Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

3 4 end

Archive 2009 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Karma Police
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

another good 35mm is the vivitar 35mm F1.9, my copy is great.
and comes in the m42 mount

i dont know if its the same league as the ones you mention but its worth the try.

Aug 26, 2009 at 11:17 PM

Greg Feldman
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Nikon. Nikon. Nikon.

Aug 26, 2009 at 11:43 PM

Empire
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

none of the above.

Distagon 35/1.4 ftw!!!

But in all seriousness, I have to agree on the nikon here. The rokkor looks pretty nice (especially in size and functional terms) but doesnt really seem to set itself apart in any way - although its colours look pretty strong and pure.

The nikkor seems to meet your needs and also has a unique look.

I was hunting for a reasonablt priced nikkor for ages myself and I would likely have one now if i had not bought a zeiss

Cheers

btw, you are definitely one of the members putting there Alt lenses to great use - your model pics definitely gain something from your choice of lens. Dont stop with the stream of well-photographed pretty ladies!

Aug 27, 2009 at 04:49 AM

Ed Sawyer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

I have a Viv 35/1.9 in OM mount, indeed that is a pretty decent lens for 3rd party. Beats some first-party 35s in Modern Photo's tests. Really should have been a series-1 lens probably.

Aug 27, 2009 at 09:11 AM

mawz
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Ed Sawyer wrote:
Just an FYI, Hexar AF and RF are quite different. the AF is the one with fixed 35/2 lens. RF is a leica-mount body (and lenses), quite abit more $ but of course very nice. the AF is not that bad price-wise.

Thanks for the clarifications on the shots on the OM 35/2. Indeed it looks great at 2.8! I havent' tried the 35/2.8, that's one of the few OM's I've not had. I expect it's probably quite good though I am not sure if equal at 2.8 to the 35/2, given that it's wide open vs. 1-stop-down comparison....Show more →

These days it seems the AF's probably worth more. I'm seeing RF's below $500 regularly now. The service issues are killing the resale on the RF but the AF's just keep ticking.

Aug 27, 2009 at 09:22 AM

weezintrumpete
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Ed - Thanks. I meant the Hexar RF. And yeah, I'll try and pick up the 35/2.8...it's so cheap, how can you not!

wayne - I'm really in live with the 35mm focal length. There are other lenses in the 24-28 range that I have my eye on (The Zuiko 24/2.8). I just wis hthe Nikkor wasn't so big and heavy! Although its nothing compared to the EF 35/1.4L so I should be thankful

Gernach - Thanks, I appreciate it. Yeah, I've had my best photos on the Nikkor so far so that should tell me something

Karma - Good call, I'll have to look into that.

Empire - That Contax looks sweet, but I can't jsutify the price. I got the Nikkor for a good deal so that's even another reason to keep it

I think I'll probably keep the Nikkor and pick up a Zuiko 35/2.8, otherwise I'll jsut keep one of the 35/2s.

Aug 28, 2009 at 10:10 AM

wayne seltzer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Sounds like 24 28mm is your next lens buying decision.

I understand about the love for 35mm focal length and the Nikon with the floating element design works well for your shooting. I enjoy all your Nikon 35 wide open models shots so I think you picked the best one of the three.

Aug 28, 2009 at 10:51 AM

PhotoMaximum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Interesting thread.

As you have all three lenses why not do a controlled tripod test using the same subject (same lighting) with all three lenses? A lot of folks here are shouting "its the Nikon" but I can't help suspect that they are being influenced by those long legs on that pretty model...

Aug 28, 2009 at 12:03 PM

Ed Sawyer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Another 35 to consider perhaps is the OM 35/2.8 Shift. It's a superb lens, a great 35 (how could it not be - it only uses part of the image circle), and is a scaled-up improved version of the same optical formula used by the legendary OM 24/2.8 (which beat all comers except 24/1.4L in the 16-9.net tests). The excellent shift range is an even bigger bonus - I think the largest shift range of any 35 tilt/shift lens. and it's still no bigger than the Nikon 35/1.4! Hell, hard to beat all those things. Of course it's not as cheap as some other choices but still...

FWIW
-Ed

Aug 28, 2009 at 01:03 PM

Sam N
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

The pics taken with the Nikon have more interest, but as PhotoMaximum said, there's no way of telling much about the lenses from the photos posted.

If you think the Nikon is heavy and big, try the 35L (which is great)!

Aug 28, 2009 at 02:42 PM

weezintrumpete
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

wayne - Yup, I might pick up a Zuiko 24/2.8 from KEH pretty soon...

PM - I've thought about doing that, but for me, the results of those photos don't sum up how I feel about the lenses when actually shooting with them. I think I've done enough regular shooting with them to comfortably say which one I like best.

Ed - The Shift would be a lot of fun. They seem to be pretty expensive though. I also like the wide of the 35/1.4 and 35/2. If I could get one for cheap, it'd definitely be something that I'd play around with! Oh, and you have a PM

Sam - I'd love a 35L. But for me, it's way more than I can spend on a single lens right now and it's a little big and heavy

Aug 30, 2009 at 07:03 PM

90 5.0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

#9 has me sold on the Nikkor

Aug 30, 2009 at 07:11 PM

Empire
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

weezintrumpete wrote:
...

Empire - That Contax looks sweet, but I can't jsutify the price. I got the Nikkor for a good deal so that's even another reason to keep it

I got my Distagon for less than the average price of the nikkor on ebay..

but obviously that isnt the usual price! I'd rather a 35L for that sort of money...

Aug 31, 2009 at 06:33 AM

weezintrumpete
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

So I was just looking at the Minolta and noticed that the flange behind the glass sticks out a small distance from the back of the glass. I think Ed mentioned this before but I wasn't sure that I wanted to play with it. But now that I look at it and see ow easy it would be to file down the edge to let the mirror pass...I might take a stab at it.

So..any idea the best way to go about doing this? Would I have to take the lens apart or could I attempt it assembled? I'm thinking about holding the lens with the mount facing down and taking a file to the edge but I'm not sure that this is a good idea.

Here's a couple photos of what the back side looks like...

http://www.pbase.com/weezintrumpeteer/image/116832524.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/weezintrumpeteer/image/116832525.jpg

Sep 02, 2009 at 09:43 PM

pengland
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Do you know a machinist you can trust?

The best way (and the safest and most consistent IMHO) to reduce the rear element holder is to machine it. All you have to do is unscrew the whole rear element assembly and get it machined down. When I do this myself I very carefully (you don't want this stuff to get on the glass!!) put some instant adhesive or thread lock on the retaining ring so that the ring threads don't take all the "tightening strain" of the anticlockwise rotation of the lathe chuck in relation to the stationary tool bit. The job only takes a couple of minutes on a lathe and will leave you with an accurately and professionally finished product. Provided the element is well secured (this is the part where you require a competent and careful machinist) in the lathe chuck this method is also safer than jabbing away with a file or Dremel tool because the lathe tool bit never needs to pass over the glass to get the job done.

For the time it takes to do this job I would think that a machine shop would charge very little to do the work. If your preference is to continue to use the Rokkor without shaving the mirror on your 5D, this might be your best option. If you decide to go this route you should have the machine shop precisely measure the total protrusion of the rear element at the infinity position and then subtract .9 mm from the reading. The difference should be the amount that would be required to be removed from the rear element holder to safely obtain clearance based on the "1mm rule". It is important to realize that there is no guarantee that after this much material removal you will get the mirror clearance you need. The reason for this is that with the retainer cut down the convex extremity of the rear element glass itself may still project into the path of the mirror. You have to accurately measure or even "eyeball" across the rear element after you have your projection interference calculation done to "guesstimate" whether reduction of the rear element holder will get the job done.

I hope this helps.

Sep 02, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Ed Sawyer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

I did the rear retaining ring removal on mine with a belt sander. Basically take the mount off, and the apeture ring/etc., which will leave the rear element on a 'stalk'-like protrusion. From there, I masked fully with tape, and used a bench-mounted belt sander to carefully grind down the upper section of the retaining ring. Only the upper section needs doing since that is where the mirror clearance issue is.

That being said, it's still a tight squeeze at infinity. I can basically get infinity wide open on my 1VHS with this method, however the 5D is a different story perhaps.

It looks like Jim Buchanan did the conversion on this one (nice work!), though AFAIK he doesn't like to do the retaining-ring reduction.

[btw, will reply PM soon, sorry - just been busy!]

-Ed

Sep 03, 2009 at 10:18 AM

Ronan O Keeffe
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Will post up a pic of mine when I get home, the ring is gone altogether and the rear element epoxied (is that a word?) in.

Sep 03, 2009 at 10:31 AM

cogitech
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

I'd just remove the mount, mask it off, set it on it's side and file away. Then paint the edge with flat black paint, re-fasten the mount and Bob's yer uncle. It would take me less than 15 minutes.

Sep 03, 2009 at 11:12 AM

JimBuchanan
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Ed Sawyer wrote:
It looks like Jim Buchanan did the conversion on this one (nice work!), though AFAIK he doesn't like to do the retaining-ring reduction.
-Ed

Yes, I am very conservative when it comes to rear element housings. I have successfully reduced a few, as pengland has described.

When I did this work, I also had the other version of Minolta 35/1.8, in for a EF back. That one, I turned down the rear element until the glass surface was just barely protected from the swinging mirror by the retainer rim. That's where I stopped and the mirror would still make contact at infinity. It appeared the 2 versions had the same rear element position, so I didn't make much of an effort on Patrick's. When we're talking .001s of an inch, I get nervous, and the manufacturing tolerances on top of that.

The rear element may unscrew without taking the back off. Otherwise, the 4 screws could be removed. Be aware repeated unscrewing of the back screws could weaken the threads.

Sep 03, 2009 at 12:02 PM

Ed Sawyer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · 35mm: Nikkor, Zuiko and Rokkor

Jim, good info to know, thanks for sharing! Retrofocus wide-angles seem to really push the limits of clearance from mirror to rear elements, it seems (usually, at least with Minoltas I have found)

Sep 03, 2009 at 03:18 PM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.