Zuiko 35mm f/2.8 shift VS PC-Nikkor 28mm f/3.5. Which one would you buy?

[albireo]

I am looking to purchase a specialised 'shift' small-format prime lens to use for amateur architectural film photography. I run 2 35mm systems, a Nikon one (my main body being an F90X or N90S as it is known in the US) and an Olympus one (centred around an OM2n). I use both kits equally and like them both about the same.

As such the choice for a (moderately priced) shift lens falls on the Nikon PC-Nikkor 28mm f/3.5 and on the Zuiko 35mm f/2.8 shift. Have people used any of the two and would if so be willing to share experiences? Is one of the two absolutely better than the other? A few points I'm considering - please feel free to add if you have more.

1. I'm interested mostly in vertical shifting to adjust for converging lines on buildings
2. The Nikon is a 28mm, which would allow for a wider angle of view than a 35mm - taller buildings might fit the Nikon but not the Olympus, though the two appear to extend vertically to different amounts, which makes the selection somewhat confusing.
3. The Nikon has a lock-release knob to enable shifting, whereas the Olympus doesn't, and I've read worrying reports about the Olympus drift-shifting with age which if common doesn't sound great.
4. I plan on trying to use the lens and the shifting operation handheld. The Nikon is bigger and heavier than the Olympus. Summed up to the weight of N90S, this would make for a considerably bulkier kit than then OM2n + Zuiko 35mm. Hand vibrations with the Nikon kit might be a factor.
5. Sharpness considerations: not extremely important as I'm not going to shoot wide open with an adapter using a last-gen DSLR so resolution is not critical. Both lenses seem to be reasonably sharp by f/11, though if one of the two is known to be already great at f/8 this would be a plus. CA not an issue either as I plan on shooting black and white film most of the time
6. Bonus consideration: there is a Nikkor 35mm PC as well. Any reasons to prefer this over the 28mm? Price seems about the same.

Any other factors to consider? NOTE - I am aware I might simply use a 20mm and then tinker in photoshop to fix the converging lines in post. I am not interested in doing that because I want to see the corrected image as I compose, in the viewfinder, and then on the negative.

Many thanks for any advice!

 

[Besk]

I have read that the Nikon 35 pc (last model) is one of Nikon's sharpest 35/s and is sharper than the 28 lens. The 28mm focal length is considered to be more usable for architecture by many. In old European cities this may be especially true.

 

[Craig75]

I used 28mm nikkor as my walk around lens for months. Personally I think 28mm is far better focal length than 35mm for architecture and shift work as you can work in tighter spaces like alleyways and its far easier to work with inside buildings. 35mm is a bit of a no mans land for this kind of work personally.

Obviously it's been superceded by much better shift lenses but then you need the deep pockets too. I think mine was $200. The 35mm is cheaper but a false economy imo.

 

[wiltw]

I also believe 35mm FL is not wide enough for architectural interiors and exteriors...not enough shooting distance to capture the item you want to shoot.
I have Olympus 24mm f/3.5 lens, and used this both for architectural work, and also mounted it as the only lens taken with me during one holiday in Europe...I never wanted or needed another lens!

 

[Greg Kriss]

I presently work with four PC Nikkors:
24mm PC-E - definitely the most useful and sharpest but also the most expensive. Nikon also makes a 19mm PC lens that is reputed to be their best PC lens... Personally, it is too wide for my use, but if I ever acquire a FUJI GFX with a Nikon lens adapter, it will be one of my first lenses to be acquired.
28mm PC - The f/3.5 one. My first PC lens. Needs to be stopped down to f/11. The f/4 previous version is not as sharp as the later f/3.5 version.
35mm PC - The f/2.8 version. A tad bit sharper than the 28mm PC. Avoid the first f/3.5 version.
85mm f/2.8 PC-E Nikkor - Actuall my most used PC lens for architectural photography. I guess it all depends on the buildings that you are photographing.

FYI: the Olympus 24mm PC f/3.5 lens was frequently converted to a Nikon mount, and usually goes for way less money because of this. Excellent optic but the 24mm PC-E Nikkor is probably 20-30? years newer and thus with improved optics. Practically I don't think that you would see the difference though.

If I had to choose just one PC lens to use, it would definitely be the 28mm f/3.5 PC Nikkor.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have the Nikon PC-Nikkor 28mm f/3.5. I always choose 28mm over 35mm lenses because the 35mm is less useful because it is too close to the 50mm lens. Also the 28mm allows one to more easily take in a wide or tall building, and also move in closer to subjects thus eliminating unwanted details.

 

[drmoss_ca]

My shift/tilt experience comes from LF, starting with Crown Graphics and going on from there to 4x5 and 10x8 Chamonix cameras. I know nothing about tilt/shift lenses on small formats, but I can say a Crown Graphic with any pretty ordinary Schneider.Kreuznach lens will give you lots of fun at a rather cheap price.

 

[Bill Burk]

I never had the OM 35mm shift but was disappointed with the 35mm f/2 and thought maybe if I got the shift version it would give me a better lens. I love the 35mm focal length.

Maybe you already have an excellent Nikon 35mm lens. You probably don't have an excellent OM 35mm lens

 

[Sirius Glass]

...

Any other factors to consider? NOTE - I am aware I might simply use a 20mm and then tinker in photoshop to fix the converging lines in post. I am not interested in doing that because I want to see the corrected image as I compose, in the viewfinder, and then on the negative.

We are of the same mind and in the same place in the preferred area of work.

 

[albireo]

Many thanks for sharing your thoughts everyone, useful advice.

24mm Zuiko - that looks like a gorgeous lens, as does the 24mm Nikon. Both of them though appear to be rather bulky and considerably heavier than the simpler/cheaper ones I have in mind. I do most of my 35mm shooting whilst cycling. I carry my SLR hanging from my neck with a small prime mounted (the Zuiko 28mm f/2.8 I own is one of my favourite, I really rather like it). I live in a huge city, with points of interests being few and far between. I find cycling gets me around them faster and it's enjoyable to mix the two activities.

So no heavy lens, and (sadly) no large format kit, though my tiny Manfrotto travel tripod does sometimes find room in my backpack alongside my Sekonic meter, film and packed lunch.

Anyhow - I was leaning towards the 28mm Nikkor when another factor came to mind - sharing it here in case someone else is going through the same sort of decision.

As stated I would like to test the possibility of using this lens mostly handheld. One risk might be that I'll find it difficult to properly align the vertical lines I'm seeing to the vertical. I wonder if some sort of composition assistance via grids on the camera's focusing screen might make this easier. My Nikon N90S does not have interchangeable screens and the default screen is a pretty plain thing with a spot metering + AF focusing area guide in the middle, so useless for any sort of architectural work really. However, my Olympus OM2n offers a selection of screens as shown below. Amongst these, the 1-10 (checker matte type) appears to have been designed specifically with shift lenses in mind.

 

[Craig75]

In my opinion the spot metering is more helpful than interchangeable focus screens, especially if you do abandoned buildings or interiors where the contrast range can be quite high - I'd do barns and demolition sites and it can be 10 or 11 stops sometimes so spot meter can be very helpful. From my Limited knowledge nikons + spot metering + manual lenses is a very fussy combination and n90 is one of few cameras below the flagship series that allow this combo. Downside is a n90 is quite weighty. Plus side is that it's a pleasure to use and that weight gives you some good stability handheld. If every gram counts then just stick lens on a plastic nikon and use phone spot meter app.

With a 28mm 9 times out of 10 I just stick it on infinity so focus screens aren't important to me.

 

[bdial]

I don't have any knowledge of the lenses you are considering, but I'd say a grid screen might be almost essential for working hand-held for what you are looking to do. The hard part might be finding the screen however.

 

[Craig75]

i'd agree that a grid screen is helpful but everything is a bit loosey goosey shooting handheld architecture so it's not vital imo.

Personally, focal length overrides every other consideration. If the environment you are shooting in requires something wider than 35mm then that trumps all other considerations. If you can use a 35mm in your environment then weight, screens and spot metering all start to come into play

 

[Sirius Glass]

...

Anyhow - I was leaning towards the 28mm Nikkor when another factor came to mind - sharing it here in case someone else is going through the same sort of decision.

As stated I would like to test the possibility of using this lens mostly handheld. One risk might be that I'll find it difficult to properly align the vertical lines I'm seeing to the vertical.

I have no problem doing that. It is easy. I do also carry the 24mm AF and 28mm AF lenses as they are light and well I am using an AF Nikon [F100].

 

[16:9]

I've had and used both. The Olympus is smaller and sharper in the corners when shifted, but the Nikon is better centre-frame. Both need stopping down quite heavily. The Olympus renders very pretty sunstars. As to focal length, 28mm is generally much more useful for landscapes and architecture than 35mm. If I could only have one it would be a 28mm.

 

[Neil Grant]

...i have both the manual focus Nikon pc lenses, latest versions - 28mm f/3.5 and 35mm f/2.8. The sharpness of the two lenses is very similar and whilst the 28mm is probably more useful, it's as well to have the 35mm as well - especially since it's not costly. I think the real purpose of them is hand-held architecture and in this they do a reasonable job, It's easier with a grid screen - i used an FM2 and also an F 100. The latter is better for exposure control using exposure time - it's not really desirable to do this using the manual aperture. Auto exposure bracketing on an F100 when using reversal film is a slick way of working. These relatively old lenses lack any form of lock on the shift control (unlike the new pce lenses) - they don't need it. The tight fit of the sliding dovetail keeps the optical block in place when shifted. This is a real advantage over the pce types - which require an 'unlocking/locking' procedure to be followed, making them quite clumsy in use.
Like all Nikon wide angle lenses, the 28pc and 35pc have some barrel distortion. Both are made to the highest mechanical standards and relatively compact. There's really no comparison with what can be achieved with a pc lens to undistorting the image from a normal lens using PS.

 

[albireo]

Many thanks for your comments everyone. I picked up a sample of the Nikkor 28mm PC. Looks to be in great condition, impressed with the precision of the shift mechanism. It has a nice solid feel to it, looking forward to testing it with some film soon.

As an aside, it appears to be easy to focus on the F90X. The shift effect is easily visible within the viewfinder although at maximum shift it does seem to produce a kind of darkening/vignetting on the side of the frame close to the shift direction. Might be by design.

I might end up using this on an old FE body of mine - I almost forgot I had it and I never liked it so much, but it could be an ideal match for this lens, especially because it has interchangeable focusing screens and I might pick up an E series one with the grid pattern to go with it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Many thanks for your comments everyone. I picked up a sample of the Nikkor 28mm PC. Looks to be in great condition, impressed with the precision of the shift mechanism. It has a nice solid feel to it, looking forward to testing it with some film soon.

As an aside, it appears to be easy to focus on the F90X. The shift effect is easily visible within the viewfinder although at maximum shift it does seem to produce a kind of darkening/vignetting on the side of the frame close to the shift direction. Might be by design.

I might end up using this on an old FE body of mine - I almost forgot I had it and I never liked it so much, but it could be an ideal match for this lens, especially because it has interchangeable focusing screens and I might pick up an E series one with the grid pattern to go with it.

Great choice, especially since you followed my advice. When I got mine a ran out aimed the camera up at a multistory building and adjusted the shift. After a few of those, I then took photographs of the fronts of a building moving the vantage point further off to one side and taking the distortion out. I hope that you enjoy the lens as much as I do.

 

[LolaColor]

As stated I would like to test the possibility of using this lens mostly handheld. One risk might be that I'll find it difficult to properly align the vertical lines I'm seeing to the vertical

All you need to do is point the camera at the horizon: when the film plane is perfectly vertical then vertical lines will be rendered as vertical. If you can do this then you don't even need to use your eyes to check the verticals (unless you want to intentionally add some convergence or divergence).

The simplest tool to achieve this when shooting from a tripod is to pop a bubble level on the hot shoe (assuming the plane of the hot shoe is perpendicular to the film plane and the bubble level is accurate). But I guess that's not much help when shooting handheld as it'll be tricky to get a reading from it when looking through the viewfinder!

But the principle for handheld shooting is the same, however you achieve it: point the camera directly ahead first, don't point up or down, and then adjust vertical shift to bring the top of the building into frame.

 

[Sirius Glass]

All you need to do is point the camera at the horizon: when the film plane is perfectly vertical then vertical lines will be rendered as vertical. If you can do this then you don't even need to use your eyes to check the verticals (unless you want to intentionally add some convergence or divergence).

The simplest tool to achieve this when shooting from a tripod is to pop a bubble level on the hot shoe (assuming the plane of the hot shoe is perpendicular to the film plane and the bubble level is accurate). But I guess that's not much help when shooting handheld as it'll be tricky to get a reading from it when looking through the viewfinder!

But the principle for handheld shooting is the same, however you achieve it: point the camera directly ahead first, don't point up or down, and then adjust vertical shift to bring the top of the building into frame.

That is true for all lenses, especially very wide angle lenses, but in this case your recommendations are counter to the use of a PC lens.

 

[albireo]

But the principle for handheld shooting is the same, however you achieve it: point the camera directly ahead first, don't point up or down, and then adjust vertical shift to bring the top of the building into frame.

Thanks and yep - I've been playing with this to 'get to know the lens' and it's just magical - the way the image shifts up when pointing straight ahead, with features which were previously hidden high above suddenly entering the field of view - just incredible!

I can see one might end up developing a lifetime LF addiction.

 

[LolaColor]

Is a PC lens different from a shift lens? In a shift lens, the image circle is greater than the format size. The shift function shifts the image circle up and down and/or left and right. The only way to ensure parallel verticals, or horizontals is to make the film plane parallel with the image plane. If you tilt the camera up to shoot a building, for example, and you want the vertical lines of the building to be rendered as vertical in your image, then those lines will not be vertical because the building and the film are not in the same plane.

See the section "SHIFT MOVEMENTS FOR PERSPECTIVE CONTROL" here for an explanation with visual examples.
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/tilt-shift-lenses1.htm

But does a PC lens operate in some other manner that I'm not aware of? I always thought that the terms "perspective control" and "shift" mean the same thing for 35mm architectural lenses. What leads you to state that,

your recommendations are counter to the use of a PC lens.

 

[flavio81]

Is a PC lens different from a shift lens?

It is the same. Nikon preferred to call them "PC-Nikkors".

 

[flavio81]

I am looking to purchase a specialised 'shift' small-format prime lens to use for amateur architectural film photography. I run 2 35mm systems, a Nikon one (my main body being an F90X or N90S as it is known in the US) and an Olympus one (centred around an OM2n). I use both kits equally and like them both about the same.

I own the following:
PC-Nikkor 28/3.5
PC-Nikkor 35/2.8 late version
PC-Nikkor 35/3.5, the first PC lens ever!
Canon Tilt Shift 35/2.8 (for FD mount)

I trust in the Big Four (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Minolta) and in particular their film cameras, so given your choice i'd pick the Nikkor. As for my 28, it is very easy to use, as are the others. The 35/2.8 and 35/3.5 are very portable, i'd recommend them too. Any of these lens you will end up using at f11 or even f16 if you want to induce strong shifts without optical problems. Wide open performance i don't think is really important, since you'd be better using a smaller 28/35 lens in such case.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Is a PC lens different from a shift lens? In a shift lens, the image circle is greater than the format size. The shift function shifts the image circle up and down and/or left and right. The only way to ensure parallel verticals, or horizontals is to make the film plane parallel with the image plane. If you tilt the camera up to shoot a building, for example, and you want the vertical lines of the building to be rendered as vertical in your image, then those lines will not be vertical because the building and the film are not in the same plane.

See the section "SHIFT MOVEMENTS FOR PERSPECTIVE CONTROL" here for an explanation with visual examples.
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/tilt-shift-lenses1.htm

But does a PC lens operate in some other manner that I'm not aware of? I always thought that the terms "perspective control" and "shift" mean the same thing for 35mm architectural lenses. What leads you to state that,

Same thing; two different names. Some lens companies call the shift lenses PC lenses.