Nikon GN 45mm 2.8 with DSLR and vs. 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 !?

[juanjo_viagran]

Hi,

 

do anyone here use the old Nikon 45mm 2.8 pancake AI-p or AI'd with DSLR's ?

if so, how you like it..?

and sample shots..?

how's the picture quality next to the newer 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 AFD's..?

 

thanks in advance.

Juanjo

[dave_lee6]

I can't comment on the older GN Nikon 45mm lens, but I did own the 45mm P lens for a short time, and I did not find it performed any better than my 50mm 1.8 Series E. The only thing the Tessar formula offers is nicely rendered out of focus highlights. The P version has a 9-bladed aperture. Lately on the auction site the GN lenses are nearly as expensive as the P versions. There is a 'C' version of the GN lens which is probably the one to watch for. For the money, I'd rather have a 50mm 1.4 AF-D for the speed.

[mharris]

Juanjo I use it sometimes and it's a very nice lens.

[mharris]

Forgot to mention, I had it for sale for a while but no one wanted it.

[tommyinca]

If you like the Tessar look (~100% less air/glass surface), you will like the 45mm GN.

[vivek iyer]

I used to use it. Still have them.

 

Check Bjorn Rorslett's site and his thoughts on this.

 

Just as he says, this lens needs to be stopped down (f/8~11) for decent results which is different when you compare it with the 50 /1.4/1.8 lenses.

 

If you do not have one, you are not missing much in terms of image quality.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Nikon should produce an AF-S version of this lens. It would make a great combination with the D40/x.

[bernard_korites]

I have the modern 45mm f2.8. I have tested it against the 50mm f1.8 and found the 45 to have about the same sharpness but with more color and contrast. I also tested it against my Leica z2x which I was told by a Leica dealer is as good as the Leica cm which, according to Leica users, is as good as a Summicron and the 45mm is sharper. I read somewhere recently that PopPhot (I think) said it was one of the sharpest lenses they had ever tested. For me the primary advantage is it has a wider view angle than he 50 which I find better for landscapes.

[tri-x1]

I had a converted P lens. Wish I had kept it. It was sharp and compact. The only negative was that it focused backwards to standard Nikkors.

[mharris]

It does focus backwards, LOL that takes some getting used to. Other than that it's a wonderful lens, the old one I mean. I don't know about the new one, I've always just used the black one.

 

Someone earlier mentioned a "C" version, I think they are all coated. Mine is and it doesn't say "C" on it. Maybe someone here knows if there was a C version, I'm not sure.

[mharris]

Answered my own question:

 

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/50mmnikkor/index9.htm

 

The non coated one says "NC" on it. The coated one doesn't have a "C" on it. Mine is the coated one.

[mharris]

I also see a 9-blade and a seven blade one. Mine has 9 blades. This research is getting good!

[mawz]

Note only the GN focuses backwards, the P does not.

[scott_warn]

It should also be pointed out that the GN Nikkor was produced during the Non AI era. Which means that unless it's been AI converted using Nikon's kit it WILL cause damage to Nikon's DSLRs. Specifically, it will put pressure on the minimum aperture signal lever on the camera which will usually end up breaking the lever. Bottomline, make sure that it has the proper AI type aperture ring (2 rows of engraved aperture numbers) or just mounting this lens can break your camera.

 

I have had mine since 1974 and it's been converted using a kit from Pacific Rim. In my case, it was a real favorite on 35mm because it's so small and such a great focal length for landscapes. Monted on my trusty old Nikkormat FS it fit easily into the pocket of my ski parka and I routinely took it skiing. One problem with mine, however, is that 30 years of existing in a smoking environment has caused a moderate buildup of internal haze. Another issue is that the focusing is done by a cam instead of a helicoid and can be VERY touchy at closer distances.

 

Personally, I would recomend that anyone interested should consider the newer P version, you'll get a normal focus direction and throw and it will communicate with the digitals because it's chipped. Darn shame that Nikon dropped it, on the D3 that 45mm focal length can be extremely versatile. On the DX format, it's a definate "tweener", now wide enough or long enough to be really useful as a walkaround lens.

 

As for sharpness, I found mine to be extremely sharp at any aperture smaller than f5.6, especially in the central 2/3 of the image. Back then I was shooting with either K25 or Panatomic-X rated at ei 16 so my experience was pretty darn critical. However, it's an absolute bear to focus on a digital body due to the poor viewfinders now in use so I would not be at all surprized at reports of poor sharpness because if you miss the focus just slightly it will look quite soft.

 

In terms of bokeh, I think that it may be the best lens for truely good bokeh that Nikon ever produced. That is because it's a totally symetrical design which yields bokeh similar to the symetrical lenses that are nearly standard for large format "normals". Due to my use of Panatomic-X I had more than one photo instructer absolutely convinced that I had shot my assignment on 4x5 instead of 35mm, the bokeh is nearly an exact match for a 165mm Rodenstock, which means it's very very smooth.

 

I should also mention that the 45mm GN was also a pretty decent enlarging lens. Back when I was a poor college student I made up a mounting board for it using a piece of dry mounting board and printed all of my photos with it for over 3 years. That f32 minimum aperture came in real handy when there was a need for a lot of dodging and burning because it really extended the printing times.

[wj_lee]

I don't have GN45mm but I have 45mm p. I find images from 45mm more pleasant than 50mm 1.4. It's hard to describe why, there is much more intimate feeling to the images from 45mm compared to 50mm, which feels more clinical.

[mark_amos]

Juanjo, in spite of the fact that I have both an AI'd 45 GN and the newer 45 P, I have not tested them critically against each other or the 50 1.8 and 50 1.4, but I can give you general observations. Either of the 45s is excellent at 2.8. My 45P seems a bit cleaner than my 45 GN but probably because it is 30 year newer and "cleaner." I can't say that they are sharper at 2.8 than my 50 1.8 E or 50 1.4 ais or 50 1.4 AF D at 2.8, but the 45s are known for their very flat field, and I have found this to be true. They have the tessar smoothness and give a very natural look that doesn't seem however to pop like a new 50 1.4 at 1.4, which is probably attributable more to the shallow depth of field that highlights the in-focus subject.

 

For most people, I don't see the 45s as necessary replacements for the 1.8 and 1.4 lenses because of the loss of speed, but if size is a priority then we have a window to enjoy the special features of the 45s, which are essentially very usable collectors items at this point. The GN feature of the original 45 is really fun to play around with. The lens looks cool on a plain prism F and this makes for a very small set capable of uncompromised flat field performance shooting walk around architecture with good film in daylight. The 45P offers the same flat field tessar character in the tiniest package on an FM3a and is perhaps the only normal focal length manual focus lens with a chip, which makes it a useful or at the very least, fun option on any of the DSLRs. I have been tempted to get a D40x with a katz eye focus screen specifically because I have the 45P, which would give me the closest thing to the kind of smallish intuitive good-feel manual focus dslr that I want, but I think Nikon can give us a more versatile small nice manual focus dslr combo than that like a digital FM3a, so I won't bite.

[mharris]

I shot mine today on a D200. My lens was converted by me using the PacificRim Nikon kit also. You have to be careful when getting the kit because there was more than 1 for that lens. It really is a nice lens on a DSLR with a Katzeye split screen.

 

Some shots are for showing the out of focus areas and some are just for color and contrast:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=766646

[juanjo_viagran]

Michael,

 

nice shots, do you have a Nikon 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 to do side by side comparatives ?

[mharris]

Juanjo, I have both. I don't use the 1.4 much, I AIed it to use on a N90s.