Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,535   Posts: 1,544,081   Online: 1117
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Hawaii
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    715
    me too thanks, learn something new every day.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,439
    Quote Originally Posted by krisb1981 View Post
    Yes, Thank you very much. I am enlightened now.
    If - and this is an important 'if' - you are using through-the-lens metering of any type, you need not compensate the reading you get. I have an FTN finder for my F and the only lens I use it with is my 55/3.5; I bought it for just this purpose.
    By the way, that lens works very well at infinity, and due to the recessed front element it is somewhat self-shading. If you wish to use a shade, the reccomended shade is the HN-3.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,399
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    By the way, that lens works very well at infinity, and due to the recessed front element it is somewhat self-shading.
    E., there are people who disagree with you. Not me, my first Nikkor was a 50/1.4 bought new in March, '70. I got a 55/3.5 in September of that year, not long afterwards retired the 50/1.4 for everything except shooting at twilight.

    But, y'know, neither Modern Photography nor Popular Photography ever published a review of the 55/3.5. I once asked Norman Rothschild why not. He told me that in PP's tests the 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor came out unacceptable at infinity at a couple of apertures. I think the problem was coma. PP had a policy of not annoying major advertisers by publishing negative reviews of their products, so never published that test. MP had a similar policy.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,439
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    E., there are people who disagree with you. Not me, my first Nikkor was a 50/1.4 bought new in March, '70. I got a 55/3.5 in September of that year, not long afterwards retired the 50/1.4 for everything except shooting at twilight.

    But, y'know, neither Modern Photography nor Popular Photography ever published a review of the 55/3.5. I once asked Norman Rothschild why not. He told me that in PP's tests the 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor came out unacceptable at infinity at a couple of apertures. I think the problem was coma. PP had a policy of not annoying major advertisers by publishing negative reviews of their products, so never published that test. MP had a similar policy.
    I'm aware of this; all I can say is my example performs very satisfactorily at infinity. I think the optical design is slightly different from the earlier versions, five in four instead of five in three like the previous versions.

    As for the 1.4, I had two, as well as a 1.2. I now use two pre-ai f:2 Nikkor Hs for my 50s.
    Last edited by E. von Hoegh; 11-13-2013 at 11:24 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Prospect Heights, IL
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    If - and this is an important 'if' - you are using through-the-lens metering of any type, you need not compensate the reading you get. I have an FTN finder for my F and the only lens I use it with is my 55/3.5; I bought it for just this purpose.
    By the way, that lens works very well at infinity, and due to the recessed front element it is somewhat self-shading. If you wish to use a shade, the reccomended shade is the HN-3.
    I will be using it without metring prism, so I need to compensate based on the table found in the link you provided. I just add 1 stop of light at 1:2 and 2 stops of light when used with 27mm ring to give me 1:1. I will see the results this weekend

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,399
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    I'm aware of this; all I can say is my example performs very satisfactorily at infinity. I think the optical design is slightly different from the earlier versions, five in four instead of five in three like the previous versions.
    I was happy with mine too. That MP and PP found all of the 55/3.5 MicroNikkors they tested unacceptable at some apertures at infinity speaks to differences between formal and informal lens tests. Remember, they published no test reports on any version of the 55/3.5 MicroNikkor.

    Your comment re changed layout surprised me. Since my memory may be failing I visited the mir site to see what it says about 55/3.5 MicroNikkor designs. There may well have been redesigns, but all versions were five element in four group double Gauss types.

    You may have been led astray by this text (see for yourself at http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...5mmmicro.htm):

    (Compared to 5 elements in 4 groups used in last versions of Ai-Spec f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor which again different from early versions of f/3.5 lens that has a simpler 5 elements in 3 groups design)
    which is not consistent with cross-sections and text descriptions of older 55/3.5s on the site.

    It is also not consistent with the cross-section shown in the instruction manual for the 55/3.5 MicroNikkor-P I bought in September, 1970. I just dug it out, it is in front of me now.

    Many of the facts asserted on the Internet just aren't so, alas.

    Cheers,

    Dan

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Utah Valley
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    275
    I just bought one of these the other day, coincidentally. The same version, too (pre-AI with the diamond grip). I was shocked at how lightweight it is--there's hardly any glass in the damned thing!

    I bought mine for slide copying, but I'll definitely try it outside. I tend to marry myself to new lenses after acquiring them.

  8. #28
    John_Nikon_F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Duvall, WA, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,446
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    If your lens has a diamond textured rubber focussing ring, and is marked as you say, it is a 'K' version.
    Not true. The K version is the black barrel lens that looks like an AI/AIS lens. The diamond pattern rubber focusing ring was used on zooms and certain primes, like the 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P/PC, and the 180/2.8. Both of those lenses were chrome barrel, unlike the K version.

    A Micro-Nikkor-PC: http://www.destoutz.ch/lens_55mm_f3.5_734997.html

    A 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor K version: http://www.destoutz.ch/lens_55mm_f3.5_910139.html

    The compensating diaphragm 55/3.5's have a metal focusing ring usually marked with a distance scale in either meters or feet. Serial numbers are much lower, too, being below 300,000. As the helicoid is extended, the diaphragm slowly opens up.

    Quote Originally Posted by LJSLATER View Post
    I just bought one of these the other day, coincidentally. The same version, too (pre-AI with the diamond grip). I was shocked at how lightweight it is--there's hardly any glass in the damned thing!

    I bought mine for slide copying, but I'll definitely try it outside. I tend to marry myself to new lenses after acquiring them.
    It's a great little lens. Slow for a normal lens, but it does the job quite well. Was what John Shaw used back in the 1970's through the early-mid '90s. Who knows, he may still have it today, even though I doubt he does much shooting with it, since he probably has current generation Nikkors that do the job.

    -J
    APUG: F4, F2AS, F, Nikomat FTn
    DPUG: D200
    Nikkors: 18-70/3.5-4.5G AF-S DX (f/D200), 24/2.8 AI, 50/1.4 AI, 85/1.8 K, 180/2.8 ED AIS, 300/4.5 ED AI

    My FB - My flickr stream
    My SmugMug

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,439
    Quote Originally Posted by John_Nikon_F View Post
    Not true. The K version is the black barrel lens that looks like an AI/AIS lens. The diamond pattern rubber focusing ring was used on zooms and certain primes, like the 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P/PC, and the 180/2.8. Both of those lenses were chrome barrel, unlike the K version.

    A Micro-Nikkor-PC: http://www.destoutz.ch/lens_55mm_f3.5_734997.html

    A 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor K version: http://www.destoutz.ch/lens_55mm_f3.5_910139.html

    The compensating diaphragm 55/3.5's have a metal focusing ring usually marked with a distance scale in either meters or feet. Serial numbers are much lower, too, being below 300,000. As the helicoid is extended, the diaphragm slowly opens up.



    It's a great little lens. Slow for a normal lens, but it does the job quite well. Was what John Shaw used back in the 1970's through the early-mid '90s. Who knows, he may still have it today, even though I doubt he does much shooting with it, since he probably has current generation Nikkors that do the job.

    -J
    Mine is this version : http://www.destoutz.ch/lens_55mm_f3.5_600033.html and the # on mine is 691621. I have read and been told that these are "K" lenses, the distinguishing characteristic being the rubber diamond texture focussing ring and the chrome barrel. Oh well.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    811
    There is more incorrect information floating around concerning these lenses than correct information. The lenses which were not as good at infinity (although some consider them better at 1:10 and higher magnifications) are marked Micro Nikkor Auto. These have mechanical compensation in the close range. The first version has a silver colored (aluminum) inner barrel. the second version has a black colored inner barrel. Both have metal focusing rings with no rubber cover. The Micro Nikkor P was the first model (the first model with an auto diaphragm) to have rubber covering the focusing ring and to have the optical formula slightly changed. It and all of the remaining 55/3.5 Micro Nikkors work well at infinity. The Micro Nikkor PC had improved coating. The next model, the 'K' had similar cosmetics to the later AI. There was no AIS version of the 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor. The successor lens was the 55/2.8 Micro Nikkor AIS which had a floating element design and which is considered excellent for both near and far subjects.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin