Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > SLRs - the unRF

SLRs - the unRF For those of you who must talk about SLRs, if only to confirm they are not RF.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Post your Nikkor 43-86mm Photos
Old 06-09-2015   #1
cary
Registered User
 
cary is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 181
Post your Nikkor 43-86mm Photos

I just picked up a 43-86 with front silver filter ring, I would like to see what others had photographed with it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-09-2015   #2
pschauss
Registered User
 
pschauss is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 578
I have the AI version. It is my favorite travel lens. Shot with an FM using Eastman Double-X.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg FM_4386_004a_small.jpg (27.5 KB, 104 views)
__________________
- Peter Schauss
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-09-2015   #3
Nokton48
Registered User
 
Nokton48's Avatar
 
Nokton48 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by pschauss View Post
I have the AI version. It is my favorite travel lens. Shot with an FM using Eastman Double-X.
Nice.
A good one!
__________________
“The secret of getting ahead is getting started.”
― Mark Twain
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-09-2015   #4
colyn
ישו משיח בנו של אלוהים
 
colyn's Avatar
 
colyn is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: CowTown, Texas
Age: 66
Posts: 4,463
I guess now I'll have to drag mine out and shoot some pics with it. Mine is a second version Ai..
__________________
Colyn

The Lone Star State....

Leica M2 | M3 x 2 | IIIa x 2 | IIIc | IIIf black dial | Kodak Retina IIIc | Kodak Retina IIIC |


Flickr

My website

My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2015   #5
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,905
<bump for more photos!>

__________________


Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2015   #6
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,905
Here is a nice story on this lens:

http://www.nikkor.com/story/0004/
__________________


Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2015   #7
cary
Registered User
 
cary is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 181
Cool article, I am going to shoot some photos this weekend with mine.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2015   #8
GarageBoy
Registered User
 
GarageBoy is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 777
Not bad for the "worst Nikon lens ever made"
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2015   #9
pvdhaar
Zoom with your feet!
 
pvdhaar's Avatar
 
pvdhaar is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarageBoy View Post
Not bad for the "worst Nikon lens ever made"
+1

Maybe we have to revisit other dogs as well.. who knows what great images pop-up?
__________________
Kind regards,

Peter

My Hexländer Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2015   #10
dasuess
Nikon Freak
 
dasuess's Avatar
 
dasuess is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Age: 68
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave lackey View Post
<bump for more photos!>

I have a pristine AI version from 1981 (or so) that I bought just because it was $19.95. I'll have to get some pics taken with it when we return from the lake.
__________________
"You can't count on others to think or see for you." David Vestal, The Craft of Photography

David A. Suess
Nikon Df: 24/f2.8, 28/f3.5, 35f/2, 43-86/f3.5, 55/f3.5 Micro, 85/f1.8, 105/f2.5, 180/f2.8, 200/f4, 300/f4.5
http://DavidSuessImages.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-23-2015   #11
dasuess
Nikon Freak
 
dasuess's Avatar
 
dasuess is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Age: 68
Posts: 507
Late evening snap from our condo balcony, Nikon Df with Nikkor 43-86 at 43mm setting.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...5903.SEQ.0.jpg
__________________
"You can't count on others to think or see for you." David Vestal, The Craft of Photography

David A. Suess
Nikon Df: 24/f2.8, 28/f3.5, 35f/2, 43-86/f3.5, 55/f3.5 Micro, 85/f1.8, 105/f2.5, 180/f2.8, 200/f4, 300/f4.5
http://DavidSuessImages.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-23-2015   #12
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
 
nikon_sam's Avatar
 
nikon_sam is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Alta Loma, CA
Age: 59
Posts: 4,952
I had one years ago it came in a box with a bunch of other photo gear a friend gave me...
I wasn't impressed with it, never shot with it and pretty sure I gave it away during one of the Christmas Giveaways...don't remember who got it...
__________________
Sam
"tongue tied & twisted
just an earthbound misfit...I..."
pf
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-23-2015   #13
ornate_wrasse
Moderator
 
ornate_wrasse's Avatar
 
ornate_wrasse is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasuess View Post
Late evening snap from our condo balcony, Nikon Df with Nikkor 43-86 at 43mm setting.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...5903.SEQ.0.jpg
Nice capture of the clouds! Ya done good with this lens!

Ellen
__________________
Images

www.pbase.com/ornate_wrasse

Leica M9, Leica M3 - 21mm 3.4 Super Angulon, 28mm 2.8 Elmarit, 35mm Summicron, Nikkor SC 50mm 1.4, Carl Zeiss Jena 50mm 1.5, CV 75mm 2.5, Nikkor 8.5cm 2.0

Mamiya 6 - 50mm f4, 75mm f3.5, 150mm f4.5

Fuji X-Pro1 - 16-55mm f/2.8, 27mm f/2.8

RFF Feedback: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...1931&protype=9
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-23-2015   #14
Kate-the-Great
Registered User
 
Kate-the-Great's Avatar
 
Kate-the-Great is offline
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Denver
Posts: 224
Got one for my 5D entirely due to Ken Rockwell calling it "Nikon's worst lens ever". Lens did not disappoint- not at all sharp at 43mm and 86mm (really the only focal lengths I use it at), but the glow wide-open is nice and the falloff/curvature of field isolates central subjects in a good way. Pretty fun lens on FF / 135.





  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2015   #15
Wulfthari
Registered User
 
Wulfthari's Avatar
 
Wulfthari is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate-the-Great View Post
Got one for my 5D entirely due to Ken Rockwell calling it "Nikon's worst lens ever".
I wouldn't take anything Rockwell says very seriously, not even himself seem to taken himself seriously, right?

I mean, some of the stuff he writes is informative, but his hatred for the Canon FD system and the Nikon zooms is well known, as well that he changes his mind quickly from review to review.
__________________
Canon 7s, Canon 50 mm f1.2
Leica M3,M4-P,M5, Summaron 1:2.8/35,Summicron 1:2.0/50DR,Elmarit 1:2.8/90, Summitar 1:2.0/50
Contax IIA,IIIA, Sonnar 1:1.5/50
Zorki 4K,5,6, Leningrad,Industar 61LD 1:2.8/55,Orion 15 1:5,6/28,Jupiter 8 1:2.0/50,Jupiter 9 1:2.0/85,Jupiter 11 1:4/135,Jupiter 12 1:2.8/35
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2015   #16
dasuess
Nikon Freak
 
dasuess's Avatar
 
dasuess is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Age: 68
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate-the-Great View Post
Got one for my 5D entirely due to Ken Rockwell calling it "Nikon's worst lens ever". Lens did not disappoint- not at all sharp at 43mm and 86mm (really the only focal lengths I use it at), but the glow wide-open is nice and the falloff/curvature of field isolates central subjects in a good way. Pretty fun lens on FF / 135.
The later K and AI versions (I have the AI) have an updated optical formula and are supposed to be superior to the earlier version with the silver front ring. But I dunno, I just take pitchers with it . I also have the equally terrible pre-AI 28/f3.5, which is also useful for taking pitchers.
__________________
"You can't count on others to think or see for you." David Vestal, The Craft of Photography

David A. Suess
Nikon Df: 24/f2.8, 28/f3.5, 35f/2, 43-86/f3.5, 55/f3.5 Micro, 85/f1.8, 105/f2.5, 180/f2.8, 200/f4, 300/f4.5
http://DavidSuessImages.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2015   #17
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Silly Valley, California, USA
Posts: 9,216
Dang you! Now I want one! ]:-)

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2015   #18
dasuess
Nikon Freak
 
dasuess's Avatar
 
dasuess is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Age: 68
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
Dang you! Now I want one! ]:-)
I got mine for $19.95 in excellent condition. Urban legend says it's so bad that nobody thinks they are worth anything. All Nikon MF glass is dirt cheap these days.
__________________
"You can't count on others to think or see for you." David Vestal, The Craft of Photography

David A. Suess
Nikon Df: 24/f2.8, 28/f3.5, 35f/2, 43-86/f3.5, 55/f3.5 Micro, 85/f1.8, 105/f2.5, 180/f2.8, 200/f4, 300/f4.5
http://DavidSuessImages.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2015   #19
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,925
Nikon's worst lens? Did Nikon make any bad lenses? I never used any Nikon gear but I never heard of their cameras and lenses as bad.

But that focal length? Fujica made a 43-75 zoom. For me at least, it is the most useless lens. That is not a focal length I see well in. I have one, and gave another to my daughter for the 801 I gave her. I just can't bond with that focal length. I see wide more than long, and to me, 43 is still (just a little shy of) normal. Now the 18-28mm for my 167mt, that I an bond with. ;-)
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2015   #20
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,015
It is "general knowledge" that this was Nikon's (first and) worst zoom lens and maybe worst lens made overall. This speaks for the high quality of Nikon made lenses. The reports then may have mentioned "barrel distortion" and "pincushening" ... stuff like that.
__________________
- Raid

________________


http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2015   #21
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 13,134
The first Nikon 43-86 was well-known for its optical compromises even back in the mid-1960's when we sold them in the camera store where I worked. But it was a zoom, unusual at the time, and that forgave a lot!

But I think the first consumer SLR zoom came a little earlier for the Voigtlander Bessamatic, the 36-82mm f/2.8 Zoomar...

Had to be careful about terminology then, as some 'zooms' were actually "vari-focal" and changed focus as you zoomed.
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2015   #22
Wulfthari
Registered User
 
Wulfthari's Avatar
 
Wulfthari is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
It is "general knowledge" that this was Nikon's (first and) worst zoom lens and maybe worst lens made overall. This speaks for the high quality of Nikon made lenses. The reports then may have mentioned "barrel distortion" and "pincushening" ... stuff like that.
All vintage Nikon lenses show a strong barrel distortion, personally I like the effect.

Here there's a comparison where I immediately spotted the Nikon:

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum52/1...le-royale.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by oftheherd View Post
Nikon's worst lens? Did Nikon make any bad lenses? I never used any Nikon gear but I never heard of their cameras and lenses as bad.

But that focal length? Fujica made a 43-75 zoom. For me at least, it is the most useless lens. That is not a focal length I see well in. I have one, and gave another to my daughter for the 801 I gave her. I just can't bond with that focal length. I see wide more than long, and to me, 43 is still (just a little shy of) normal. Now the 18-28mm for my 167mt, that I an bond with. ;-)
If you check out the comparison on the other thread you can find some interesting info: IMO 70s Takumars and Fujinon are better than Nikons of the same era.

For the focal lens I agree, it was a fashion for those that were called "standard zooms", that supposedly were kit lenses destined to replace 50 mm fixed lenses, the idea was to have a wide angle (35 or 40mm), the standard 50mm and a portrait (75 to 85), IMO they are zoom for lazy people who don't want to move their asses to compose properly, I find them completely useless and plain bad because fixed lenses are usually faster.
__________________
Canon 7s, Canon 50 mm f1.2
Leica M3,M4-P,M5, Summaron 1:2.8/35,Summicron 1:2.0/50DR,Elmarit 1:2.8/90, Summitar 1:2.0/50
Contax IIA,IIIA, Sonnar 1:1.5/50
Zorki 4K,5,6, Leningrad,Industar 61LD 1:2.8/55,Orion 15 1:5,6/28,Jupiter 8 1:2.0/50,Jupiter 9 1:2.0/85,Jupiter 11 1:4/135,Jupiter 12 1:2.8/35
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2015   #23
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate-the-Great View Post
Got one for my 5D entirely due to Ken Rockwell calling it "Nikon's worst lens ever". Lens did not disappoint- not at all sharp at 43mm and 86mm (really the only focal lengths I use it at), but the glow wide-open is nice and the falloff/curvature of field isolates central subjects in a good way. Pretty fun lens on FF / 135.





Good grief, I like the look!

Like Godfrey, you got me wanting one now.
__________________


Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-26-2015   #24
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug View Post
The first Nikon 43-86 was well-known for its optical compromises even back in the mid-1960's when we sold them in the camera store where I worked. But it was a zoom, unusual at the time, and that forgave a lot!

But I think the first consumer SLR zoom came a little earlier for the Voigtlander Bessamatic, the 36-82mm f/2.8 Zoomar...

Had to be careful about terminology then, as some 'zooms' were actually "vari-focal" and changed focus as you zoomed.
Do you remember the Vivitar Series I 35-85 varifocal? I got one along with their 70-210, and the first ST801 I purchased, out of a pawn shop. The 70-210 never worked, but the 35-85 did and does. Nice lens, just a bit of a beastie. I keep it mostly for its uniqueness.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-26-2015   #25
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,920
If you are looking for low cost Nikon glass try the Series E 36-72/3.5. Plastic but from what I remember had better reviews than the 43-86. The 70-150 was equally well regarded (if not more).

When I was trying to make up my mind on my first wide angle I tested the 28/3.5 and the version I had was a dog compared to the 24/2.8 or 35/2.

Interesting thread.

B2
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-26-2015   #26
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug View Post
The first Nikon 43-86 was well-known for its optical compromises even back in the mid-1960's when we sold them in the camera store where I worked. But it was a zoom, unusual at the time, and that forgave a lot!

But I think the first consumer SLR zoom came a little earlier for the Voigtlander Bessamatic, the 36-82mm f/2.8 Zoomar...

Had to be careful about terminology then, as some 'zooms' were actually "vari-focal" and changed focus as you zoomed.
I meant to say "first Nikon zoom".
__________________
- Raid

________________


http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-26-2015   #27
djcphoto
An Englishman Abroad
 
djcphoto's Avatar
 
djcphoto is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 154
I think the first Nikon zoom was the 8.5-25cm; I have a very rough one that dates to 1960, I think. Didn't make many of them though.
__________________
My blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2015   #28
dasuess
Nikon Freak
 
dasuess's Avatar
 
dasuess is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Age: 68
Posts: 507
Nikon Df with 43-86/f/3.5, Sunset on North Sand Lake in Wisconsin

__________________
"You can't count on others to think or see for you." David Vestal, The Craft of Photography

David A. Suess
Nikon Df: 24/f2.8, 28/f3.5, 35f/2, 43-86/f3.5, 55/f3.5 Micro, 85/f1.8, 105/f2.5, 180/f2.8, 200/f4, 300/f4.5
http://DavidSuessImages.com
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 15:11.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.