PC-Nikkor 35mm f/2.8.

<p>A recent acquistion that I had the opportunity to test drive today, the PC Nikkor 35/2.8. I drove to my hometown Bloomfield NJ, to shoot around the town green. Also, the first time I used this Film Kodak Profoto XL 100.</p>

<div></div>

<p>The first one is the Bloomfield Presbyterian Church on the Green circa 1797. This is the on the North end of the green.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Sacred Heart Church across Broad Street on the South West corner of the Green.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Catacorner from Sacred Heart Church looking Northwest.</p><div></div>

<p>House midway down the Green on the East side.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Bloomfield College Westminster Arts Center about a block south of the Green.<br>

</p><div></div>

<p>The last is the Grammar school I attended and graduated from.</p>

<p>Here is the grammar school photo.</p><div></div>

<p>Grammar school shot 2, with more shift.</p>

<div></div>

<p>I will have to try this on tripod the next time, though it does seem very usable handheld. There does not seem to be much information on the Kodak Profoto XL 100 film. I picked up a couple of rolls the last time I was at Unique Photo.</p>

<p>I like 35mm shift lenses. I <a href="../classic-cameras-forum/00Y89A">posted about my PC-Nikkor</a> (same model as yours, but slightly older, according to the serial number) a few months ago, and gave a brief explanation of what a shift lens actually does. The rage today seems to be for 24mm and even 17mm shift lenses, but even in some of your shots here we can see fairly strong geometric distortion (at the tops of the Sacred Heart (#2) and Westminster Hall towers), which would only be worse had you shot at closer range with a wider shift lens.</p>

<p>The comparison of the two grammar school shots is interesting. In the first shot, your camera was tilted slightly upward, and in the second, slightly downward. The framing is nearly identical, but the building's verticals are distorted differently -- converging slightly toward the top in the first shot, slightly toward the bottom in the second.</p>

<p>I quite like the Westminster Hall shot, though I think I would have preferred, if possible, to shoot it from a little further away.</p>

<p>Craig, thanks for the response. I had read your post and that was one of the things that led me to purchase my PC-Nikkor. I have ordered a E3 focusing screen with with etched horizontal and vertical grid lines to aid in my composition.</p>

<p>I agree about the Westminster shot, one of the things I took away from this outing is that more distance is better with this lens.</p>

<p>Hey Raymond -<br>

Bloomfield never looked better!<br>

Filmsheet for Profoto 100 info -<br>

<a href="http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e2e/e2e.pdf">http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e2e/e2e.pdf</a><br>

That filmsheet oddly reads the exact same as for Kodak Pro Image 100 -<br>

<a href="http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e4L/e4L.pdf">http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e4L/e4L.pdf</a><br>

Jim M.</p>

<p>Thanks for posting these. I have yet to take my PC-Nikkor out for a test drive, other than shooting my own home with it. I am excited to take it with me to Europe this fall to use it on cathedrals there!</p>

<p>I have the 'R' screen in my Nikon F3HP, which is like an 'E' screen but in addition to the grid, it also has the split image circle in the middle.</p>

<p>@Jim, Bloomfield Green was pretty quiet. Thanks for the link.<br>

Here is image of the film used. It is states it is new, however there is no claim to it being improved. Might be the same stuff.</p>

<div></div>

<p>@Dave, the split image with grid would be nice. Even though I usually use the matte to focus on the FM3A, the split image is usually my fallback if I am unsure.<br>

I have always wanted a F3HP, when it came out I could only afford an new FG.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I have always wanted a F3HP, when it came out I could only afford an new FG.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I wasn't able to afford an F3HP until I bought this one in 2005. Had an FE2 from June 1987-June 2000 and in July, 1987 I went to a summer jazz festival near my home. Saw a guy using an F3 while I had my FE2 around my neck. And I thought at that time, "Wow, I'd sure like to have one of those!" And I've really enjoyed the F3HP since then. As a glasses wearer, there is no better viewfinder on any other manual focus Nikon camera. The F100 viewfinder is my other favorite, and I have one of those as well.</p>

<p>The silver knob version of this lens has played an important part in determining what cameras I buy right up to the present day, as detailed in my post at http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00YizA on classic manual cameras.<br>

Thanks for the post and examples. They will only pry this out of my cold hands (and maybe not then) when I finally go for a copy of the Canon TS-E 17mm lens. ;)</p>

 

<p>Nothing like a PC lens, especially when it comes to architecture. You can use Photoshop, but you are then throwing away a bunch of pixels. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>You can use Photoshop, but you are then throwing away a bunch of pixels.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That and depending on the degree of correction, a certain amount of distortion and noise is introduced into the image, which spoils the quality. Very minor corrections are perfectly fine in post, but a pro would use a PC lens to get the lines correct in camera.</p>

<p>I have the 28/3.5 PC Nikkor, this one is really a tripod lens and requires a small pocket size level to get it aligned perfectly, at about f/11 it becomes critically sharp producing photos that rival 4x5 view cameras for moderate size prints.</p>