5cm f/1.4 lens

[macymills@mac.c]

Guys/Gals,

Any idea how much I should be paying for this lens in excellent plus condition? I saw one on eb.y and the bidding price starts at $300.

I tried to search completed listings but nothing came up.

[Gabriel M.A.]

I've seen it go as low as $185, average $250 in at very least very good condition. You do mean the Nikkor S.C. f/1.4 in Nikon S mount, right?

[Brian Sweeney]

I would expect them to go ~$200 in Ex condition. I have seen them for less. This is for the original Sonnar "copy" 5cm F1.4, in chrome or black. Nikon later came out with a 50mm F1.4 lens for the late 1964 S3 that has the same optical formula as the Canon 50mm F1.2 and F0.95. That lens was multi-coated and sold with the S3-2000. Either of the "Non-Sonnar" 50's will run much more money. It is much larger than the original Sonnar based design.

No Connection with this seller:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikkor-S-C-5cm-f1-4-lens-in-Contax-RF-bayonet-mount-NR_W0QQitemZ7543546665QQcategoryZ30062QQssPageName ZWD1VQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[Brian Sweeney]

Another One: looks better than the first.

Agai, no connection.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-Nikkor-S-C-5cm-1-4-Nippon-Kogaku-RF-lens-M-S3-SP_W0QQitemZ7543240267QQcategoryZ15234QQssPageName ZWD1VQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[macymills@mac.c]

Brian - thanks so much! Would the chrome ones you found be the same as the one I found for $300? See following link:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7547456660&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

They certainly look similar, except for the colour.

[Brian Sweeney]

They are optically identical. Nikon went over to a black finish in ~1957. The chrome lenses are a little heavier, using more brass than aluminum. I have both. The inclusion of the proper lens caps (especially the rear cap) and case will boost the price. I think $300 is on the high side. As the others are priced at $200, and one includes a filter, $250 for the Black lens with accessories would be tempting.

Here is what each looks like on an SP.

Black
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=236
Chrome
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=237

And the late version, EXPENSIVE, on the S3-2000.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=362

[macymills@mac.c]

Thanks again, Brian!

[Brian Sweeney]

I'm going to add that the rear cap with the black lens is rare, and can get $50 or more with collectors. I use the rear caps from the Russian lenses on my Nikkors, they are cheap and $50 would buy 5 Russian lenses with caps.

[ray_g]

Macy, there are a few presently available on KEH in varying condition. In my experience, their "bargain" lenses often translate to "mint" in ebayese.

http://www.keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=NR&cid=06&sid=newused&crid=12105233

[VinceC]

I'd recommend the black barrel. They sometimes cost a bit more, but they're lighter and have much smoother click stops on the aperature ring, making them more usable. It's also easier to read the black barrel's aperature ring in a hurry. As mentioned before, chrome and black are optically identical.

Rear lens caps are a challenge to find for old Nikkors and their kin. My 5cm uses some old plastic lid I found at a flea market. My Jupiter-whatever 35mm/2.8 Soviet biogon copy uses the inner part of a spray-paint lid while my Biogon 2.1cm/4.5 uses part of an old plastic prescription medicine container. My Nikkor 3.5cm/1.8 uses a black plastic cap that I dug out of a photoshop used-stuff bin -- it fits snuggly over the rear glass element.

[Nikon Bob]

Macy

This might help with the retail pricing http://www.ritzcam.com/catalog/index.html and give an idea on that level too. Don't foget the rare aluminium version is out there too in chrome and black finish.

Bob

[macymills@mac.c]

Geez! Thanks so much! I know I sound like a broken record, but really, thank you!

[VinceC]

You know, before you drop $300 or $350 on the most common Nikkor lens, you might think about waiting until you find one attached to an interesting vintage S3 or SP for a second body (afterall, Nikon RF cameras are a little like potato chips -- nobody can have just one). That's almost always the most cost-effective way to get a 5cm lens, since nearly every one of these cameras was originally sold with one. If you've got the pockets, you could also get the S3-2000 as a second body, and it comes with the very scarce improved version of the 5cm lens.

By the way, my gallery has a half-dozen or so family pictures that show the standard version of the 5cm 1.4 wide open. I've been meaning to update my gallery to show performance of the other Nikkors but haven't gotten around to it. It's worth mentioning that in its middle aperature ranges, say f/2.8 to f/8, the standard 5cm 1.4 displays bokeh that some Leicaphiles and Sonnar mavens would consider to be unflattering -- doubled lines and clumpy out-of-focus areas.

[Brian Sweeney]

The price of a Nikon S2 with 5cm lens will run ~$600. I picked up a beater S2 with a terrific 5cm F1.4 lens for under $400. Always pays to look for user cameras with great lenses attached.

[aizan]

this was taken with a nikkor 50/1.4 ltm wide open. the bokeh is bright ring, so i wouldn't purposely go out to take portraits with it, personally, unless i knew beforehand that i wanted it for aesthetic reasons, or that the background would be relatively simple and uncluttered.

[macymills@mac.c]

The price of a Nikon S2 with 5cm lens will run ~$600. I picked up a beater S2 with a terrific 5cm F1.4 lens for under $400. Always pays to look for user cameras with great lenses attached.

Brian, you've read my mind. That is what I sorta have in mind.

Vince....I can't afford a S3-2000 at this point! I am back to square one saving for the Linhof 2000 that I wanted before I spotted this @#*&! SP 2005!

[Brian Sweeney]

The "Bokeh" of the Nikkor can be harsh. I think it's a by-product of its optimization.

The first picture is with the Zeiss-Opton 5cm F1.5 on my "modified" Nikon S2, at F4. I used shims to increase the flage-to-film distance by 0.5mm to work "better" with the 52.3mm Sonnar. You can use the Sonnar on an unmodified Nikon, but the focus will be slightly behind what the RF indicates. When the RF indicates 36", the actual focus will be at 37".

The second shot is with the Nikkor 5cm F1.4 on the S3, also F4.

[Brian Sweeney]

If you have not seen this thread, lot's of Nikkor 5cm f1.4 shots.

And a few with a Leitz Summarit for contrast...

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9602

[VinceC]

Here's my favorite "bokeh run amok" example. Nikkor 1.4 at about f/2

The Zeiss Sonnars are awfully cheap. You could also pick up one for those moments that require buttery bokeh.

[wlewisiii]

Or, for that matter, a Kiev mount Jupter 8. The focus will be off ala what Brian mentions, but they're dirt cheap and good Kiev ones are easy to find (very little to screw up :) )

William

[VinceC]

I think with an F/2 lens like the Jupiter that your depth of field covers the mismatched focus. About 15 years ago, before I was aware of this whole problem, I shot several rolls through a Jupiter 8 using an S2 and don't recall any focus issues. Pretty lens, but mine (a 1957 version) was prone to bad flare (actually, a very distinct ghosting of the aperature blades) and absolutely needs a sunshade.

[furcafe]

I'm not sure there's much of a boke difference between the 50/1.5 Sonnar & the 5cm/1.4 Nikkor-S, @ least wide-open. As I've stated before, I think the 2 lenses have pretty much the same optical signature. If a busy background gives a "swirly" background w/the Sonnar, I've seen the same w/the Nikkor-S & vice versa. I'll have to look through my archives for more examples, but here are 2 wide-open shots taken w/a c.1941 T-coated Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm/1.5 Sonnar where the background was a little busy:

http://static.flickr.com/16/20379338_24589040c5_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/15/21232167_3d4974bc25_o.jpg

There is the possibility that the Nikkor-S is closer to the pre-WWII & post-WWII Jena Sonnars, but I haven't noticed any big boke difference w/the W. German Sonnars. Again, I'll have to look through my archives, but here's an example from a c.1950 Zeiss-Opton 50/1.5 Sonnar:

http://static.flickr.com/22/27497642_6280cd28cd_o.jpg

[Brian Sweeney]

One of my Favorite's with the Nikkor 5cm F1.4.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=1606&cat=3204&page=5
Some More.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=1607&cat=3204&page=5
B&W, Wide-Open
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=2323&cat=3204&page=2

Outdoors, wide-open, shows the "doughnuts" in the busy background.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=3072&cat=3204&page=9

If you want smooth Bokeh, get the 8.5cm F2.
Wide-Open.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=1089&cat=3204&page=2

[VinceC]

>>If you want smooth Bokeh, get the 8.5cm F2.
Wide-Open.<<


Agreed.
Photo of my 5-year-old holding an S2 with a Sonnar, taken by 8.5cm wide open.