Nikkor-S 35 mm 2.8 lens

[JDMvW]

I'm guessing that the 2005 OP has found some solution by now.

 

I got a PC-Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 -- in fact it was the reason I switched to Nikon in 1971. Never had any reason to get any other 35mm lens. I still use it regularly, but now with adapters (it was always stop-down) on Canon EOS camera bodies.

[Matthew Currie]

I also have the 35/2.8 PC like JDMvW, and use it regularly as the normal lens on a DX camera. In addition I have a converted 35/2.8K (late pre-I) which I occasionally take traveling, as it's a decent lens and indestructible.

 

Just for the archival record, don't forget that pre-AI lenses can be used unmodified on lower-end camera such as the D3x00 and D5x00, and more recently on the D7500. They won't meter, and can be used only in manual mode, but they work just fine. Any camera that has no AI follower, and either no minimum aperture tab or one which operates up and down rather than sideways, can take unmodified lenses.

[orsetto]

To 1099861: there were multiple look-alike revisions of nearly every manual focus Nikkor lens: as a rule, official AI conversion kits were not offered for the very oldest (these had a different method of affixing the bayonet mount and aperture ring that Nikon felt would be too troublesome to modify efficiently with an affordable parts kit).

 

Additionally, the specific 35mm Nikkor-S that begat this thread fifteen years ago is not your average old pre-AI lens: its a rare, highly collectible, and valuable first-generation version (one of the first lenses released with the Nikon F camera). It was more elaborately built and has unique markings. No official AI conversion was ever offered, and a file hack on the aperture ring would be like hacking a museum piece.

 

Not that there's any point to converting it: its value is purely historical, not optical. Performance-wise, all versions of silver nose 35mm f/2.8 Nikkor-S were mediocre (and not in an interesting way). None are worth bothering with, the faster f/2.0 and f/1.4 are way more interesting.

 

Only the later all-black modern-barrel 35/2.8 is worthwhile: not amazing, but a good compact lens with better flare and ghost resistance than the faster Nikkors. Boringly slow in the film era, the black nose 35/2.8 Nikkor is more useful with high ISO digital bodies (where it can outperform the 35/2 and 35/1.4 in some nighttime cityscape situations).

 

The old pre-AI 35mm f/2.8 PC Nikkor was an entirely different lens, better optically than the standard silver-nose S with added perspective control versatility. Still popular today with some digital shooters.

[roland_vink]

To 1099861: What orsetto said :)

 

The lens which kicked off this thread is the Nikkor-S 3.5cm 1:2.8 Auto. This is the original 35mm lens for NIkon F and only made for a short time from late 1959 - early 1962. It was replaced with the Nikkor-S 35mm 1:2.8 Auto which is a more compact lens with a different optical design. Nikon has a good article about these lenses here: Nikon | Imaging Products | NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights No.38

[rodeo_joe1]

I got a PC-Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 -- in fact it was the reason I switched to Nikon in 1971. Never had any reason to get any other 35mm lens.

You might want to think about updating that lens though JDM. I owned and used a pre-Ai era f/2.8 35mm P.C. Nikkor for years. It had the old blue single coated AR. Then a few years back I had the chance of a newer version with greenish NIC multicoating at an unrefuseable price. The difference in contrast was astounding.

 

The old version flared like mad with any bright light source just out of frame. Whereas the new(er) lens doesn't flinch. It's not just outright flare resistance, but the image clarity in any lighting situation is far superior. AFAIK, the optical configuration remained the same, so the difference must be entirely due to the improved coatings.

 

Well worth the upgrade IMO. Although a slight downside is that the old lens cleared an AI-follower tab with no modification, whereas I had to 'butcher' the newer lens with a file to allow clearance for the AI tab. What the heck! You look through lenses, not at them, right?

 

P.S. and FWIW. I also have a 35mm Schneider P.A. Curtagon in Nikon fit. Performance is about the same, or maybe slightly worse than the older P.C. Nikkor. The design is much smaller and neater though, and wouldn't look out of place on a small mirrorless camera.

Edited May 5, 2020 by rodeo_joe|1

[JDMvW]

You might want to think about updating that lens though JDM.

 

I've not had the problems you mention with my copy of the lens. You just have to be careful how you point it to avoid flare.

 

There is a lens hood for it, but it is so wide as to not do much good.

 

But I have also added a lovely Canon TS-E 17mm lens, so I am not completely dependent on 50-year-old technology:rolleyes:

 

LINK for more

 

Edited May 5, 2020 by JDMvW

[Matthew Currie]

I have heard that later versions of the 35/2.8 PC are better than mine, which looks about the same as JDM's, but they don't show up very often or very cheaply. I use the HR-4 rubber hood on mine. It might be a little narrow for full frame use when shifted, but you can retract it, and it stows nicely in the bag.

[roland_vink]

The later 35/2.8 PC with rubber focus grip and chrome shift knob has the same optics as the older style (as far as I can tell) but is fully multi-coated.

 

The last version with the black shift knob has a different optical design. Overall the optics have a similar arrangement of positive and negative elements, they are clearly related, but the central doublet in the older version (pic below) is replaced by a single element in the newer version. I guess the newer version uses better glass materials and refinements to the curvature and spacing give the same or better performance with one fewer element.