Which 35mm

[david_h._hartman]

<em>It's just too bad that many people cannot deal with

the manual focus feel. --Steve QL<br>

</em><br>

I have an AF 50/1.8 on which the manual focus feel changes from

time to time. Sometimes its quite jerky and you cant

get it to stop at the precise spot you want so you cant

achieve a tight focus. Its a plastic on plastic binding. If

the plastics were of higher quality and dissimilar hardness they

would not be so prone to bind but they are what they are, cheap

plastic.<br>

<br>

Ive thought about the AF 35/2.0D Nikkor for a long time but

my experience with the AF 50/1.8 has held it to just that.<br>

<br>

Today the AF 35/2.0D cost $265.00 after rebate at B&H Photo.

In CPI adjusted dollars it would have cost $99.00 back in 1979. I

paid about $205.00 before sales tax for my 35/2.0 AI Nikkor in

1979. In CPI adjusted dollars that would be $550.00 today. 25

years later my 35/2.0 AI functions just as well as it did the day

I bought in. It was and is a professional quality lens.<br>

<br>

The new AF 35/2.0D is a consumer throw-away lens designed for

people who only use auto-focus and dont use their cameras

very often. Whats too bad is that Nikon makes such poor

quality AF lenses. Whats too bad is that people buy these

inferior quality products.

[paul_loader]

Thanks for the additional food for thought. There is much to ponder there and it is good to get thoughts, perspectives and experience that I might not naturally think of. There are two types of not knowing as one wize old buzzard once said to me, things you know you don't know and things you don't know you don't know.

 

To add a few more clarifications. I agree 100% that this mental image I have of grainy B&W would make a poor record of a little one growing up. Until last year my shooting has been 100% colour slide coupled with digital P&S and indeed miniDV footage. All have their place and provide something different. The B&W is purely an artistic preference for me and therefore an addition.

 

Photography is a time-limmited hobby for me and not week in, week out. I look for one pleasing shot out of 36 and assume I need to go through many rolls to learn my habits properly, repetition, what works, what doesn't and how to improve. The most important section for me right now is probably the critiquing. I take the point about using one lens and really thinking about the whole film. It's easier said than done but I appreciate that it's good advice. In fact one has to factor in the film as well, no doubt. I recently learned the hard way that either my metering with the FM2N or the latitude of the TMax400 does not like bright sunshine. I haven't worked out which yet, simply that some highlights border on overexposure.

 

I certainly have no desire for a dozen lenses, just two more, a 180mm Ais ED which I shot a few test shots with once and have regretted not buying ever since. The second is the 35mm, the subject of my post and the most important one right now simply because I *do* want to get the environment into the pics. I was simply saying that in answer to the focusing comments (which I agree with) and indeed my daughter's arm in the example I used that to my eyes cropping takes away the distractions.

 

Anyhow, I shall print this thread and give some quiet thought to it.

 

Paul

[steve_ql]

"The new AF 35/2.0D is a consumer throw-away lens designed for people who only use auto-focus and don?t use their cameras very often. What?s too bad is that Nikon makes such poor quality AF lenses. What?s too bad is that people buy these inferior quality products." - David Hartman

 

My 35mm AFD is the most used lens between my wife and I because of

the high quality photographs we can make with it. In the past 5

years, we've shot it through Death Valley at 120 degree summer heat

to snowy French Alps in the winter. It's made several bride and

and grooms glowingly happy from the resulting prints and was the

only lens that shot our honeymoon trip. It works perfectly with

either AF bodies and flash units, or with our FM2n for available

light and high speed film. Just last weekend my wife and I and

seven other relatives hiked up the Mist Trail at Yosemite. The

35mm AFD with FM2n along with everyone else got soaking wet from

the waterfall mist while we took turns snapping away at all the

beauty. Everything and everyone dried off at the higher elevations,

and the 35 AFD is still chugging along just fine. Maybe you

think it's a cheap throw away lens, but it's sure making lots

of fine photographs for me no matter where I go.

[mark_crown2]

Hmmm - I don't think David's assessment of the AF 35mm f2 is very fair. It's a fine lens optically, even if the construction does not meet the superb standards of the previous AI/AIS lenses (even the 2.8 35mm). The UK's Amateur Photographer magazine reviewed the AFN version in 1991. The test was conducted by Dr Stewart Bell, AP's resident lens tester and optical expert (RIP Stewart)and compared the Canon AF f2, Minolta AF 1.4 and f2 lenses to the Nikkor. His conclusion was (and this was a chap who used Pentax and Contax cameras I believe) that the Nikkor was the best of the bunch with (quote) ".no trace of chromatic aberration and with a bitingly crisp image." I got my AF 35mm f2 for 115 pounds plus the HN-3 hood. That's a bargain as far as I'm concerned but there's nothing bargain basement about the results I get from it - they're sharp and contrasty with Provia F. It is a lens that can be safely used wide open - my sample anyway. Try one - or borrow one from the shop and return it if you don't like it. You can then save for the 1.4 AIS.

[User_502260]

I have collected and used many types of cameras before getting anything made by Nikon (other than an enlarging lens). In the last few months I put together a bunch of Nikon stuff mostly on eBay. I have a Nikomat FT with an FTN top. This was sent out for an overhaul and isn't back yet. Then there is a Nikomat FTN which didn't get here at all yet. There is an Nikkormat FT2 which I had overhauled and is nice to use. Today I received a Nikkormat FTN middle model. It has the black plastic film advance tip and the and the black plastic self time lever but the viewfinder has the plain microprism focusing aid surrounded by ground glass and not the later K screen. The last two bodies are a Nikomat FT2 and an early Nikkormat FTN model. For lenses I have six standards: 2 50mm f/2 Nikkor H, a 50mm f/2 'K' Nikkor, a 50mm f/2 AI Nikkor, a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor SC and the last version of the 50mm f/1.8 AIS (no prong). I think my favorite is the 50m f/2 AI. The rest are a 35mm f/2.8 Vivitar fixed mount, a 35m f/1.9 Vivitar fixed mount, a 55mm f/3.5 Micro Nikkor P w/M2, a 105mm f/2.5 Nikkor P and a 200mm f/4 Nikkor (older model). For accessories I have a BR2 ring, a PN-1 ring and a set of Vivitar auto extension tubes. To round things out I have about half a dozen Vivitar T4 and TX mount adapters for Nikon and a very large supply of T4 and TX lenses which go from 21mm to 400mm. One of the FTN bodies came with the 50mm f/1.4, a Nikon leather case and two straps (one on the body and another on the case). I weighed them. The result was 3 pounds and 3.7 ounces. That should make for a real sore neck. I don't know if my Bronica ETR with a lens, prism and back weighs that much.

 

For now I think I'll just digest the Nikon stuff I have. Do I have NAS?

[david_kelly1]

I think David Hartman's assesment of the quality of the 35 AFD is outdated. I suggest he take a look at a new one. My current sample has a smooth and well-damped manual focusing action, slightly lighter than that of my AIS lenses but otherwise very similar. It's as easy to use on my FM3a as my F100. And overall construction quality seems very good indeed, nothing like the flimsy 50mm f1.8 non-D I owned in the early '90s. I'd guess Nikon has learned a lot about making polycarbonate lens bodies in the meantime.

[david_h._hartman]

<em>I think David Hartman's assesment of the quality of

the 35 AFD is outdated. -- David Kelly<br>

</em><br>

Well Ill have another look but Im dubious about any

improvement until I hear that Nikon has done a complete overall

of these low end prime lenses. Im not sure when I'll get to

see the current design because all the Nikon dealers where I live

have gone out of business or dropped their Nikon dealership or

were dropped. Ill have to drive 65 to 80 miles to Los

Angles to lay my hands on one.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

The worst part of my AF 50/1.8 is not the manual focus binding.

The aperture ring is even worse. It binds so badly that half

stops are all but impossible. You dont have to grip the

aperture control tightly to make if bind. Most of the time where

changing apertures it jump over one stop to the second, e.g. f/2.8

to f/5.6.<br>

<br>

Its a mid design, made in Japan lens and has the sliding

aperture lock. It shows no signs of abuse in fact is mint in

appearance. Its simply poor design and materials. Its

what my camera repairman friend calls plastic crap.

Having worked on real Nikkors they disdain these products. One

would be a fool to use this lens on a manual focus camera.<br>

<br>

The criteria for these lenses is set buy the customer...<br>

<br>

It must be cheap (thats the price).<br>

It must be unreasonably light (because of laziness). <br>

It must be stylish (because Function Follows Form).<br>

<br>

These are the product the great unwashed want.<br>

<br>

Its a shame so many are so touchy about their cameras and

lenses. Rather than being offended when someone points out major

flaws they should be critical themselves. If more people were

critical Nikon would have to make better products. When Canon

started making cheap plastic lenses Nikon would have gain sales

instead of loosing them. The engineers who design these lenses

probably arent too happy about the design criteria.<br>

<br>

Its absurd when a person buy a 1,000.00 plus lens from

Nikon and they have to immediately buy a replacement tripod

collar because the original is not fit for the purpose for which

it was designed. The problem, saving weight, cost and the stylish

cantilevered design renders the original useless where its

needed most.<br>

<br>

I have an AF 70~180/4.5~5.6D ED Micro-Nikkor. Its a fine

lens in many ways but the zoom control ring binds if its

gripped even rather lightly, if gripped tightly it locks. This

lens cost about $1,100.00 when I bought it. This is nothing less

than defective design. The tripod collar on this lens is among

the worst Nikon has made ever. The foot is too small. The

attachment threads are right at the front so the lens rocks

easily if a tripod head as a compliant covering and its

been shaved to much to save weight so its not rigid.

Installing it on a Wimberley Arca-Swiss lens plate helps but it

still needs to be shorn up. This is defective design also. Its

ridiculous, the wimps that continually complain about weight are

too blame.<br>

<br>

I could go on but its a waste of time. The apologist are

for Nikon are too many.

[mark_crown2]

David

 

I think that you are right in principle to have a go at Nikon for some of the sloppy designs they have been generating. I was put off an AF 300mm f4 because I heard that the tripod collar was unstable. I settled for an AIS 300mm EDIF which has a great tripod collar and is lovely to handle. I can't wait to see the results.

 

It also diappoints me when I see that the current 24mm AF is still based on the original AI/AIS design (in other words, it still flares pretty badly which is pretty poor really when you think that the humble 20mm 3.5 AI/AIS basically doesn't. Why?). I feel that Nikon has somewhat ignored its prime lenses because it is concentrating on zooms. Fair enough, but if they applied some of these modern optical techniques to the new prime lenses, I'm sure the results would be tremendous.

 

I'm certainly not apologising for Nikon, but the 35mm AF I got so cheaply is a very good lens indeed. I also think the 'plastic' construction of the Nikkors is amongst the best there is. Compare the Nikkors with some of the Pentax AF lenses. Try the aperture rings on the Pentaxes - uuugghh! The Nikkors are much smoother and easier to handle and the Nikkors have proper manual focussing rings that you can actually grip too.

[paul_loader]

Well, the 35mm is going to wait for a while. I had the opportunity to pick up a 28mm 2.8AIS and took it given its stellar reputation. It's six months old and Nikon registered and with a list of GBP500+ and even allowing for retailers who discount, GBP135 struck me as worth paying. I guess when I do go for a 35mm it will be a 1.4AIS for available light but, as I say, it can now wait. Thanks for the thoughts and advice in any case.

 

Paul