Aha! Now I get why 58mm lenses!

[kelly_flanigan1]

Physically the older 5.8cm F1.4 Nikon F lens is about the same size as the later 50mm F1.4 . Nikon had a 5cm F1.4 In rangefinder version; and LTM version already. They started off with a 5cm F2 and 5.8cm F1.4 for the Nikon F slr because thats what they could design and make at the time ; they had NO 5cm F1.4 yet that could clear the mirror of the Nikon F yet; it took 3 years for this opticak design to come out. The 5.8cm F1.4 was not as good as the newer 50mm F1.4 that came out later for the F at the wide open fstops; here I got a used 5.8cm F1.4 in 1962. The fact that WHY the first F1.4 was 5.8cm instead of a 5cm version was common knowledge when the Nikon F came out; is amazing how time makes marketing chaps invent fibs that the 5.8cm was for a 1:1 image. This type of changing history is common with marketing chaps; bs is created; tales made to fit ones agenda. If the 5.8cm focal length was such an important thing they would still be making it as a normal lens in massive numbers. Its the focal length used by many early slr makers to clear the mirror with a faster lens design; with the 1:1 tale invented by marketing chaps to justify why their optical department has not yet released a shorter 5cm version yet. Lots of otehr things change with time too; the indexing gizmo back when I got my first Nikon F was called " the fork"; then it became the prong; then newbies renamed it the rabbit ears. As a practical thing an early Nikon F user might have his next shorter lens than a 5.8cm F1.4 as a 3.5cm F2.8; the F2 was not out yet; or F1.4 either. Thus for reportage and news work a 5cm F1.4 is a better lens since its wider; than a 5.8cm f1.4.

[kelly_flanigan1]

In the purely manual focus era having a F1.4 lens such as the 5.8mm Nikkor meant it was easier to focus than say a 5cm F2. The smaller 5cm F2 was a better lens than the 5.8cm F1.4 and also WAY better on a bellows; or for slide copying. With action shooting one got a more consistant image of a moving person at F5.6 with the F1.4 normal lens than a F2; since its easier to focus in dimmer light.

[richard_oleson]

"...the indexing gizmo back when I got my first Nikon F was called " the fork"; then it became the prong; then newbies renamed it the rabbit ears...."

 

My favorite new name for the coupling fork is "pig nose".... it (in the AI/AIS version) really does look like one if you think about it

 

:)=

[User_502260]

My first good camera was a Konica Autoreflex T2. It came with a 57/1.4 Hexanon. The other choices were the 57/1.2 and the 52/1.8. It's not just a difference in focal length when you compare these lenses to the later 50mm versions. Most of the fast standard lenses which were longer than 50mm were six element designs. The two different 50/1.4 Hexanons which came later were seven element designs. The 58/1.4 Rokkor was also a six element design while all later 50/1.4 Rokkors had seven elements. It has been mentioned that the early Canon f/1.4 standard lenses were 50mm designs but even that lens was redesigned in 1968 to have seven elements.

 

At some point I'd like to have a 58/1.4 Nikkor just to add it to my collection. Other longer standard lenses I have include the 57/1.2 and 52/1.8 Hexanons, the 58/1.4 MC Rokkor, the 55/1.4 Mamiya Sekor M42, the 55/1.4 Mamiya Sekor for the Auto XTL, various 55/1.8 Asahi M42 and K mount lenses and the 55/1.2 Canon FL. The Asahi f/1.4 lenses I have are all 50mm models. Olympus made a 55/1.2 before it made a 50/1.2 but I don't have either of those lenses. The greatest improvement in the seven element designs was in wide open performance but the longer f/1.4 and f/1.2 lenses do have a nice character of their own and are still fun to use. A few standard lenses like the current 50/1.4 Leca R lens and the older 55/1.2 Canon AL have eight elements. This is not very common.