People often claim this, but I have found that drum scanners don't do as well with 35mm as scanners that are optimized for it (Fuji/Noritsu).
On rangefinderforum.com there is a drum scanner thread. The 35mm drum scans are incredible (let alone the larger formats). Much better than anything I've seen from a Noritsu etc.
I've also worked with a commercial photographer who has his own drum scanner. His 35mm scans again were incredible.
I agree that these bakelite mostly made cameras bring surprising results. I tried a Vilia that came into a batch of cameras bought just for a Contax II included in it. To my surprise, its 40mm f/4 lens gave excellent results. It is ugly, with bakelite all over it with just a thin metal frame around it. It is fun, but I would never go out with just that camera in my bag, a lesson learned with the broken Smena I mentioned before.I have actually dissasembled and overhauled a Lomo Smena 8M and I can assure you, once it's working, there is little that can fail. The shutter doesn't use a slow speed governor (so it can't freeze on cold weather), it's a very simple shutter. Everything is very simple. The plastic case is very hard and thick plastic (otherwise the camera could have been made even lighter!). But the "toy materials" stop at the lens: The lens assembly is pure brass and glass, and sits on a simple helicoid.
The film advance mechanism (and counter) is the worst part of the machine, pure goofy stuff, but once adjusted it just works.
Considering that at f11 or even f8 the lens is seriously sharp, it isn't a bad choice for going to a far away place... there's little that can break down there, really.
The Smena 8M that came in my hands had a non working B speed. because a screw on the shutter mechanism got loose. Just tighten it up and apply loctite on the shutter screws that are around moving parts and ta -da, you get a reliable camera.
No. The IQ of my 50mm F2 is unsurpassed (unless you are referring to meaningless technical specs)!
My super cheap F90x offers Matrix, center weighted and spot, and is a hell of a lot better made!
Presuming the camera and lens function as new, yes.
The 55mm f/2.8 AF-D beats it easily in every way. Of the best lenses Nikon ever made. We could talk about the 60mm f/2.8D, but the price gets somewhat high with it.
But F100 is better than F90
"Unsurpassed"?No. The IQ of my 50mm F2 is unsurpassed (unless you are referring to meaningless technical specs)!
My super cheap F90x offers Matrix, center weighted and spot, and is a hell of a lot better made!
"Unsurpassed"?
You've not used many really good lenses, then.
Mind you, the 50/2 Nikkor H is the only Nikkor 50 I own, because I like them - all five, one for each body. But the 50/1.8 doesn't have the barrel distortion of the -H. The Summitar is sharper in the central zone (the Summitar is sharper than the first three versions of the vaunted Summicron, inthe center and I like the Summitar contrasty smoothness).
A good Helios 103 is gorgeous, sharp and smooth. Kinda like the Summitar but with maybe a flatter field?
And, you really should try the SMC Takumar 50/1.4. I'm certain you'll find something to bitch about it.
Not in every way, you are exaggerating! For instance, an unatural level of sharpness (like the lenses you mentioned) does not make it better unless you like it better.
The matching Leitz/Nikkor 50mm F2's produce the most accurate and transparent results of their focal length class.
Technically perhaps. But the F90 is built better, and is capable of anything one could reasonably want from a camera.
I have had the 35 Nikkor-O for 35 years, it is the only "fast" 35 I've ever liked.Only if you think about zooms, in which case you're correct. In fact the only AF-D lens I own is a zoom: The 35-80/4-5.6 AFD. I love that lens and I wished Canon had something similar in FD version. This is almost everything I want in a zoom lens: covers most used focal lengths, sharp, contrasty, little distortion, and weights like a prime.
In primes the story is a bit different. When the AF line was created, many of the first prime lenses that were picked, used the optical design of the (inferior) Series E lenses, not the (superior) AI primes. Two examples:
The 28/2.8. In AIS form this is one of the best Nikkors ever. For the AF version, NIkon used the cheapened-down 5 elements formula of the Series E 28/2.8. The AFD is the same design.
The 35/2.0. In AI and pre-AI form this is an universally lauded Nikkor lens that traces its origins back to the Nikkor-O of 1965. I owned those two versions btw.
The AFD 35/2 is a new, simplified version that has none of the marvellous qualities of the predecessor.
There are more examples of course, what about the 70-210/4 AF and AFD? Another Series E lens. Nikon, instead of giving you the awesome 80-200 of the AI world., gives you the cheapened down stuff. But, well, much better zoom lenses came later.
Then there were better prime lenses in the form of AF-G lenses, but those are unusable on manual focus cameras. Thus, for me, those are a waste of money.
Well said! +1
I am not exaggerating at all. Honestly you have never tried any really good lens. Perhaps that 50/2 is the best you have, but by all it is just an average lens.. And if you want to crank it further up, it does not fare a cent against my summucron 50/2 (on my Leica M6).
The F90 is better build than the F100? I thought we had some serious talk about it but you just killed it.
I will let you and the other guy stew in your delusions.
Yes, but I will argue that the F90 has the closest to pro build quality since the Nikkormat.
A high-end drum scanner, such as a Heidelberg Tango (that is properly calibrated, and skillfully operated) will produce scans vastly superior to a Fuji Frontier.
All this fascination about build quality.
"Unsurpassed"?
You've not used many really good lenses, then.
Mind you, the 50/2 Nikkor H is the only Nikkor 50 I own, because I like them - all five, one for each body. But the 50/1.8 doesn't have the barrel distortion of the -H. The Summitar is sharper in the central zone (the Summitar is sharper than the first three versions of the vaunted Summicron, inthe center and I like the Summitar contrasty smoothness).
A good Helios 103 is gorgeous, sharp and smooth. Kinda like the Summitar but with maybe a flatter field?
And, you really should try the SMC Takumar 50/1.4. I'm certain you'll find something to bitch about it.
The only thing I can find to bitch about concerning my Takumar lenses is that Pentax never made them in F mount.
If Takumar had made lenses for the Nikon, then Nikkor ciuld have attacked by making Nikkors for Pentax cameras. This was a war nobody would like to start.
Then, perhaps, also war in the patents could follow...
but from what I have read they do not focus to infinity.
I was just joking about that. I love my Takumar lenses, but I prefer my Nikon cameras to my M42 Pentax cameras. I am aware that there are adapters that allow you to mount M42 lenses on F mount cameras, but from what I have read they do not focus to infinity.
Imagine a world where the manufacturers agreed on one standard mount and all made cameras and lenses for that mount…
I have had the 35 Nikkor-O for 35 years, it is the only "fast" 35 I've ever liked.
The F90 is better build than the F100? I thought we had some serious talk about it but you just killed it.
And probably the Nikkor gives better out of focus areas (haven't really compared).
But F100 is better than F90, F5 is better than F100 and so on...
but the F90X is way underrated. And thankfully so. shhh! Keep it secret!
Oh yes. I thought it was established by now. The F90X is better built than the F100 IME. I had the F100, have the F90X. The F100 was disappointing. One known issue, which is what I experienced, was that flimsy plasticky exposure mode selector (matrix/spot/cw) on the pentaprism. It just goes after a while. Other people experienced failures in the focus mode joystick selector. Not me tbh. Great cameras both, but the F90X is way underrated. And thankfully so. shhh! Keep it secret!
...From the technical point of view, no doubt, about what is better: F5 > F100 > F90, but may compare in context of their own era... then the F90 probably wins over the F100....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?