Photos taken with Nikkor-O 2.1cm 1:4 - POST HERE

[jonmanjiro]

Originally Posted by raid

Not at all. I know that the less costly F version is not RF coupled. I use a Minolta Rokkor 2.1cm 4 and a Canon 19mm 3.5 each with an adapter on M bodies, without the RF coupling. The RF coupling is not really needed.

I was asking about the adapter for using the SLR F version (without RF coupling) Nikkor 2.1cm on the M.

Oh ok, my misunderstanding.

To answer your question, as per my previous post, there is an F-M adapter so the F-mount version of the lens can be used on an M-mount camera.

http://www.cameraquest.com/adpSLRRF.htm

[raid]

Originally Posted by jonmanjiro

Oh ok, my misunderstanding.

To answer your question, as per my previous post, there is an F-M adapter so the F-mount version of the lens can be used on an M-mount camera.

http://www.cameraquest.com/adpSLRRF.htm

I will have to get me such an adapter.
The other issue would be to adapt the lens to my F2.
There are many cost levels, from $40 to over $200.

[jonmanjiro]

Originally Posted by raid

The other issue would be to adapt the lens to my F2.

A Nikon F2? What other issue to adapt the lens?

[Highway 61]

Originally Posted by raid

I will have to get me such an adapter.
The other issue would be to adapt the lens to my F2.
There are many cost levels, from $40 to over $200.

What would cost $40 to over $200 ?

[enasniearth]

The 2.1 cm f4 in Nikon slr version is an odd bird .
The Nikon f / f2 and some nikkor mats have the tab in the camera body that makes use of this lens possible .
The lens has more in common with a canon fd breechlock mount than a Nikon f .
The lens has a tab that mates with a tab in the Nikon body .
You set the lens so the tab is behind the lens mount ring. ( there is a clickstop and set focus so the tab is in proper position)
You drop the lens onto the body , rotate the outer chrome ring until it locks .
The Nikon f f2 is made for the use of this fine lens .
The problem with the voigtlander f- s and f to Leica m adapters is that they lack this tab that is standard to the production Nikon f . ( cameraquests original listing for the f- s adapter stated it would not work for the 2.1 cm f 4 nikkor in Nikon f mount )
So there is no way to align the lens so it functions properly . Posts refer to using duct tape to accomplish this .
The Nikon f requires the finder to be mounted over the rewind crank so it makes for a large package .
You can modify the f , by removing the prism and installing a reduced height shoe , you also modify the finder to Leica shoe mount type.
I posted my adapted Nikon f ( pawnshop buy $45 mirror lazy not good )
Much laughter ( well the camera can not be used as an slr now )
You can buy the rf coupled unit ( 298 produced ) or purchase the 21 zeiss biogon ( like performance to the nikkor )
The Nikon f type is the same as the rf type , lacking only rf coupling
Well the nikon f body is 3/4 inch longer , however with modified finder is the same height or lower than an s 3. The locked up mirror gives titanium shutter sp performance ,iit is a guess focus 2.1 cm , wide open depth of field is from 4.5 feet to infinity .its pretty easy
I can guess focus this ,

[raid]

Originally Posted by jonmanjiro

A Nikon F2? What other issue to adapt the lens?

I meant to use the lens ontne f2 an get a flash mount for the finder.

[raid]

Originally Posted by Highway 61

What would cost $40 to over $200 ?

The F -M adapter on ebay.

[Tom A]

For a while I had two 21f4 Nikkors. One is more or less permanently on my S2 with the F-S adapter and the other one was on a black F.
It is a good lens, maybe not a Super Angulon 21f3.4 - but close enough. The finder on the F is a problem as they are off-set slightly - and keep falling off! If I didn't have the F-S adapter I would simply dedicate a F body for it. Probably cheaper than getting an adapter anyway.

[Highway 61]

Originally Posted by raid

I meant to use the lens on the f2 an get a flash mount for the finder.

If you've got the original finder of the F version of the lens there is no additional flash mount to get.

If you use a third party 21mm finder, an AS-1 adapter is what you need, the cost is under $10.

If you intend to use the original finder of the F version of the lens on a camera body fitted with a standard flash shoe, this is just not possible unless you permanently hack the finder to convert its dedicated Nikon female flash shoe into a standard male flash shoe.

If you do this, then you can use that finder on the AS-1 adapter, though.

But once you get a Nikon F you'll need the grey Nikon F type flash shoe adapter eventually. Same cost as the AS-1.

So you need both right now.

[raid]

I have the F2 now as I have sold my F many years ago. Once I get the lens in the mail, I will try things out. Thanks for the detailed reply above.

[kbg32]

I owned a F version with M adapter for awhile back in the late 70's. I got rid of it when I bought a Super Angulon. My avatar was taken with the Nikkor.

[raid]

Originally Posted by kbg32

I owned a F version with M adapter for awhile back in the late 70's. I got rid of it when I bought a Super Angulon. My avatar was taken with the Nikkor.

Hi Keith,
How come that some people here state that this lens cannot be used with M cameras? Did you have any problems?

[raid]

Originally Posted by Tom A

Thanks Jon. Must be the analog user in me that cant figure out the "linking". Somewhere in the great pixellated sky there is a hard drive that holds a lot of my pictures!
It is a pity that not more people use the old 21f4 Nikkor. It has a very special look to it - not a Biogon "clinical" or the Super Angulon 21. It is also very compact - can easily slide into a pocket. It also uses the 52 mm filter in the F version.

You can add me as a new user of this lens in F mount, Tom. Once it will arrive to me in the mail, I will compare its performance with my W-Rokkor 21mm 4. I know that you have used both lenses and that you prefer the Nikkor over the W-Rokkor.

[Tom A]

Raid, you will probably like the Nikkor 21f4. It has a distict look to its images. Another advantage is that it uses 52 mm filter (and with a deep red one - the edges are dark, really dark - but looming sky too).

[FrankS]

So what's the diff between this lens and the later improved f3.5 and f2.8 versions?

[Highway 61]

Originally Posted by FrankS

So what's the diff between this lens and the later improved f3.5 and f2.8 versions?

Less distorsion and less vignetting due to the old Biogon symmetrical design.

The later 20/3.5 UD, 20/4 Ai, 20/3.5 Ai-S and 20/2.8 Ai-S are all retrofocus design lenses with mandatory compromises re. distorsion and corners illumination.

The 20/2.8 Ai-S can give you a serious headache due to its huge pincushion distorsion.

[raid]

So the "improved later versions" are not really improved if there is more distortion. Did I get it right?

[Highway 61]

Originally Posted by raid

So the "improved later versions" are not really improved if there is more distortion. Did I get it right?

They are really improved because you can use them as genuine SLR lenses, without being forced to lock the camera body mirror up, to guess focus and to use an external offset viewfinder.

Now you must buy a Nikkor-UD 20/3.5 and a Nikkor Ai-S 20/2.8 so that you can compare them all.

[FrankS]

Ah, that makes sense now, thank you! Still learning. That's good.

[jonmanjiro]

Originally Posted by Highway 61

The 20/2.8 Ai-S can give you a serious headache due to its huge pincushion distorsion.

Exactly. If I remember correctly, it has some barrel distortion in the center and changes to pin cushion distortion toward the edges, so a sort of moustache distortion, which is a PITA to correct in post processing.

I expect Raeed's thorough lens tests will determine precisely just how wavey this particular moustache is!

[raid]

I meant to say that if optically the older Nikkor is a better lens, then the newer lenses are (optically) not really better if the main advantage was not needing mirror lock-up. Tom once said that he found the Nikor to be a sharper lens than the W-Rokkor, so I will look into it since I now have both lenses. I don't want to buy any other wide angle lenses now.

I wonder how the 21mm lenses compare with the Canon 19mm lens.

[Highway 61]

Originally Posted by raid

I wonder how the 21mm lenses compare with the Canon 19mm lens.

Do you have the Canon so that you can compare it with the Minolta ?

I also expect you to scientifically compare the Nikkor-O 21/4 with the old original Biogon 21/4.5 once mounted on a Nikon rangefinder camera body. I own the latter but sometimes feel some attraction towards the Nikkor-O.

[raid]

Originally Posted by Highway 61

Do you have the Canon so that you can compare it with the Minolta ?

I also expect you to scientifically compare the Nikkor-O 21/4 with the old original Biogon 21/4.5 once mounted on a Nikon rangefinder camera body. I own the latter but sometimes feel some attraction towards the Nikkor-O.

I do not own the Biogon but have the Canon lens.
I do not do any scientific comparisons.

[Tom A]

I have the vintage Biogon 21mm f4.5 as well as the F-mount 21f4. The biggest difference between them is the almost perfect rectilinear rendition with the Biogon. Edge fall off is slightly less too - and it does couple to the rangefinder. However - from user stand point - the F-mount with the VC adapter wins hands down. The Biogon 21 is heavy and the focus/aperture indexes are virtually unreadable in bright light (tiny numbers in black on a bright chrome barrel. Either one of these lenses is good, very good in fact. Both are quite dramatic in their rendering and both are sharp. The Nikkor is a bit less prone to flare and it does have the 52 mm filter thread. This means you can actually make a vestigal hood for it by knocking the glass out of 2-3 filters and stack them together. I dont know if there ever was a hood for the old Biogon - at least I have never seen one.
I did have the Canon 19 but for some reason I did not get along with it.

[raid]

Tom,
Which VC adaptor do you use?