Nikkor HC 50mm F2... Wow, I am impressed [Archive]

hipsterdufus

05-14-2010, 04:25

So, my deal-hunting finally paid off on the auction site and I found a nice Nikkor HC. This lens has exactly the right OOF areas that I am looking for and has absolutely wonderful ergonomics. I took the following picture with my Bessa R2 a 1/500th of a second wide open with the Nikkor lens. It was shot on Fuji Superia 200. While I don't consider myself a particularly good nature photographer, I still love this picture:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3537/4606441762_0ab12d51f8_o.jpg

And for those who are interested in how it looks on my recently reskinned Bessa R2:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3394/4606459910_57e8a0e246_o.jpg

Does anyone else have some examples from this great little lens?

Brian Sweeney

05-14-2010, 04:34

http://www.ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=203&pictureid=1975

Wide-open on the M8.

hipsterdufus

05-14-2010, 04:47

Beautiful picture and rendering, Brian. I am particularly excited to try this lens for portraiture (my main field of interest). If your results are any indication, I don't think the lens will be what limits my results...

tennis-joe

05-14-2010, 06:52

I have two Nikkors 50f2.0 and one 50f1.4. I love the shots with all three and I am tired of the haze, soft glass of Leica LTM lenses. I have been lucky to get the Nikkor lenses on Ebay with moderate bids.
Joe

gzuiko

07-06-2010, 17:37

I have one just like this with a serial number a couple hundred off from yours. a great little lens. I like the bokeh of the f1.4 better because it's smoother and not as harsh. But this lens is still very sharp and good. One of my favorites.

Chriscrawfordphoto

07-06-2010, 17:42

These are supposed to be Sonnar type lenses. Do they have the focus shift as you stop down like the modern Zeiss C-Sonnar 50/1.5 ?? I'd love to have a C-Sonnar but the focus shift puts me off. And, yes it is real, I've seen plenty of proof that it is not an 'internet myth' as some have dubbed it. Plus, the Nikon's are a hell of a lot cheaper than the Zeiss.

David Murphy

08-11-2010, 22:56

yeah it's a great lens for the money. Well made too.

Chriscrawfordphoto

08-11-2010, 23:13

Does anyone know if the Nikon LTM sonnar type lenses had the focus shift problem the modern Zeiss ZM Sonnar 50 has?

ferider

08-12-2010, 06:09

Sonnars all shift Chris. For the ZM Sonnar it was very obvious, since it was optimized for f2.8, originally, and the contrast is much higher than with classic lenses.

The Nikkors 50/1.4 and 50/2 have lower contrast, are optimized for close up and wide open, and shift gets hidden behind the DOF when closing down. Meaning, at infinity and closing down, you'll get a little less resolution, even in the center, than an equivalent Planar type lens of the same period (like the DR Summicron). But hardly noticeable. We've done tests here, with a friend, and even the modern Nikkor 50/1.4 Millenium behaves like this at infinity, when compared to say, a Summilux or Noctilux (both a tiny bit sharper at infinity, but lower performance close up).

Other benefits of Sonnars are the small size, typically low distortion and flare resistance (few glass surfaces). Which is why they were so popular, IMO.

That's my take on it anyways. I've owned (and tested against each other) Nikkor 50/1.4 (different vintages), Nikkor 50/2, ZM 50/1.5, Canon 50/1.5, ZM 50/1.5 (early Jupiter 3). The only one I've kept is the Nikkor 50/1.4 NKT.

The Nikkor 50/2 is an outstanding lens. Unfortunately not as cheap anymore as it used to be.

Best,

Roland.

raid

08-12-2010, 06:32

I used to own a Nikkor 50/2 LTM. In my first 50mm lens comparisons at RFF, it stood out as the top performer in the comparison. Too bad that the cost for such a lens has gone up.

Vickko

08-12-2010, 06:50

Very nice bokeh. Not quite my personal taste, with the "ring of light" bokeh, but, very nice.

Vickko

08-12-2010, 06:56

Ljós

08-12-2010, 07:02

Oh, I have a 50/2 Nikkor SLR lens that might be going up for sale. I recall seeing this review, saying that it is a stunning lens.

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_norm.html

Would you know if the optical formula between the SLR and RF lenses were the same?

Vick
Vicko, the 50mm f2 Nikkor SLR lens is a fine lens, in some ways preferable to the f1.8 version(s). But it is not optically related with the 50mm H.C. rangefinder lens, which is a Sonnar design.

coelacanth

08-12-2010, 07:04

This is my one and only Sonnar type lens that I got from Roland a while back. I usually use slower, even smaller 50s but this is quite small for F2.0 and I like how it renders especially for portraits.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/4847461065_fc898283c4_z.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4865682236_746d5847bd_z.jpg

hipsterdufus

08-12-2010, 07:07

Wow, it's been awhile since I started this thread. Since buying this lens, I still feel that it was a great value for the money. I have not noticed any "focus shift"; then again, I have not tested for it, since I am only using the lens on film. I do have out of focus pictures every now and then, but I usually assume that it is my error, paired with the short EBL of the R2. Overall, the number of hits vs. misses has been phenomenal, so I don't feel that it really warrants further testing on my part.

Ranchu

08-12-2010, 07:18

The SLR 50/2 is a Biotar type. I like it better than the SLR 1.8's or 1.4's. No LoCA's, which bug me.

alexnotalex

09-26-2010, 00:59

ooh I ove my HC, nursed back to usability...checking the mail every day :)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4117/4862519178_cd502d82f1_z.jpg

Phantomas

09-26-2010, 01:15

I now finally understand what "ugly bokeh" means. :)

jonmanjiro

09-26-2010, 01:27

I now finally understand what "ugly bokeh" means. :)

To be fair to the little Nikkor-H, that first photo was taken under probably the toughest conditions for bokeh there is. I'd like to see a lens that *isn't* ugly under those conditions :)

Here's one taken at f/2 with my S-mount Nikkor-H.C 5cm f/2 mounted on an R-D1 via an Amedeo adapter. I prefer the bokeh of the Nikkor-H 5cm f/2 over its faster and more famous big brother, the Nikkor-S 5cm f/1.4. Big brother gets a lot funkier wide open.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/4964119134_4f4b9e9acf_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonmanjiro/4964119134/)
thinking of... (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonmanjiro/4964119134/) by jonmanjiro (http://www.flickr.com/people/jonmanjiro/), on Flickr

Phantomas

09-26-2010, 01:59

I prefer the bokeh of the Nikkor-H 5cm f/2 over its faster and more famous big brother, the Nikkor-S 5cm f/1.4. Big brother gets a lot funkier wide open.

Really? I love the Nikkor-S. I consider it to be one of the best 50's, to my taste.
Don't take my comment seriously though (even though it's true - I do find bokeh on most of these shots not very pleasing to my eyes, but then again, what is "pleasing bokeh"?)

jonmanjiro

09-26-2010, 02:27

Really? I love the Nikkor-S. I consider it to be one of the best 50's, to my taste.
Don't take my comment seriously though (even though it's true - I do find bokeh on most of these shots not very pleasing to my eyes, but then again, what is "pleasing bokeh"?)

Millennium Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4 (gauss formula) or Nikkor-S 5cm f/1.4 (sonnar formula)? ;)

The Millennium is nice but the big brother to the Nikkor-H, the sonnar formula Nikkor-S, has got to be the champion of harsh ni-sen bokeh :eek:

But its all subjective anyway ... :p:D

Phantomas

09-26-2010, 02:37

Millenium formula. But I agree, it's all subjective.

jonmanjiro

09-26-2010, 04:35

Here's one taken with my S-mount Nikkor-H.C 5cm f2 on a Nikon SP earlier today.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4151/5026008166_86881c232c_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonmanjiro/5026008166/)
Autumn is coming... (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonmanjiro/5026008166/) by jonmanjiro (http://www.flickr.com/people/jonmanjiro/), on Flickr

goliathus

09-26-2010, 05:57

I love it's lgiht blue coated lens : )

Small but quite nice performer, I think overall performances are better than Nikkor-S.C 5cm F1.4 except the aperture.

Here are first 2 shots when I got the lens from her seller.

http://cfile23.uf.tistory.com/image/204693214BC73B7F35616E

Nikon SP / Nikkor-HC 5cm F2 (f2.0) / Fuji Superia 200

http://cfile25.uf.tistory.com/original/204693214BC73B8036F095

Nikon SP / Nikkor-HC 5cm F2 (f2.0) / Fuji Superia 200

jonmanjiro

10-13-2010, 06:51

Heck, even Ken Rockwell likes the Nikkor-H.C 5cm f2 :D

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/rangefinder/5cm-f2.htm

alexnotalex

10-17-2010, 12:15

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4112/5084361247_27c77c4c1e_b.jpg
Fixed! Thanks to Brian's nimble fingers.
Alex

helenhill

10-17-2010, 12:19

Truly FABULOUS !!!!
what a lens...what a Great EYE !

Is that or is there : a Screwmount / ltm Version ??? :D

Brian Sweeney

10-17-2010, 12:30

Fixed! Thanks to Brian's nimble fingers.
Alex

Now THAT picture makes a kitchen table hobbyist very proud. And who would have thought that the screws in an F-Mount Nikkor-Q 135/2.8 parts lens would fit a 1950 5cm F2 Nikkor-H...

Alex's lens is LTM.

lxmike

10-17-2010, 12:40

I had a PreAI Nikkor H 5CM/2 on my Nikon F, a superb lens

Brian Sweeney

10-17-2010, 12:45

The F-Mount Nikkor-H 50/2 is a Planar formula lens, very different from the Sonnar formula RF lens. The first F-Mount "50" was the Nikkor-S 5cm F2, which was a planar formula lens with a negative element, slight retro-focus design. Very different rendition from the Sonnar.

alexnotalex

10-17-2010, 13:08

Thanks Helen and Brian for your kind words. It's LTM. Still learning how to use it and loving the results so far.
It's always set to f2.8. Lovely pop, great shadow details, tone and gentle fall from focus.
Can't decide if I prefer the HC or my Summar... but the HC is the current live-on lens.

Here's another
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4902216949_fb798d3210_z.jpg

Alex

Ronald M

10-17-2010, 16:50

Kick my butt. I had one of these welded to my Waltz Envoy in 1958and did not appreciate it. The film transport went, and the first camera became landfill.

Now have one for my Nikon D3 digital. Damn good digital lens too.

alexnotalex

10-27-2010, 08:29

Gets better and better...
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1127/5119732505_0ffee01591_z.jpg

Ade-oh

11-15-2010, 08:01

What is the filter thread of the Nikkor 50mm f2 H-C in ltm?

Thanks.

Brian Sweeney

11-15-2010, 11:45

40.5mm, same as the S-Mount version.

wjlapier

11-15-2010, 12:31

Truly FABULOUS !!!!
what a lens...what a Great EYE !

Is that or is there : a Screwmount / ltm Version ??? :D

Yes Helen, there are LTM/screwmount versions of the 50/2 and 50/1.4 RFer Nikkors. I just picked one up fo next to nothing--the 50/2 that is. I also have a Tanar Tanack Kogaku 50/2 similar to the Nikkor 50/2 in everyway, including sharpness.

filmtwit

11-15-2010, 12:45

Helen, if I hadn't found the Nikkor 50mm f1.4 ltm I just found last night, I'd have bid on this one on the bayE. (the seller didn't list this as well as he should have)>

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=290498428913&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

Ade-oh

11-15-2010, 13:15

40.5mm, same as the S-Mount version.

Thanks Brian: I've got one 'on the way' and wanted to get a hood and a UV filter for it.

Brian Sweeney

11-15-2010, 13:27

In my experience, The Nikkor-HC is a faithful reincarnation of the Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm f2 Sonnar "T"- except in the proper focal length for a Leica and available in LTM. I remounted a wartime CZJ 5cm f2 Sonnar "T" in LTM, and have used both with film and with the M8. The coating on the Nikkor is harder and less prone to damage than the Zeiss, especially the inner surfaces. The threads used for the retaining ring of the Nikkor is the same as that used on the Zeiss optics module, also the same as the I-61. If I decide to remount the latest CZJ 5cm f2 Sonnar "T" in LTM, it will be with a Nikkor mount. Right now, it is shimmed for S-Mount and on the Nikon SP. I do not have a Collapsible S-Mount lens, my collapsible Nikkor is in Leica mount.

alexnotalex

11-15-2010, 13:56

Here are some BW shots - Kodak 400CN (C-41) - with the 'HC, hood and skylight filter.... great separation and pleasing backgrounds as usual... I think I need a yellow filter though.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1025/5179550787_1d4a082293_z.jpg

alexnotalex

11-25-2010, 13:31

More HC-powered goodness. What would a 50 'cron bring to the party apart from a better f2?
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/5207194875_3de0530677_z.jpg

alexnotalex

11-30-2010, 12:50

Now I find my Nikkor Sonnar GAS building again... most of my shots are indoor and up close. Would I get better mileage from the f1.4? or another Sonnar?

Brian Sweeney

11-30-2010, 13:40

The Nikkor 5cm F1.4 is a bit "harsher" in the out of focus areas than the F2. It is sharp.

The Canon 50/1.5 is probably closer in rendition to the original Sonnar and the F2 Nikkor.

Me- I'm hooked on the pre-war and wartime 5cm F1.5 Sonnars converted to LTM using a J-3. Usually, the focus is good enough to use past 10m even wide-open. Stop down a little for infinity.

5cm F1.4 Nikkor, wide-open on the Nikon SP.

http://www.ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=166&pictureid=1559

http://www.ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=166&pictureid=1573

Brian Sweeney

11-30-2010, 13:44

Remounted 1939 5cm F1.5 Sonnar "T" wide-open on the M8.

http://www.ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=276&pictureid=3161

alexnotalex

11-30-2010, 14:04

Wow, the prewar Sonnar is just amazing, I think it has the edge.
Thanks Brian, you're the Sonnar meister!
Here's another from the my copy you nursed back to health. Not sure if I missed the focus, or shot at f2, still happy with the result.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5041/5221669273_984932770d_z.jpg

alexnotalex

12-30-2010, 12:58

oui, oui, oui!
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5045/5303416496_ed14285b74_z.jpg

raid

12-30-2010, 18:25

The Canon 50/1.5 is probably closer in rendition to the original Sonnar and the F2 Nikkor.

Me- I'm hooked on the pre-war and wartime 5cm F1.5 Sonnars converted to LTM using a J-3. Usually, the focus is good enough to use past 10m even wide-open. Stop down a little for infinity.

I let the Nikkor 50/2 go, and I got a Canon 50/1.5.
The CZJ 5cm/1.5 converted to LTM by you is one of my favorite lenses.
My ZK has mint glass,and it should be used more often.

BillBingham2

12-30-2010, 18:48

Saddly the secret of how well LTM Nikkors paint the light has been spread (I blame Kiu, Fred and Roland for this, perhaps Jon too) and the price continues to be strong. I loved them so much I switched to Nikon Rangefinders and loved it.

Alex great shots, wonderful subjects, you are a lucky man on so many fronts!

Thanks for sharing.

BillBingham2

12-30-2010, 18:55

Alex,

You might want to pick up an old 24/2.8 and 105/2.5 for your D40. You can find good examples in lots of places and you might find it a fun combo.

Getting back On Topic, either a 35/2.5 or 35/1.8 would go very well on your Canon P, though hard to find these days.

I do so love passing GAS......

Excuuuuussssssse Meeeeeeeeeeee

B2 (;->

tbarker13

12-30-2010, 19:01

Love mine, both on my M2 and my M8.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5087/5292352102_464d324bfb_z.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4091/4978194041_ba20a880d5_z.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4113/5028924968_00027571af_z.jpg

BillBingham2

12-30-2010, 19:10

Nice shots Mr. Tim.

B2 (;->

Brian Sweeney

12-30-2010, 19:14

Beautiful images with a great lens. The rendering of the Nikkor-HC 5cm f2 is very close to the wartime CZJ 5cm F2 Sonnar "T", very different from the F1.4 lens. They are all good, the mechanics of the optical fixtures changed during the run. I was very lucky to have the correct front group for Alex's 1950 lens. Sometime early in the run of the Rigid lenses, the design was changed.

alexnotalex

01-07-2011, 17:14

Lovely work Tim, I prefer these to the planar shots of the same models. (just my opinion of course)

Here's the winner from my last roll:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5006/5334214373_326da35d58_z.jpg

note to self: stop shooting indoors in winter with ISO200 film

cfritze

01-09-2011, 20:11

I like the surface texture this lens gives me - not an especially noteworthy image, but an example of what I'm talking about.

Nikkor 50/2 Tokyo LTM, f5.6
http://hoover.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v19/p357139941-6.jpg

Michael Markey

03-08-2011, 03:31

I had the loan of one this week.
Thanks Noel.
Here with XP2 and at f2

hipsterdufus

03-08-2011, 03:47

Wow, this is an old thread. Nothing wrong with keeping it going, I guess. I have since bought a Summitar as a replacement for the Nikkor and sold the Nikkor. There was something that seemed a tad too clinical in my eyes about the Nikkor (especially for a lot of the portraits that I do). However, here's some of my favorites from this lens. I can post more examples as well, if folks would like.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5122/5365765366_57908c5997_z.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5121/5365764602_d073430cf5_z.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5122/5355287657_6dea56dfdd_z.jpg

Brian Sweeney

03-08-2011, 04:34

I've never thought of the Nikkor-H 5cm f2 as too clinical. The contrast is higher than the contemporary Leica lenses, gives the impression of being sharper.

I just picked up a 5cm f2 Tanar- looks like a copy of the Nikkor, but in Black Paint.

waiting for the M9 to try out both, side-by-side.

hipsterdufus

03-08-2011, 04:49

I've never thought of the Nikkor-H 5cm f2 as too clinical. The contrast is higher than the contemporary Leica lenses, gives the impression of being sharper.

That could be what I was seeing, Brian. When I got the Summitar, I ran a roll of portraits; half were shot with the Nikkor and half with the Summitar. I don't know what it was, but I liked the Summitar better.

Of course, to the average person, they would probably never notice the difference. But, like most photographers, I'm an OCD tinkerer that never stops obsessing about the "look" of my photos.

alexnotalex

03-29-2011, 14:10

just keeps on giving!
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5261/5572581668_d5ede7000f_z.jpg

uhoh7

04-02-2011, 10:42

I've been trying to chase down the specs for the 50/2, namely the weight for the LTM. Any idea or links?

TY sirs

alexnotalex

05-04-2011, 12:26

yes! f4 this time.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5142/5684514513_52b4a94b49_b.jpg

alexnotalex

04-21-2012, 13:05

still snapping away with this gem.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7173/6838346931_af3dca5156_z.jpg

coelacanth

06-12-2012, 19:39

I love this lens so much. My favorite portrait lens, probably only second to Zuiko 85/2 for the OM...

A few from work.

http://d.pr/i/Pz80+

http://d.pr/i/aagv+

http://d.pr/i/TLns+

crispy12

06-12-2012, 20:33

This lens is heavier than it looks! Really chunky piece of solid metal, very nice to hold. I keep thinking how great it would be to use this on a mirrorless camera like NEX or m43 due to the closer minimum focusing distance.

coelacanth

06-12-2012, 20:35

BTW, my copy is modified by our very own lens master Roland and it can focus down to 0.7m (goes little more than that after disengaging with the cam), it is spot on at 0.7mm on digital M. ;)

marduk

06-13-2012, 00:09

My Nikkor H 50/2 looks definitely sharper than v3 cron at infinity, can't speak much about closer distances with my scanner, but it seems to have more pleasant bokeh too. Gem of a lens.

helenhill

01-27-2013, 14:22

revive an Old Thread...
[/URL]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8353/8418977674_0a5b45e03d_b.jpg (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/8418977674/]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8353/8418977674_0a5b45e03d_b.jpg%20Bliss%20Street%20by% 20helenhill_HH,%20on%20Flickr)
Bliss Street (http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/8418977674/) by helenhill_HH (http://www.flickr.com/people/helenartemishill/), on Flickr

raid

01-27-2013, 14:37

Paulbe

01-27-2013, 15:53

Helen--what a GREAT shot!
Don't know why--but I love it!
Thanks!
Didn't know you were a Nikon fan...
Paul

Mark C

01-27-2013, 17:08

I got one with an M5 outfit a couple weeks ago. It's a nifty little lens, but I'm finding myself using the Summarit that was also part of the deal more often for some reason.

Helen, Bliss street looks lovely. This is Walnut Street, but only one over from Pleasant. We don't ever get quite to Bliss here in W.Va. Well maybe at New Vrindaban :)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8510/8422492862_9f8787250e_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/90951949@N02/8422492862/)
Walnut Street (http://www.flickr.com/photos/90951949@N02/8422492862/), on Flickr

M4-2, Nikkor HC 5 cm, TMY.

helenhill

01-28-2013, 03:19

I used my recently cleaned Nikkor 50/2 on the E-P2 yesterday. I am (again) impressed by this lens. Youxin did a good job.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/gallery/3565/U3565I1359261880.SEQ.0.jpg

Ha Raid, We're in a similar state of Mind...shooting with that 50
The Girrls look Lovely...this lens has such a Soft Glow...amidst its Sharpness

Helen--what a GREAT shot!
Don't know why--but I love it!
Thanks!
Didn't know you were a Nikon fan...
Paul

Cheers & Thanks Paul....I think it's tat dark hooded figure that draws You in
Amidst the metal vendor cart and gritty subway entrance
I recently acquired this Lens and it's made me fall hard again for the 50 perspective ;)

I got one with an M5 outfit a couple weeks ago. It's a nifty little lens, but I'm finding myself using the Summarit that was also part of the deal more often for some reason.

Helen, Bliss street looks lovely. This is Walnut Street, but only one over from Pleasant. We don't ever get quite to Bliss here in W.Va. Well maybe at New Vrindaban :)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8510/8422492862_9f8787250e_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/90951949@N02/8422492862/)
Walnut Street (http://www.flickr.com/photos/90951949@N02/8422492862/), on Flickr
M4-2, Nikkor HC 5 cm, TMY.
Ahh, a Glimpse of Walnut Street....a Touch of Noir
A Woman Alone walking the gritty cracked cement, wires , & criss crossed wires...Love it !
This lens seems to add a Glam to All it 'sees'

leicapixie

01-28-2013, 03:49

sanmich

01-28-2013, 04:07

How much the f/2 is running these days?
How is it different from the 1.4?? (from f/2 of course)

raid

01-28-2013, 04:14

Hi Helen,
I agree with you. Your image shows well how B&W is rendered in your fine composition.
Many years ago, I compared about twenty 50mm lenses and I showed the results here. Dana was two years old then or so, and she was the model. The Nikkor had the best flare resistance of all lenses compared. It used to sell for $200.

raid

01-28-2013, 04:17

How much the f/2 is running these days?
How is it different from the 1.4?? (from f/2 of course)

It has a smoother bokeh than the 50/1.4. A clean ltm example runs between $275-$375. Sometimes, you can find a Tower or Nicca bundled up with the 50/2 for $350-$550.

Mark C

01-28-2013, 06:06

Wow! All, well almost all the shots show WHY people moved in droves to Nikon!
i love the soft rendition of my Collapsible Summicron, but as a pro, it was Nikon system.
The ease of the equipment, repair people unknown, unless i flung a camera over my shoulder,
"thinking" it was around my neck..
The camera' 'Photomic" head did need a service. The rest,incl. the lens unscathed.
Love this forum.

I like old Nikon gear, but can't really agree with that one. I think pros adopted Nikon's SLR for the versatile camera system. The lenses were fine, but I always have, and still do, prefer my Leica lenses to Nikkor SLR lenses. Every photographer I knew back then agreed.

Nikon made some nice RF lenses like this one. It is cheap and has a great look. Lots of fun, but I doubt it caused many people to abandon their Leicas.

Paulbe

01-28-2013, 10:49

sanmich--a good copy of the pre-AI 50/2 ran me $40 recently.
The coated version is a little more and the AI version is still less than $100--that's here in the Atlanta GA area..
Paul

leicapixie

01-28-2013, 11:10

I was meaning getting other lenses than Leitz Leica, for our Leica-M's.
The move to the SLR was that it simply was the better system.
You actually saw what you were getting, some of the lenses were based on the RF system which was very good. In terms of service my Nikon system has needed very little attention. My M3 is my most repaired camera. I know service people all over the world by first names..and their families.
I like using a Leica.

goamules

01-29-2013, 04:32

I like old Nikon gear, but can't really agree with that one. I think pros adopted Nikon's SLR for the versatile camera system. The lenses were fine, but I always have, and still do, prefer my Leica lenses to Nikkor SLR lenses. Every photographer I knew back then agreed.

Nikon made some nice RF lenses like this one. It is cheap and has a great look. Lots of fun, but I doubt it caused many people to abandon their Leicas.

Actually, the Pros (American war correspondents in Korea) did leave Leica glass in droves, and started putting the then obscure Nikkor lenses on their Leica bodies. Their reviews of the Nikkors, and their shots in Life magazine and others, caused huge demand for Nikkor lenses. From that point on, the small company exploded in growth, leading to it's later F series and dominance.

Mark C

01-29-2013, 07:38

That is of course exactly true. DDD pretty much created the Japanese photo industry, or at least jump started, or maybe even enabled, the success of it with the publicity generated in his wake.

I apologize for dragging this off topic. I was actually responding to something that was said about Nikon systems.

Hopefully, getting back on track, it would be fun to compare some similar vintage lenses like raid did a while back. It may be that Nikon gave Leica a kick in the backside in the forties that caused them improve their offerings. What would be the contemporary offering from Leica, a Summar, or Summitar? The Summitar would certainly be more of a match.

My Leica lenses are all a little newer, with the exception of a Summarit. I guess that would have been the competition for the 1.5 Nikkor DDD adopted.

raid

01-29-2013, 08:46

sanmich--a good copy of the pre-AI 50/2 ran me $40 recently.
The coated version is a little more and the AI version is still less than $100--that's here in the Atlanta GA area..
Paul
I was referring to RF lens with .my cost estimate.

furcafe

01-29-2013, 11:54

Also, Zeiss also gave Leica a kick back in the 1930s. One of the main attractions of Zeiss Ikon's rival Contax system was the glass, which was generally considered to be superior to Leitz's offerings. Of course, it wasn't as much of business problem because Zeiss stuff was also more, sometimes significantly more, expensive than Leitz.

Post-WWII Japan was a bigger threat because they combined high-quality w/lower costs, first copying & later improving upon the best German designs. Note that the 5cm/1.4 Nikkor-S & 5cm/2 Nikkor-H were both based on the respective Zeiss Sonnar designs from the 1930s.

That is of course exactly true. DDD pretty much created the Japanese photo industry, or at least jump started, or maybe even enabled, the success of it with the publicity generated in his wake.

I apologize for dragging this off topic. I was actually responding to something that was said about Nikon systems.

Hopefully, getting back on track, it would be fun to compare some similar vintage lenses like raid did a while back. It may be that Nikon gave Leica a kick in the backside in the forties that caused them improve their offerings. What would be the contemporary offering from Leica, a Summar, or Summitar? The Summitar would certainly be more of a match.

My Leica lenses are all a little newer, with the exception of a Summarit. I guess that would have been the competition for the 1.5 Nikkor DDD adopted.

goamules

01-30-2013, 04:50

If I were going to compare, I'd compare the Nikkor to other Sonnar types like a Zeiss, the Canon 1.5, Jupiter-3, and a few others. I'm not sure if Leica ever made a Sonnar type, or close, so if not it would be comparing apples to oranges. But that can still be fun! Here I compared 3 Canon lenses at 3 apertures. I also did the J-3 the same day...not shown.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/garrettsphotos/sets/72157628955481717/detail/

Here's a good, short history of the Nikkors:
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/nikoleic.html

ferider

01-30-2013, 05:52

What would be the contemporary offering from Leica, a Summar, or Summitar? The Summitar would certainly be more of a match.

My Leica lenses are all a little newer, with the exception of a Summarit. I guess that would have been the competition for the 1.5 Nikkor DDD adopted.

The Nikkor 50/1.5 was introduced 1950, followed quickly by the 50/1.4. The German competion was obviously the Sonnar (for example used by Franck and HCB), the Summarit, and the early collapsible Summicron. WRT optical performance, very comparable, IMO. For 50mm, Japanese lenses competed on price only.

I think the real technical Nikkor threat to German glass in the early 50s was the 3.5/2.5 (1952). There was nothing comparable from either Leitz or Zeiss until the late 50s. The 35/2.5 is not too popular around here, but is an outstanding performer, given its age. There was also nothing German that compared in performance to the 2.8/3.5 and 10.5/2.5 Nikkors (1952 and 1953).

The lens that caught DDD's attention was the Nikkor 8.5/2 (1950?): a better performer than the respective Sonnar, with no contemporary match from Leitz.

Mark C

01-30-2013, 07:43

It is an interesting point in photo history when Jun Miki snapped a picture of DDD with the 8.5cm Nikkor. Are those lenses really better than a Zeiss made Sonnar? Are the others? The 8.5cm shot is what caught Duncan's eye, but I don't think it is what he ended up buying. What was his long lens? Maybe a 13.5?

Duncan does mention in "This is War" that he and his colleagues found the Nikkors "far superior" to the German lenses with the exception of wide angle and long telephoto lenses (over 135mm). He said they felt the 50/1.5, 85, and 135 were the best Nikkors. They felt their German wide angles were better, and kept those.

I always kind of assumed that he was comparing the 50/1.5 to the Leica offering (Summarit), but it well may be correct that he was specifically comparing it to the Sonnar. Does anybody know for sure which f1.5 50 he was using then?

ferider

01-30-2013, 08:13

Not sure Mark.

A couple of more things to remember:

1) Post WWII, Zeiss was disassembled and moved. Access to new Occupied Japan or German lenses was easier than getting a Sonnar, at least for a German, Swiss, French or American photographer.
2) Leitz continued production and developed, for example, the Summicron. But between 45 and 50, most of the remaining German male population was not allowed to work (classified as "Mitlaeufer" by the Allies).
3) I am also assuming that - even though published by the Allies post WWII - Leitz kept honoring the existing Zeiss patents.
4) Today we love our Barnacks. But arguably, with difficult access to Contax bodies, Canon and Nikon RF cameras must have been attractive to professional photographers between 1945 and 52. Unless you shoot "f5.6 and be there" mostly (like HCB), using an integrated finder and focus patch must have been appealing.

Roland.

furcafe

01-30-2013, 08:44

Also, the relocated Zeiss Ikon didn't even get their "Zeiss-Opton" lens operation up & running until around 1951, for Contax RF lenses, anyway. That's why early Contax IIa/IIIa's were sold with lenses made in Jena, by their brethren under Communist rule on the other side of the Iron Curtain. The West German part of Zeiss basically had to reconstitute their entire optical works in Oberkochen, as the heart of their miniature camera (35mm, etc.) & lens production before the war had been in Jena & Dresden.

Plus, as the Zeiss afficionados know, after WWII, there was nothing official from Zeiss in LTM. Actual Zeiss lenses in LTM were made in very limited numbers during the war, & mainly for the military. After the war you basically had Soviet Jupiter copies of the Zeiss designs for the Kiev Contax copies or aftermarket conversions of Zeiss Contax mount lenses or optical parts. Either way, I think the main problem was quality control, as the Zeiss designs & coating formula were more than good enough. Nippon Kogaku, already a favored optical company before & during WWII, benefitted from the relatively more generous conditions of the U.S. Occupation & was able to concentrate on super premium quality (actually overbuilt) products.

As to the availability & attractiveness of Contax bodies, I agree w/Roland there, too. Because they were so expensive, even compared to the pricey Leica gear, only really well-financed or fortunate photojournalists could use them, the best-known example being Capa, but also many of the Time-Life shooters (IIRC, after the IIa/IIIa came out in 1950, they donated some of their old IIs & IIIs to Edmund Hillary's Everest expedition, though Hillary himself was a Retina man).

Not sure Mark.

A couple of more things to remember:

1) Post WWII, Zeiss was disassembled and moved. Access to new Occupied Japan or German lenses must have been much easier than getting a Sonnar, at least for a German, Swiss, French or American photographer.
2) Leitz continued production and developed, for example, the Summicron. But between 45 and 50, most of the remaining German male population was not allowed to work (classified as "Mitlaeufer" by the Allies).
3) I am also assuming that - even though published by the Allies post WWII - Leitz kept honoring the existing Zeiss patents.
4) Today we love our Barnacks. But arguably, with difficult access to Contax bodies, Canon and Nikon RF cameras must have been attractive to professional photographers between 1945 and 52. Unless you shoot "f5.6 and be there" mostly (like HCB), using an integrated finder and focus patch must have been appealing.

Roland.

Roland.

helenhill

02-19-2013, 06:30

[/URL]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8383/8489591608_923376de87_b.jpg (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/8489591608/]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8383/8489591608_923376de87_b.jpg%20Cloudy%20Day,%20Dirt y%20Neg%20makes%20for%20Nostalgia...%20by%20helenh ill_HH,%20on%20Flickr)
Cloudy Day, Dirty Neg makes for Nostalgia... (http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/8489591608/) by helenhill_HH (http://www.flickr.com/people/helenartemishill/), on Flickr