which Nikkor 50mm lenses are Sonnars?

[alexnotalex]

Here's my beloved damaged HC f2, exquisite when it behaves. Marked Tokyo.

[raid]

Originally Posted by ferider

Followup on Jon's question and correction to my previous post: the Millenium Nikkor is a re-issue of the 1964 Olympic 50/1.4, both significantly larger than the classic 50/1.4, including a larger rear element. 7 elements, but detailed formula unknown for both, also to Rotoloni. So we don't know if it's a Sonnar or not.

Does it have a soul or is it cold?
There will hide the answer.

[alexnotalex]

Originally Posted by ampguy

I agree that they are popular and deliver unique images, but optically they are technically obsolete:

from the nikon site, re: 105/2.5:

Compared to the previous model with Sonnar type lens construction, it offers significant improvements in close-range aberration fluctuation, as well as peripheral light, spherical aberration and coma. In particular, it delivers a beautiful balance of focused and defocused (blurred) images, as well as higer resolution with natural gradation. The Xenotar-type lens design with the ideal aberration correction made it the perfect lens for portraits.

Can someone post some Xenotar pics? Any Xenotars available in LTM?
best,
Alex

[ferider]

Originally Posted by alexnotalex

Can someone post some Xenotar pics? Any Xenotars available in LTM?
best,
Alex

Check out the Canon 50/1.4 LTM, for instance on the flickr M-mount forum (see my sig).

[ampguy]

could be, but probably mostly nostalgia, like Kodachrome, where even though we know the colors and grain patterns don't reproduce as accurately as newer films, some people will always like them because they remind them of a certain time or memory ...

Originally Posted by raid

Ted,
Being "technically obsolete" could be one of the reasons why they are so popular. They are "better lenses" based on other factors. There is a reason why extra sharpness is often referred to as "cold sharp" or "surgically sharp". While being optimized technically, some lenses lose their ..... soul?

[AgentX]

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/im...kkor/n40_e.htm

Might find this interesting.

[Brian Sweeney]

The Olympic Nikkor and Millenium Nikkor are not Sonnar formula lenses. Neblette, "Photographic Lenses" lists the Olympic Nikkor as having the same block diagram as the Canon 50/1.2, but this must be an error. I have seen (somewhere posted) an X-Ray of the Olympic Nikkor showing it was not a Sonnar, but it was different from the Canon 50/1.2. I have taken the latter apart, and made one from two parts lenses- thanks to Roland for providing one of them.

[kinoglass]

Interesting reading. It mentions how Nikon patents were the product of German-Japanese cooperation and how Germans designers contributed to them. Politics may have more to do than optics in the quality of Japanese Sonnar types. <A HREF="http://old.photodo.com/art/When3.shtml">When Japan took over</A>

[raid]

Originally Posted by ampguy

could be, but probably mostly nostalgia, like Kodachrome, where even though we know the colors and grain patterns don't reproduce as accurately as newer films, some people will always like them because they remind them of a certain time or memory ...

Ted,
I am not a Sonnar fanatic by any means. I sold several lenses, including a Tokyo Nikkor 5cm 2.0 to buy a Leica lens. The Sonnar lenses are a nice alternative.

[fbf]

Any comparisons between the nikkor 50/2 H.C and zeiss 50/2 opton sonnar T* ?

[ampguy]

I like the Sonnar look occasionally, it's basically a lensbaby or Holga like fun distraction once in awhile.

If we were back in the '30s, and that's about all there were, it might be a different story...

Originally Posted by raid

Ted,
I am not a Sonnar fanatic by any means. I sold several lenses, including a Tokyo Nikkor 5cm 2.0 to buy a Leica lens. The Sonnar lenses are a nice alternative.

[alexnotalex]

Originally Posted by ferider

Check out the Canon 50/1.4 LTM, for instance on the flickr M-mount forum (see my sig).

Your pics of the sutro baths are sublime. 80mm Komura? Superb! Wow!

[raid]

Originally Posted by ampguy

I like the Sonnar look occasionally, it's basically a lensbaby or Holga like fun distraction once in awhile.

If we were back in the '30s, and that's about all there were, it might be a different story...

The Nikkor 105/2.5 is razor sharp and it is a Sonnar. It is not even close to a soft lens.

[Brian Sweeney]

Originally Posted by fbf

Any comparisons between the nikkor 50/2 H.C and zeiss 50/2 opton sonnar T* ?

I do not have any scanned in with the Zeiss Opton 50/2. I have two of them, one shimmed for a Nikon RF and the other is on the Contax IIIa. "Personal opinion"- very close, the edge goes to the Zeiss. I have 5 of the Nikkor 5cm F2's beween S-Mount and LTM.

I will have to do a "Sonnar formula 50" shootout. I have a number of them. I have an M-Mount adapter with an indexed-cam, thanks to Roland.

I also have a 5cm F1.5 Post-War CZJ Sonnar which is "tweeked" from the pre-war design. And the Carl Zeiss Opton 50/1.5, and later Carl Zeiss 50/1.5. Canon 50/1.5, and of course several J-3's.

[ampguy]

The F mount ones, post '60s (5xxxxx +) are not Sonnars and have many corrections over the previous ones.

Originally Posted by raid

The Nikkor 105/2.5 is razor sharp and it is a Sonnar. It is not even close to a soft lens.

[raid]

Originally Posted by ampguy

The F mount ones, post '60s (5xxxxx +) are not Sonnars and have many corrections over the previous ones.

My 105 Nikkor lenses are all Sonnar, and they are amazing.

[JRG]

Here's what Bjørn Rørslett has to say about the Sonnar (pre-1972) version of the F-mount 105/2.5: "The Sonnar is easily identified by its smallish rear element compared to more recent versions. It was an extremely sharp lens for its time and the optical quality still surpasses that of many modern lenses. It underwent cosmetic changes of the exterior only and stayed in production until 1971. It is a great performer at f/5.6 and provides for good performance even wide open, but flare could be a problem here."

[ampguy]

They are probably all amazing.

But the later ones are optically even better than the Sonnar ones:

Originally Posted by raid

My 105 Nikkor lenses are all Sonnar, and they are amazing.

[alexnotalex]

Originally Posted by raid

My 105 Nikkor lenses are all Sonnar, and they are amazing.

105??!! you'll need to buy more Canon Ps to mount them

[raid]

[Brian Sweeney]

Sonnar's are known for having high field curvature. It does not do well for flat objects, but this can be an advantage for taking portraits.


I am a Sonnar fanatic. I have ten Zeiss Sonnar 50 F1.5's alone, all a little bit different. I have even more Nikkor 5cm F1.4's, mostly to go with Nikon RF's.

[ampguy]

Raid - great photos, I doubt those could have been any better with the newer 105/2.5

Brian - I do more than portraits with my 105/2.5, so I like flatness of field. A great lens for portraits is a 75-85 1.4 to 1.8

Here's another with the 105/2.5 p*c post Sonnar version on a d40x: