NIKKOR 50mm S vs S.C

Besides the engraving on the lens barrel, is there any difference in the coating or the image quality between the S and the S.C normal 50mm NIKKOR lens?

There's a big difference.

 

On the earlier(primarily fluted ring) Nikkors, the letter after the word Nikkor indicates the number of elements. A Nikkor-S is a 7 element lens(the largest I know of is the 20mm, which is UD, or unideci-11 elements. All of these series Nikkor lenses were single coated. The 50mm f/1.4 Auto Nikkor-S usually has an amber colored coating.

 

The lenses with "C" appended to them are multi-coated. All else being equal, they generally have much more contrast than the comparable single coated lenses.

 

Get the S.C. if you have the choice(said as someone who has a half dozen 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S lenses and no 50mm S.C. lenses).

Funny but I've used a few of both and can't be quite so axiomatic. Used with a correct lens hood and some care about about what causes them to flare, they're not all that different.

There's the rub! the S.C is attached to a black Nikkormat that is worth about $10 and I already have an S.C and several S. The seller thinks he's got a classic gem!

 

I've been shooting a 50/1.4 S since Ektachrome was only 3, no complaints.

When there is nothing much to say about how a newer version of the lens performs relative to the previous version, you can guarantee the maker will tout "new coatings": it is as inevitable as day following night. Probably marginal improvement in certain circumstances in this case.

 

For lenses updated from 5 or 10 years ago, I think "improved coatings" will make no practical difference, but a marketing department will never say that.

The C was added to signify improved coatings. It was the first version of Nikon's multicoating. Otherwise I believe the optical formula of the lens remained unchanged from the plain S version. (Septus, latin for 7, signifying the number of elements)

 

"When there is nothing much to say about how a newer version of the lens performs relative to the previous version, you can guarantee the maker will tout "new coatings": it is as inevitable as day following night. Probably marginal improvement in certain circumstances in this case."

 

- Not so. The previous generation of Nikon lenses mainly had amber single coatings. Having owned a few of those older Nikkors, there was a definite and noticeable improvement in contrast and flare resistance between C and non-C lenses, even though the optical configuration remained the same.

 

Beside that, multicoating allows more light through the elements. The single coated f/1.4 lens probably had a transmission 'T-stop' rating of nearer to 2, whereas the C version rates a T1.7 stop or thereabouts.

Edited April 25, 2018 by rodeo_joe|1

Rodeo. I did point out: probably marginal improvement in certain circumstances in this case. So I accept there is some improvement in going from single to multicoated, which is why I said there was an improvement. The rest of my comment was simply a grumble about current marketing BS. As a side note, and bearing on my "marginal" qualifier, when I shot single-coated and multicoated lenses side by side when I had my Leica system I did not particularly prefer the higher contrast shown by the multicoated lenses, so I can see where C Watson (above) is coming from. Someone would have to measure the T values to see the importance of your other point. It is interesting how T values have only recently come back from stone age oblivion in the digital age as yet another thing to worry about. Only cinematographers and lens designers used to worry about those in the days of film in my youth.

The 'C' multi layer coating should effect a very slight increase in transmission on a 7 element lens, and more significantly IMO will change the color transmission of the lens, making it a bit less yellowish and a bit more toward neutral. The differences between C and not-C are subtle.

"The rest of my comment was simply a grumble about current marketing BS."

 

- Oh, I'm in complete agreement with you there Robin.

 

I don't think the advantages of multicoating should be underestimated though. We wouldn't have today's 15 or 16 element, highly-corrected zooms without it. Well, not in a very useful effective aperture or flare-resistance anyway.

 

If you look at lenses sold in f-stops versus their cine converted T-stop version, there's usually a good 2 points difference between the geometrical aperture and the transmission stop. F/2 versus T-2.2 for example. And that would be closer to f/2 versus T-2.8 if only single coating was employed.

 

Having said that, other so-called advances and innovations verge more on BS than real improvement. The over-complexity of modern flash systems, for instance. When all that's really needed is to throw a bit of light toward the subject.

 

And a metering system that supposedly 'looks up a reference bank of 10,000 images' - Really?!

Edited April 26, 2018 by rodeo_joe|1