Opinions on a 35mm 2.5 series E for my EM

[joe_zammarelli]

I have a Nikon EM with a no-name 28mm 2.8 lens. In keeping with the

vintage of the camera and because I think it'd have to be a better

lens, I'm thinking of replacing it with a 35/2.5 Series E. Comments?

 

Thanks!

[cbender]

I'm a big fan of the series E lenses, but I hesitate to recommend the 35/2.5. I've never owned one so can't speak from personal experience, but I've heard that the 35's were sometimes not so sharp. What other lenses do you have? Is the 28 your only lens right now? If so, I'd recommend that you get the series E 50mm/1.8. It is very sharp, and only costs about $30. If you're looking for something a little longer, the 100 and 135 are also excellent.

[NetR]

Hi Joe.

 

Don't worry about the age of the camera - your EM will work well with any modern (AI, AIS, AF) lens except the new G lenses. In your place I'd go for the 35mm f2 AF lens, or the 28mm f2.8 AIS lens if you want a manual one - these are the best 28mm lenses Nikon (or anyone else) ever made. The 35mm Series E lens does not have the same high reputation as some of the other Series E lenses - there are better options out there.

 

Regards, Ross

[hayward]

Series E lenses sort of bridge the transition from all metal and glass manual focus lens to modern glass and plastic ones. The "E"s were built to be affordable and are pretty cheap in the used market today. You can get a Series E 50mm 1.8 on Ebay for $30. I'd tend to get one of those and keep the 28mm.

[harry_akiyoshi]

The 35mm 2.5 Series E is kind of unspectacular. It might not be that much better than the 28mm lens you already have. Nikon makes much better 50mm primes than 35s, in general, the exception being the old 35mm 1.4, so I'd suggest that you pick up a 50 f/1.8 or f/2.

[dave_schneider]

I have the 35mm Series E lens. It is not bad at all, certainly not up to the level of the 28mm 2.8 AIS I have but very good. The real plus is that with some careful shopping I was able to get one for $20.

[joe_zammarelli]

Thanks, guys.

 

I have a 50/1.8 but the front half is loose, just barely enough to see and hear when you give it a tug, less than a millimeter, but it's there. Doesn't seem to affect picture quality. Probably because while it moves easily, it doesn't move THAT easily. I can focus and the lens stays put. But it ain't right. I guess I could shim it. I don't think it's worth repairing given the cheap replacement cost.

 

I was hoping to dump the 28 and 50 and use the 35 as my main street lens. I've nothing against the 50. In a previous life I did a lot of work with one. But that was then and this is now and I think a 28 or 35 would be better.

 

Thanks for the feedback, you saved me a few bucks. If you're ever in Rock Hill, stop in I'll buy you a beer.

[jose f.]

The nice thing about the 35/2.5E is it has such a negative reputation I bought mine for $40 and have used it for about five years now.

 

Wide open it's just a little soft, but in a uniform, kind of attractive way. The front element is exposed and it will flare with a strong light source in the frame, but you can fit a standard hood.

 

From f/4 through f/8, it's very crisp and has good contrast. Weighs next to nothing and mostly stays on an FM. Mine is the second version with the conventional focusing ring and the silver lens-mounting ring.

 

Bad E series lenses tend to have a gritty feel to the focus or feel loose when mounted on the camera. The later ones with the silver ring around the barrel feel more durable than the first run.

[joe_zammarelli]

Jeez Josef! Just when the other guys had me convinced...

 

But this one is from the first run, so I think I'll pass. If I see a newer one I may try it if the price is right. My 50 is a newer one, but it has problems. So new might not be better.

 

Thanks for the info!

[david_h._hartman]

Having said "as my main street lens" I would think a 28/2.0 AI or AIS would be a better choice. The 35/2.5E is a simple five element design in a low cost mount. That doesn�t mean its a bad lens but it just can�t compete with a modern nine element, eight group CRC design like the 28/2.0 The 35/2.5E is also 2/3rds stop slower in a lens that needs to be stopped down some. The 28/2.0 is quite a fast lens for evening use. The same arguments could be made for the 35/1.4 AI or AIS as for the 28/2.0.

 

If you are going to stop these lenses down to f/8.0~f/11 you many not see much difference. If you stop down to f/16~22 then just keep what you have as nothing can fool mother nature at those stops.

 

The 50/1.8E(s) are all single coated. This means they won�t compete on color or contrast with other 50/1.8(s). The 50/1.8 AIS (late) in plastic mount probably the same optically but is multi-coated. I prefer the 50/1.8 AI or AIS (early) as they have a better quality mount, are multi-coated and focus a little closer.

[moccia]

I never tried it.

But you can find interesting an expert opinion here:

http://www.37thframe.com/37th_frame_3.pdf

You'll be surprised! I plan to buy one when I'll find it dirty cheap, because I already own a 35mm f2 AIS and a 28mm f2 AI'd.

I'm interested in the bokeh issue and the fact that it is a very small (and cheap) lens.

[douglas k.]

I've owned three 35mm f2.5E lenses. Not the very sharpest Nikon lens, but sharp enough at f2.5 and sharper stopped down, smooth contrast, nice rendition of out-of-focus areas, small, light, inexpensive. I recommend it. Make sure it focusses smoothly.

[Robert_Lai]

Try the 35mm f/2 used for around $100 as an everyday lens. Very sharp lens! Light and compact too.<p>Regarding the front element play issue, I found that my 20mm f/3.5 AIS has a tiny bit of play. It hasn't affected the sharpness of the lens at all. I suspect that some of the grease on the helical has dried out (or it may never have had much, as the focus ring turns very freely). The grease had to go somewhere, and I guess that's where the play comes in.<p>I have the second version of the 50mm f/1.8 series E. It is bitingly sharp, even at minimum focus distance. I carry a hood with it. I read somewhere that the optical forumula is the same as the 50mm f/1.8 AIS, just that the elements are single coated. Regardless, its pictures look just like those from my 50mm f/1.8 AI. No one has ever called the 50mm f/1.8 AI(s) a bad lens. I was thinking of dumping the 50mm, but I just may keep it around for travel use. That was David Hartman's advice to me, and he and I both suffer badly from NAS (Nikon Acquisition Syndrome).

[joe_zammarelli]

Thanks for all the great info folks!

 

Robert, as I said, despite the play in the 50 it still works okay. I never thought of the grease drying out. I have repair info, but do I feel like taking it apart? I spent three hours trying to replace the plastic bezel or whatever you call the frame around the lens mount. It came off easily enough, but the lens release button popped out and the aperture return spring sprung. I managed to fix the button fairly quickly, but it took me forever to realize that that tiny hole in the body is an access hole to adjust the spring tension.

 

Or maybe I could slip a loop of waxed yarn in there. It would add a bit of friction, give 360 degree support and the wax would keep bits of thread from going where they shouldn't.

 

Anywho, back to lenses. I have no prejudices other than price constraints. High end is out. Low end is tempting (Hey! I'm part Scot.) But I'm willing to part with a few bucks to get a day in, day out, workhorse lens.

 

Thanks again!

[douglas k.]

As an afterthought: As Robert Lai mentions, the Nikkor 35mm f2 ai or ais is also very nice. I got a nice one, some years ago on eBay, for only $90, and it's my all-time fave 35mm lens -- tons better than a Leica 35mm f2 that I owned, and better than the Nikkor 35mm f2AF. But the Series E lens is also very good and should cost even less -- I bought two, years apart, for $42 each.

[david_h._hartman]

Robert reminds me of my logic on the 50/1.8E. If you have an EM or FG most people buy these because they are small and light or because they are economical. If you go to sell the camera the buyer will likely want a 50/1.8E so having it may help bring a better price or make the sale easier.

 

I figure the retail price of a 50/1.8E should be about $25.00. That�s $1.00 more than what I pay for a Nikon L37c UV filter. If I have an extra L37c I�m not going to list it on e*Bay, package it and stand in line to ship it. It�s not worth the time. I�ll just save it till I need it.

 

In short the 50/1.8E is not worth selling. Although it�s the least of the AI/AIS type 50/1.8(s) the Series E is still a very good lens. Small and light my be just the thing one wants for travel.

 

If one is buying a 50/1.8 lens. I recommend spending a little more and getting a multi-coated one. If I bought an FG without a lens I�d want a 50/1.8 AIS (late) or the Japan only 50/1.8 AIS (late). Both are pancake lenses. The Japanese version is an aluminum mount. The other is a plastic mount similar to the 50/1.8E.

 

For other manual focus cameras I recommend a 50/1.8 AI or AIS or a 50/1.4 AIS.

 

I notice the prices for 50mm lenses at KEN.com are higher than I�ve ever paid. I paid locally $49.00 for a 50/1.8 AI and $85.00 for a 50/1.4 AIS. I�ve always bought my 50(s) used when I found good prices.

 

---

 

As far as multi-coated v. single-coated: I compared a 210/5.6 Nikkor-W (multi-coated) to a 210/5.6 Symar-S (single-coated). I took some test prints to LEE-MAC Camera in Pasadena, California. I penciled on the back the taking lens and showed the prints to the sales staff one by one. Though I panned the difference between the prints all chose the prints from the Nikkor-W. The reason was simple. The multi-coated lens hand more contrast and therefore looked sharper.

 

I should also note that I�ve seen good contrast from an uncoated 101/3.5 Commercial Ektar and on a big 6x9 negative it gave a very pleasing performance.