55mm micro-nikkor

For years I've used a Nikon F with micro-nikkor lenses 55 and 60 for my closeup

wildflower photographs. This past year I bought a Nikon D50, after fighting

going digital. Must admit I like it, but here's my problem. My 55mm lens gooped

up on my and is not usable, plus it didn't allow my D50 meter to work. My 60mm

does work fine on the D50. I want to replace my 55mm with another one, but am

confused by all the reviews I read. I always use manual focus, but do want the

meter to be able to work on my D60, although I set the f and aperture manually

as well. What particulars should I be looking for on my "new" 55mm?

Nikkor 60mm f2.8 AF Micro.

If you are happy with the lens my 2c is: sell your D50 and get a D200 body.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that with the D200 you can have metering on AI/AIS lenses.

 

Plus getting a D200 is a BIG upgrade.

Another possibility is buying a used Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 AF. I have

one and it works well on my D50. Though manual focusing isn't as

ergonomically good as on an old 55mm f/3.5, it's OK.

Neither the D 40, 50, 70 nor 80 will meter with 99% of manual focus lenses. You could take a stab at proper exposure for initial shot, check histogram, adjust accordingly, etc. That is the common approach when using MF lenses. Absent that you'll need an autofocus lens for metering. The Mico Nikkor 60mm f2.8 AF D (circa $300 used)goes 1:1 without an extension tube, unlike your 55mm (which goes 1:2). I suggest the shoot-and-look (at histogram) approach since your subjects are patient.

Thanks for the help so far. okay, so to recap, I already have the micro 60mm lens. My 55mm micro doesn't work and I'm a little leery of buying the wrong one since there were different versions of them made. I don't want to buy a new camera, I like the D50, it suits my purposes fine. I used my Nikon F, totally manual, for years, I like simple. Mainly I want to make certain a "new" 55mm micro-nikkor will allow the meter to work on my camera. Does that mean I may have to go with autofocus, if there was one?

Great lens, bad price.

 

Your friend may not know how far prices have fallen on most manual focus lenses. If he's basing the price on what he paid for it, he may be in for a shock.

The only 55mm micro-Nikkor that will meter with the D50 is the

AF 55mm f/2.8, which I mentioned above. It also goes 1:1 without

an extension tube, unlike the earlier 55mm micro-Nikkors.

 

I'm a bit puzzled why you aren't just happy using your 60mm f/2.8.

<Does that mean I may have to go with autofocus, if there was one?> Yes, if you want metering you will need an AF lens. Nikon made a 55mm f2.8 AF Micro Nikkor but no longer...thus available only as 'used'. Seems like a 55 and 60mm Micro Nikkor are quite redundant. Why not, in the interest of variety, get a Micro 105 AF? Do tell, why 55 and 60?

 

<My 55mm lens gooped up on my and is not usable...> Gooped up? Not sure what is meant by that. Difficulty mounting? Could your 55 be non-AI? A non-AI lens ought not be mounted on any modern body (film or digital) for fear of damaging the body. See this for ID'ing AI vs. non-AI. The critical feature is the 'Meter Coupling Ridge', not terribly apparent in the straight-on-from-the-rear view so have a look at the schematic with MCR circled.

 

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/nikonfmount/lens2.htm

 

R Borovoy's post is misplaced.

In my closeup work I find an incredible difference in magnification of the two lenses. My old 55mm manual focus was okay for "kind of" closeups and great for all around use. I find my 60mm is great for closeups but with the parameters of shooting "live" in the field my depth of field is extremely limited. This is okay for some shots, and yes, I could probably back up, but I like the versatility of the 55mm. Maybe I'm missing something with the 60mm???

jReny Parker wrote "In my closeup work I find an incredible difference in magnification of the two lenses. My old 55mm manual focus was okay for "kind of" closeups and great for all around use. I find my 60mm is great for closeups but with the parameters of shooting "live" in the field my depth of field is extremely limited. This is okay for some shots, and yes, I could probably back up, but I like the versatility of the 55mm. Maybe I'm missing something with the 60mm???"

 

Huh? Both go to 1:1; the 55 manual on a 27.5 mm tube (M1, PK13), the 60 on its own mount.

 

Huh? Depth of field is controlled by aperture and magnification, focal length has no effect on it. And anyway 55 mm and 60 mm as close enough to be, practically speaking, the same.

 

Versatility of the 55? Huh again. What are you talking about?

Get a 55mm/2.8 AIS and find someone to **chip** it.

"Both go to 1:1; the 55 manual on a 27.5 mm tube (M1, PK13"

 

And if he didn't ever HAVE this extension tube ?

 

He used the 55 as his all purpose lens, and the 60 as his closeup lens because if it's inherent

magnification. You know. WithOUT needing and extra piece of gear ?

On a limb here, but based on the nature of the statements, the threadstarter probably doesn't know what M-ring is and has never used one, so let's give the benefit of the doubt, there. Nor do I think they would have any idea what CPU-chipping is. I am confused, though, by the statement that there already is a 60mm AF in the equation. If this is the case, what is the need? Reny?

Thanks for all your comments.

By "gooped up" the f 2.8 design is extremely prone to getting lubrication onto its aperture blades making the aperture stick unexpectedly when shooting, or just making it difficult to change the aperture. I'm not thinking this up on my own, but got it from a review which seemed to be right on with the problem I was having.

And, the comment is correct, I don't use tubes, so the 55 is 1:2 and only focuses as close as 9-13/16 versus the 60mm close range of 8.6 in. This makes a big difference when you are photographing a tiny wildflower. But, I want the option to do both.

So, it sounds like I should find a 55mm with AF, being the key to having the meter work with my D50.

The AF Micro 55mm f/2.8, besides being somewhat rare and difficult to find, is *not* going to give you *anything* that your current AF Micro 60/2.8 doesn't already give you. The focal lengths are close enough that the angle of view is nearly identical. Both focus to 1:1 without tubes. At 1:1 the minimum focus on the 55/2.8 is 0.223m, on the 60/2.8 it is 0.219m (i.e. a difference of only 4mm/0.2in).

 

Everyone here is having a difficult time understanding just what it is you are trying to achieve?

jReny, You have not explained why you need a 55mm Micro lens, to supplement your 60mm.

 

I can only imagine the 55mm is for non macro photography? If this is the case. A 50mm AF f1.8 or f1.4 lens, would be better suited for general photography. Either lens would also be fully compatible with your D50.

Having used both lenses on my Nikon F I know that there is a big difference for the type of closeup work that I do.

My question, which for me has been answered, boils down to: which 55mm micro nikor do I need to work with my Nikon D50. Answer: needs to be AF to work with meter, auto focus is not needed as I manually focus

Thanks to all.

"Having used both lenses on my Nikon F I know that there is a big difference for the type of closeup work that I do."

 

jReny, I am genuinely interested, could you please explain the difference between the 55mm and the 60mm?. I own a 55mm f3.5 + PK-13, and a 105mm f2.8, but have no experience of the 60mm.

Yeah, I don't get it either. I've used both and would never own both. The 60mm is great, I am

trying to figure out why you'd also need a 55. (I'm genuinely curious!)

I have a slew of 55mm f/3.5 Micro Nikkors from the compensating Auto to the f/2.8 AIS but I have never used the 55/2.8 AF or the 60/2.8 AF. I have read that the 60/2.8 is excellent close-up but not that great at infinity. If your 55/2.8 AIS shows oil on the blades just get it serviced. I had mine done by Essex camera Service in Carlstadt, NJ. The 55/2.8 is a very versatile lens and is good with both near and far subjects. If you really like using it in addition to the 60/2.8 AF lens then you might be able to get it "chipped" so it meters with your AF camera. If you just want the 55/2.8 for more distant shooting then you should get a 50/1.8 AF or 50/1.4 AF instead. Whether an older 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor can have a chip added is something I don't know. It is true that the older 55/3.5 lenses are less prone to getting oil on their aperture blades and I have fun using them too but if I were not a collector I would service the 55/2.8 AIS lens before buying an older 55/3.5.

Set the 60 at 1:2 or less and it will work just like the 55. I suspect the issue here is you're always working with them racked out to near maximum magnification, where there will be a big difference since the 55 only goes to 1:2.

My preference to have both lenses, an OLD 55mm 1:2 and the newer 60mm 1:1 is the way in which I shoot. I am as close to the flower as possible which allows me to "communicate" with the plant, btw I'm a she not a he. Sometimes the 1:1 is not the shot I'm looking for but to move back, simple solution, puts me out of my "communicating" space.

Also, the "light came on" in realizing that the AF 55mm is 1:1, which I didn't know and has created some confusion in this discussion. No wonder you thought I was nuts to want two 1:1 similar lenses.

I've had my old 2.8 55mm fixed, but didn't realize that leaving it in a car in n. CAlifornia summers could bring the problem back again, actually making it worse.

I now think the solution is as a few people are suggesting, get a 2.8 55mm manual, don't leave it in the heat, and have it "chipped." Can anyone suggest where to have this done?

In the course of helping my customers understand the machinery they purchased from me, I sometimes ask the question, "I understand you're confused, but do you ever feel like you're standing in your own way? Because I'm certainly not standing in your way."

 

That's pretty much where we are, jreny. As was suggested at the top of the thread, if a 1:1 macro is the need, you want to to have full metering options, and that's a focal length you like, then another 60mm AF Micro is the answer. Not a chipped AIS 55mm f2.8, not an AIS 55mm f3.5, not a 55mm AF Micro (which is long-since extinct and more of a collector's item than a working lens), but a current design Nikkor 60mm f2.8 AF Micro. Period.

 

I'm sorry, but the solution has been repeated up one side and down the other many times in this thread. Will you take the advice and put it to work, now?

mmmmm, seems you didn't fully read my latest post:

an OLD 55mm 1:2 and the newer 60mm 1:1

Soooo, perhaps listening to your customer is an important point as well. :) I want BOTH 1:2 and 1:1.