Which 55mm 3.5 micro that Bjorn Rorslett described?

[vietnam photo]

In http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html, Bjorn describes 55 mm

f/3.5 micro Nikkor with auto compensating aperture, single coating. He

talked about the version with auto compensating.

 

Does it mean that there are two types of 55m f3.5 P, single coating:

with and without auto compensating? If so, are there any differences

in optics or photo quality?

Could you post photos of the lens?

 

Many thanks.

[Matthew Currie]

It looks from what I read as if the "P" goes along with the compensating aperture. Here's a good page to start on:

 

http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/6070nikkor/micro/index.htm

[Prof-K]

As far as I know, the ones where P is engraved on the lenses, are non-compensating. The compensating aperture (CA) are even older than the "P"s. There seem to be three (four?) versions of CA lenses. See <a href="http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#55%20micro">here</a> for a list (including serial numbers and photos). The third group there are the CA ones.

[gary_watson]

I have the more common 55/3.5PC version. I've also shot the "compensating" version and truthfully can't tell the difference. The PC verson with the M2 tube is farirly easy to find, thanks to strong sales. It's pin sharp and flat field corner-to-corner. Wonderful little lens that shouldn't be too pricey. Try to find a "factory" AI-d version if you need one--the aftermarket AI jobs are ugly and sometimes damaging to the lens.

[vietnam photo]

That's very nice resource. Thanks to everyone for your tremendous help.

[Prof-K]

Also, the version that Bjorn Rorslett describes seems to be the 2nd or the 3rd version. Here is a shot of the 2nd version:<br><br>

<center><img src="http://www.photo.net/bboard/image?bboard_upload_id=26418284"></img></center>

[bjørn rørslett]

Hey, that's MY lens (just kidding).

 

The nomenclature of those old 55/3.5 lenses is pretty complex, because Nikon used the designation Nikkor-P in the brochures, but not always on the lenses until the arrival of the non-compensating variants which *are* engraved "P" (single coating) or "PC" (multi coating). Later, they again dropped the "P"/"PC" engraving. So, a lens without "P" engraving may or may not be a compensating type, but a lens with "P" probably isn't. The serial number ranges given by Roland Vink on his site are not accurate (in case of the Micro-Nikkors, otherwise they are pretty much spot on), thus my compensating 55 is outside the reported range. Probably this relates to the confusing variety of these Micro-Nikkors.

 

The compensating 55 have a chrome barrel, effective aperture numbers engraved in light blue on the barrel, and a hill-and-dale layout to the focusing collar. When you look into the lens from the rear, you can see the slider which regulates the aperture to compensate for added extension. This can also be seen from the front if you set the lens to f/4 (off camera) and infinity focus, then slowly move the focusing collar to see that the aperture becomes perfectly circular instead of multi-edged.

[Prof-K]

Bjorn, the serial number ranges for 55mm f/3.5 CA given by Roland Vink on his site seems to be accurate, only if you consider the third group (all 4 types of lenses in the 3rd group, starting from '63 to '69) as CA. Unfortunately, he mentions "compensating" only for the first entry of that group. The serial # of my lens is also outside the first entry, but within the second entry of the 3rd group.

[roland_vink]

<i>The serial number ranges given by Roland Vink on his site are not accurate</i>

<p>

Bjorn, would you elaborate? For every version and subversion listed on my site, I have seen several lenses and recorded their serial numbers and details. The list can never be absolutely accurate (unless I sighted every lens in existance!) but I'm confident the numbers are reasonably accurate. If you have any other data please let me know!

<p>

As for the original question, here is a summary of micro lenses:

<ul>

<li>

The first micro lens is the Micro-NIKKOR 5.5cm f3.5 lens with a pre-set aperture (no "auto"). It focused direct to 1:1. This lens is rather rare and expensive.

<li>

The next version is the Micro-NIKKOR Auto 55mm f3.5. <u>This is the compensating version</u>. It has a metal focus ring. The early version has a chrome barrel, later ones are black.

<li>

It was replaced by the Micro-NIKKOR-P Auto 55mm f3.5. This lens has the diamond pattern rubber focus grip and <u>is not compensating</u>. The optics of this lens are basically the same as before, but there is a slight adjustment in the spacing of some elements. Performance for general photography is improved at the expense of the macro range. The Micro-NIKKOR-P.C is the multicoated lens, otherwise unchanged.

<li>

This lens was given modern styling in 1974 with the late-pre-AI Micro-NIKKOR 55mm f3.5. The letter indicating the number of elements and "Auto" were dropped from the designation. The optics are the same as before.

<li>

It was upgraded to Ai in 1977, with no further changes.

<li>

The lens was replaced by the AiS 55/2.8 in 1979. The new lens has similar styling as the Ai lens but is half a stop faster and now has CRC for improved performance at infinity and close range.

</ul>

[ebogaerts]

Hi Bjorn,

 

You mention the effective aperture numbers in light blue. In the 55mm compensating lens I have, the effective aperture numbers along the silver barrel are in black, while the reproduction ratios are in light blue. I don't know if the lens version I have is another variant of the 55mm compensating.

[roland_vink]

<i>the serial number ranges for 55mm f/3.5 CA given by Roland Vink on his site seems to be accurate, only if you consider the third group (all 4 types of lenses in the 3rd group, starting from '63 to '69) as CA. Unfortunately, he mentions "compensating" only for the first entry of that group.</i>

<p>

Yes that's correct. I was hoping that "compensating" for the first entry would be interpreted for following entries until we get to "non-compensating" for the first entry of the next group. I didn't write "compensating" for all entries due to lack of space - it's a long word! It seems this still causes some confusuion. I'll try to change the description to make it clearer.

[bjørn rørslett]

My compensating 55/3.5 was purchased in 1967 or '68 and has s.n. 249xxx. I haven't the lens at hand now so cannot remember which set of numbers is given in blue. It might be the reproduction figures, difficult to say when only memory is pressed to a reluctant service :)

 

There is at least two columns of effective apertures engraved on the chrome barrel, one is for the lens with the "M" ring (ending at 7.1 if memory serves me right), the other for the lens on its own and ending at f/5 or so. The leaflet accompanying the lens designates it "Nikkor P" but the lens itself lacks the "P" indication. My sample performs quite poorly at distance. I also own two later 55/3.5 lenses, one with "PC" and non-AI, the other a later model with AI and without the "PC" engraving. Both of these are good at distance and not up to the compensating variant in the close range.

 

I also own the 5.5 cm f/3.5 (from 1961, going to 1:1), which has much more pronounced field curvature at close range than the later models. It is also not easy to use due to its unusual barrel design.

 

I looked at Roland's site now and see that the confusion is due to the term "compensating" only being used on the first entry of a series of 4 variants.

[vietnam photo]

Thanks again. A picture is worth a thousand words, especially for an ignorant guy like me :-)

[david_h._hartman]

I don't know if this scan is worth a thousand words or not but

what the heck. I didn't own a digital camera at the time.<br>

<br>

<img

src="http://www.photo.net/bboard/image?bboard_upload_id=16703684"><br>

<br>

Here is a link to the instruction manual. Please note this link

is not dial-up friendly...<br>

<br>

<a

href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/uploaded-file?bboard_upload_id=16703884"

target="_new"><u>Micro-NIKKOR Auto 55mm f/3.5 Instructions</u></a><u><br>

<br>

</u>Please do not have your 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor Auto AI(ed)

unless the job replace the part responsible for the compensating

feature. I notice a Nikon AI kit number shown on Roland's site. I

assume this kit does have the part. I wonder if those kits are

available on eBay or elsewhere though I rather like the CA

feature. It works very nicely with manual flash and a flash meter.

You just focus on the flash receptor, pop an open flash and look

for your quarry. This method is deadly accurate.<br>

<br>

Regards,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[vietnam photo]

Thanks Dave, does it mean if the lens serial number in the range of A 55/3.5 Micro Auto NKJ Ai kit 63 5- 238011 < 240240 - 267764 >, as per Roland's web page, it is AI'ed by Nikon?

 

I am very curious to try this lens. I have tried 60 f2.8, 105 f2.8, and 200 f4 and like 200 f4 the most so far but it is too heavy for me. As Bjorn's evaluation of lens performance is right on, i.e., I usually consult his website before buying lenses, I am so curious to try this lens rated highly by him.

[roland_vink]

<i>does it mean if the lens serial number in the range of A 55/3.5 Micro Auto NKJ Ai kit 63 5- 238011 < 240240 - 267764 >, as per Roland's web page, it is AI'ed by Nikon?</i>

<p>

No, it means the lens could be Ai converted by Nikon using part no 63. Most lenses were never converted. I'm not sure if this part is still available.<br>

The Ai conversion kit is the same for the compensating (Micro) and non-compensating (Micro-P) versions. I'm not sure how Ai conversion works for the compensating lens since the compensating feature would throw the meter out at close range (the lens would be up to one stop wider than the meter expects from the aperture setting).

<p>

<i>I am very curious to try this lens. I have tried 60 f2.8, 105 f2.8, and 200 f4 and like 200 f4 the most so far but it is too heavy for me. As Bjorn's evaluation of lens performance is right on, i.e., I usually consult his website before buying lenses, I am so curious to try this lens rated highly by him.</i>

<p>

Ah, this is getting to a question I was about to ask - why you want this lens? I don't think performance would be much different from the AF 60/2.8 micro, which is also reputed to be extremely sharp at close range. As you probably know the working distance is very short for 55 and 60mm macro lenses. Also, the compensating feature does not work well with TTL meters as I mentioned above - you need to un-compensate to get correct exposures, so it may not be the most practical lens. It is a very clever piece of engineering though.

<p>

If you are looking for a more compact alternative to your AF 200/4 micro, consider the AiS version. It's not as sharp and color fringing sometimes shows up (no ED glass), but use it between f5.6 and f16 you will obtain quality results. The lens handles beautifully, with a very solid tripod mount, built-in hood and silky smooth focusing. The focus scale is not so compressed as the AF version so manual focusing for distance shots is much less touchy. It's much more portable than its AF cousin due to the smaller size and weight, and it accepts standard 52mm filters.

<p>

The Ai or AiS 105/4 micro with a PN-11 tube is also very good. It lacks CRC so there is no focal length shortening at close range like most 105mm macro lenses. It focuses to 1:1 at 0.42m (with the excellent PN-11 tube), not far short of 0.5m for the AF 200/4 micro. I've found this lens to be extremely sharp.

[david_h._hartman]

<em>Also, the compensating feature does not work well

with TTL meters as I mentioned above - you need to un-compensate

to get correct exposures, so it may not be the most practical

lens. It is a very clever piece of engineering though. --Roland

Vink<br>

</em><br>

A little clarification: The 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor Auto (CA version)

works just fine with TTL meters <u>but not aperture coupled

meters</u>. I think that is what Roland means. It also works nicely

with TTL flash or manual flash and a flash meter.<br>

<br>

The lens was specifically designed for hand held light meters and

its use with a flash meter, long before TTL flash, is

really smooth and deadly accurate.<br>

<br>

Besides all the other good things Roland says about the 105/4.0

AI and AIS Micro-Nikkor it give really smooth out of focus

background rendition. Also a longer lens with a narrower angle of

view allows for much easier selection of non-distracting

backgrounds.<br>

<br>

Selection of background is a major advantage telephotos both

close up and for general photography. When you backup with a

telephoto you can have the same subject size but the telephoto

takes in a much smaller area of the background. A slight shift in

camera placement allows easy selection.<br>

<br>

Best,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[andrew_kalman1]

This discussion has done a nice job of explaining the issues. I wish I had found it earlier!

 

Anyway, one item that was not mentioned is that the 'P' in "Nikkor-P" is part of their earlier nomenclature which indicates that this lens (from the compensating one in the picture onwards) has five (5) elements (Penta = 5, Q=4, S=6, O=8, D=10, etc. in Greek).

 

--Andrew

[andrew_kalman1]

Ooops -- thinking back to my childhood Greek classes in Sunday school, four is "Tessera". So Nikon must have used Latin. :-)

 

--Andrew

[User_2000406]

<p>One more data point here. I have the compensating version with the black outer barrel, serial number 216377. The compensating feature is verified by looking through the lens while rotating the focus ring; you can see the aperture enlarge as the barrel extends. My copy is apparently the version before Bjorn's copy according to Roland's site.</p>

<p>As Eric stated, the effective aperture numbers are in black on the silver portion of the barrel. When you are not using the M-ring, the reproduction ratio is shown by the orange numbers between the focusing ring and the distance scale. Thanks to the manual linked by David, I was able to figure out that the light blue numbers are only supposed to be used when the M-ring is in use. The left column of blue numbers is the reproduction ratio while the right column is the distance from the film plane to the subject at that reproduction ratio.</p>

<p>My copy is an EX+ from KEH. They correctly characterized it as to type and its grade is as advertised. The lens is a beautiful piece of equipment but due to recent busyness I have not tested it yet.</p>