Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Older Lenses
Page <<first <prev 6 of 6
Jul 18, 2018 15:46:00   #
RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA
 
SteveR wrote:
I'm tempted to buy a vintage Nikon 20mm manual focus for my D800. Any thoughts on this lens?

The 18 f/3.5 Ai-S is another gem worth considering, (IF you can find someone willing to part with a mint copy)!

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 15:55:05   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
Kuzano wrote:
No special rendering or "drawing" characteristics, other than Sharp, Sharp, Sharp.

This is exactly the modern thinking that separates new lenses from old lenses. Today, if something isn't edge-to-edge needle-sharp, then its viewed as being unworthy. In the old days, people valued other characteristics of rendering that perhaps could be better seen than described.

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 15:59:50   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
NCMtnMan wrote:
Quality glass is quality glass whether it is 50 years old or 50 days old. Technology has brought a whole additional group of people into the photography world over the last 30 years. And, that has been good for the industry and has brought us many innovations that we may or may not like. Not every film camera or lens was great, and not everyone who used one really knew what they were doing. Like so many things about the "good ole' days", we tend to remember them in a different light than what reality was.
Quality glass is quality glass whether it is 50 ye... (show quote)

The definition of "quality" itself has changed over time. Today, corner-to-corner sharpness is highly valued; in days gone by, being sharp in the center was important, but corner sharpness was less important because something in the corner could take attention away from the center, and other characteristics, which have to be seen rather than measured or described, were also valued.

Reply
 
 
Jul 18, 2018 16:04:38   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
rehess wrote:
The definition of "quality" itself has changed over time. Today, corner-to-corner sharpness is highly valued; in days gone by, being sharp in the center was important, but corner sharpness was less important because something in the corner could take attention away from the center, and other characteristics, which have to be seen rather than measured or described, were also valued.



We don't generally shoot brick walls flat on edge to edge.

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 16:58:21   #
dmsM43
 
Exactly as I was saying. In fact Canon designed their 20mm f2.8 with curvature of field so that you could get sharper edges while photographing interiors of rooms. The old Nikkor 20mm f3.5 works the same way. And while, it's not great for photographing brick walls straight on, it works fine for everything else.

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 22:46:43   #
DJO
 
dragonking wrote:
I have several old lenses and some are 50years old. I have to admit I bought them all from new.
I remember that some of them produced really sharp photographs and I still have the proof in negatives and prints.
I kept them so I could use them on any camera I bought with the same results.
This was true until I bought my first DSLR.
You see all of my previous lenses had M20 thread or were Tamron Adaptall.
The Adaptall (Original) fitting system adapters stopped being produced shortly after I bought the lens.
Now the bad part.
Without looking into the use of old lenses I opted for a Nikon DSLR, this was a mistake.
I like the camera and have no complaints with the results with the Nikkor lenses I bought.
I have since found out that the distance from the lens mount to the focal plane of the camera is smaller in Nikon cameras compared with other cameras.
This means that although old Nikkor lenses can be used on it with no problems, Practika or M20 lenses have to have an adapter with an auxiliary lens incorporated into it to allow for the shallower body if focus at infinity is required. Not many people don't want to focus at infinty!
Another lens behind the main lens unfortunately degrades the image and they are much softer than I remember and have proof of.
I have bought cheap and middle price range adapters and there isn't much difference between them.
I haven't used the expensive ones as I might as well buy a new lens.
The only lens I couldn't use at all was my Helios 50mm which came with my first SLR a Zenit B as the back elements of the lens go into the camera body when focusing.
It hits the auxiliary lens before full travel and I am worried about it hitting the mirror if used without the adapter.
I have several old lenses and some are 50years old... (show quote)


"I have since found out that the distance from the lens mount to the focal plane of the camera is smaller in Nikon cameras compared with other cameras."

I share your frustrations! The cause, however, (perhaps just a typing error on your part) is that the distance from lens mount to focal plane in a Nikon camera is greater than other major manufacturers. Hence, any addition will prevent focus at infinity. I was told by my now retired but still brilliant camera repairman that this distance is one dimension of what is called "the mirror box".

Reply
Jul 19, 2018 02:39:31   #
RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA
 
DJO wrote:
The cause, however, (perhaps just a typing error on your part) is that the distance from lens mount to focal plane in a Nikon camera is greater than other major manufacturers. Hence, any addition will prevent focus at infinity. I was told by my now retired but still brilliant camera repairman that this distance is one dimension of what is called "the mirror box."

The Leica-R flange focal distance is greater than that of Nikon F. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance
Fotodiox makes a replacement ring for R lenses, which focus at infinity on F cameras.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 6 of 6
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.