orsetto

Before this thread disappears back in time again... The Nikon F2 is my all time favorite 35mm SLR, but it does have some quirks that can make it suddenly malfunction in ways the earlier Nikon F (and lesser Nikkormats) do not. Depending on past use history, storage, etc, the F2 can indeed manifest a jammed wind lever (which may or may not be tied to related issues with the shutter button collar mechanism). The F2 shutter is also prone to develop capping (not properly exposing) at the fastest 1/500, 1/1000, and esp 1/2000 speeds: the shutter system is more sensitive to misuse than the older F shutter mechanics. The F2 is a phenomenal, rugged camera but it doesn't tolerate misuse/disuse to the degree the older F can handle. The F is unkillable, the F2 slightly less so. Most important tip for preserving the F2: never leave the shutter cocked overnight, preferably not more than an hour. Always fire a cocked F2 before putting it away for the night, to relieve tension on the shutter mainspring. Check the shutter button collar occasionally, to be sure its holding to the center detent securely. Avoid moving it off center to the locked or T position unless absolutely necessary. Avoid using multiple short strokes to advance the film or cock the camera: doing this substantially increases the odds of the lever locking up or other mechanical mishaps. This applies primarily to aging F2 cameras that haven't ever been serviced: if your F2 has been recently overhauled by a specialist tech like Sover Wong, it won't be prone to winding or button collar glitches. Just be vigilant about not leaving the shutter cocked for long periods.

Buying and reselling just to check out and play with various camera systems has always been financially unpredictable. Sometimes if you time it on the upswing of a popular model, you'll break even or eke out a slight profit. Usually you'll take a fairly significant loss upon resale, either from eBay/broker fees or lowball offers from established dealers. We usually write off the loss as a "rental fee", but its still painful to eat a $200 loss on a camera you paid $600 for a couple months earlier. I think a lot of vintage camera "dabblers" got spoiled by the white-hot COVID-era market, where resale prices were rising so fast you could generally try out any camera for "free". That feverish era seems to be hurtling toward an end in recent weeks: for the first time in quite awhile eBay is again awash in Mamiya RB67 gear (after being nearly unobtainable from domestic sellers since 2016). Global economic woes (and the recent issues with Fuji's true intentions re ongoing film manufacturing) seem to have deflated the latest "vintage film camera" binge. Compounded by rapidly disappearing repair sources, we may soon see a massive selloff and market correction. The hipster kids and retro-boomers are beginning to realize their beautiful looking $1799 Rolleiflex or Hasselblad can be terrifying post-purchase money pits of maintenance cost, with ever-dwindling numbers of truly competent techs and wait lists of months to years. The recent unfortunate passing of David Odess was a big wakeup call to me personally: suddenly, my heavy investment in vintage Hasselblad (with its utterly absurd neverending repair costs) seems rather ill-advised. Since I have more fun with my Mamiya TLR system anyway, and the simplistic Mamiya lens shutters can be repaired by any geek wielding a screwdriver, it may finally be time to unload most of my 'blad stuff. Leica and Rollei TLR enthusiasts seem to enjoy living their lives hostage to only two or three aging specialist techs: thats not for me. A competently overhauled Leica M can run a decade or more with no issues, but you're lucky to get a few months from a 'blad overhaul before it fails again. I've been burned by generalist techs several times: truly excellent 'blad service costs dearly and has become increasingly difficult to find. Knowing my Hassy kit (esp lenses) are ticking time bombs of spite kinda sucks the joy out of the user experience.

Lifetouch was/is one of the largest high-volume portrait photography franchises in North America: they've been in business 80 years, certainly long enough that it seems logical this bespoke focus screen configuration was made by Beattie to Lifetouch precise specifications. Probably not a stock offering in Beattie's catalog: I'd guess this was made only for Lifetouch to offer as a proprietary accessory for their affiliated photographers. Mamiya was by far the medium format system of choice in the heyday of churn-em-out school and corporate film portrait work (most often the C220/C330 TLRs, but the later RB67 made heavy inroads and even the clunky Universal Press was popular in some applications like passports and IDs). The layout of this screen indicates the attached RB67 was expected to remain in fixed portrait orientation at a fixed distance, with the upper small rectangle used to quickly position the face in the overall frame (handy when dealing with an endless parade of schoolkids etc). Interesting find! Hope it proves to have some utility for you.

"Around", yes, but not really in the same way they were at their peak when they had two locations in Manhattan (main one on W 13th Street, and a pro satellite shop). The Cambridge that exists now doesn't refer to itself as Cambridge half the time, and does most of its business via various confusing eBay stores. The most interesting thing about the current Cambridge is their location, which I expect will soon either increase their business considerably or create problems they never dreamed of when they moved there. Some years ago, two ex-Cambridge guys opened their current outpost in one of the dullest, most nondescript, unhip, low-traffic retail streets of Queens NYC, in a neighborhood nobody under the age of 60 would be caught dead in. In essence, they run their packed shop as a cross between between the old 47th Street Photo and Floyds Barber Shop in Mayberry. Its a confusing setup if you don't have prior experience dealing with this type of older camera sales veterans: they are simultaneously very charming and a bit shady. For years, I think the storefront was mostly a Collyers Mansion for them to putter around and amuse themselves. The neighborhood they're in has taken quite a turn recently, which could shake things up significantly. The hottest most desirable neighborhood in the world for the past fifteen years has been Williamsburg Brooklyn: ground zero and holy land of hipsterism. As Williamsburg filled to overflowing with newcomers, a spillover effect began which follows the path of the isolated subway line that passes thru it. Slowly but surely, every neighborhood within a mile of that train has been overtaken with a younger demographic, until finally they reached the end of the line: where Cambridge is currently located. Once the sleepiest most overlooked area in NYC, Maspeth Queens is on the cusp of total hipster invasion. This group has no patience with quirky old school sales methods or presentation: they view film photography and old cameras in a very different light. The current Cambridge outpost will likely need to change quite a bit to avoid alienating this youth invasion: the accident of their location coinciding with this tidal shift could be a boon or a curse depending on the tenor of social media posts. At the moment, reviews seem relatively balanced at 60/40.

There are (usually) no inherent "benefits", as the F4 screens tend to be brighter to begin with (although some of the later F3 screens were updated to roughly F4 performance). The primary reason people do this switcheroo is the scarcity of dedicated F4 screens: for some of the more desirable configurations, it is (or was) much easier and less expensive to obtain the F3 version and swap the frames with a more commonplace F4 screen. Some of us Nikon veterans did the same thing in reverse earlier on: we'd swap a newer slightly brighter F3 screen into our older F/F2 frames. All bets are off with some of the really scarce configurations like the focal-length-specific all-microprism screens: these are way more available in F/F2 guise so you'd cannibalize one of those to transfer to your F3 or F4 frame.

It does look like impact damage, tho I wouldn't expect to see such extensive cracking along all edges of an actual solid glass prism. Agree with John_Seaman that this might be the cheaper "Porro Finder" that used a set of fragile flat mirrors vs a solid prism. The Mamiya porro finders can often be found more easily and for less money than the true prism, but the viewing image is much smaller and dimmer (fine for outdoor and landscape, not great for indoor where the WLF or true prism show a larger brighter easier-focusing image). IIRC, the porro finders were offered only for the Mamiya TLR cameras, not the RB/RZ67 or 645 series. The porro option is more effective for the top heavy TLRs anyway: much lighter than the true prism, and you can get a porro version with built in TTL CdS meter. The true solid glass Mamiya TLR prism is more compact than either porro, but weighs much more and is not available with TTL meter.

Nicely brassed example! Also a reminder that the only thing louder than the running noise of the AW1 winder is the gaudy raised badge on the front of it. Guess Nikon really did want everyone to know "yes, we have a winder, too!" Sadly most broke down quickly due to a "recycled parts bin" nylon motor gear that was no match for the motor-hostile Copal Square Nikkormat shutter. They can be brought back to life with the same custom made brass replacement gear sold by Nikon guru Sover Wong to fix the failure prone gear in the professional F2 motors MD1, MD2, MD3. Sover resurrected my MD3 this way: its worked perfectly ever since, but you have to really love the motor or winder to justify the repair cost. I just checked the March 1977 actual discounted selling prices advertised by a fourth defunct NYC camera store chain, Cambridge Camera. The Nikkormat ELW body was $316, AW1 $95. The still new Canon AE-1 body only was $208, the Canon winder $73. Quite a difference if you were a newbie to SLRs lured into the camera store by a glitzy TV ad for the AE-1. Its unlikely many customers could be upsold to the Nikkormat (it was still a premium, expensive model). The closest you could get to beating the Canon combo of shutter priority AE and low price was the Konica T3N, which had a clearance price drop to $216 (its budget sister the A3 was only $139, but omitted key features). Neither Konica could take a winder. More affordable aperture priority competitors to the Nikkormat ELW had sprung up like weeds at that point: every other major brand had panicked at Canon's aggression, and significantly dropped the prices on their holdover premium AE models. Pentax ESII and K2 went down to $219, Minolta XE7 and Fujica ST901 ditto, even Canon dropped its own EF to $257. The warmed-over Nikon EL2 was due any minute, but still in the $330 range. Pentax new ME and Minolta XG7 were about to pounce with the AE1 price/feature set, Konica was releasing the stripped but dirt cheap TC, and Fuji would make a last stand in 35mm SLRs with its AX (instantly forgettable, if not for its place in history as the first AE SLR to be bundled with an affordable kit zoom lens). The popular FE would turn things around for Nikon in this market segment, but wouldn't be announced or available until '78. The bargain-basement EM and E lens line was even further out, but would fail to catch on, leading Nikon to cede the entry level segment altogether. They would be vindicated years later by great success in the entry level DSLR market.

Per my late 1975 Nikon retail price reference, suggested retail on the chrome finish body-only lineup was: F2S Photomic $703 F2 Photomic $599 F w/ FTn Photomic Prism $474 EL $460 FT2 $287 FTn $275 For context, competing autoexposure SLRs from other brands were also marketed like the Nikkormat EL: confusing mixed messaging implying they were optimized for the newbie, yet priced as luxury premium items most newbies could not afford. Canon EF $460, Minolta XE-7 $455, Olympus OM2 $458, and Pentax ESII at a nosebleed $494. When Canon dropped its AE-1 bombshell in 1976 at just $279, the shockwave was even bigger than the miniaturization craze set off by Olympus OM1 a couple years earlier. Mfrs scrambled to add more automation to the smaller camera bodies they were about to unveil. Matching the AE1 price point was a nightmare for most. _____________ The NYC camera store history, specifically in Manhattan, is full of fits and starts. My comments re the decline of the best known old-school chains at the hands of the heavy discounters refer to mid to late .'70s era: by the late '70s and early '80s Olden Camera looked like the unrenovated Cairo Museum and was utterly devoid of customers, Willoughbys was laser focused on foreign tourists, and Camera Barn's retail operation went into slow but steady slide. Personal impressions can of course vary widely, I will agree Camera Barn had far more retail action than Olden Camera during this time, was notably less aggressive than Willoughbys, and I did allude to CB having a deep stock of used and classic gear.. The income from their wholesale accessories pivot helped keep them stable thru the early '80s, but by 1984 or so things really began to decline. The tension between Henry and his staff could be cut with a knife during the final decade, and atmosphere in the last store was toxic: Henry would be screaming and raving in the catwalks above, leaving customers to wonder WTH kind of asylum they'd wandered into. But the NYC camera store scene didn't disappear, it transitioned to something markedly different from what it had been in the 1960s-early 1970s. Some of the back-page predatory discounters stepped up their game after causing the rival chains demise: most notably B&H made a headspinning metamorphosis from from Slim Shady to being the epicenter of East Coast photo retail and professional services. Dedicated enthusiasts like Ken Hansen opened their own enthusiast/pro shops, creating a newer hipper photo district one neighborhood over (in Chelsea). Hansen's was incredible: was very sorry when he closed down some years ago. Several specialist places devoted to 4x5, Leica and Hasselblad opened and fluorished (with some still around today).

Of the two you pictured, the 28mm Nikkor-H f/3.5 would be the choice of most photographers prioritizing optical quality. It was THE Nikon 28mm lens for many years, very good optics, high construction quality (all metal). This one has the genuine Nikon upgrade to full AI compatibility, making the asking price just about on the nose for a typical clean example with that upgrade. At f/3.5, the maximum aperture is a bit slow compared to the now-common f/2.8: depending on your needs, this may have significance for viewing/focusing and shutter speed limitations indoors or in dim light. Like all of Nikons 28mm primes, this one has some field curvature: this can manifest as slightly blurry corners in landscape shots, and pose difficulty with closer uses. Nothing that can't be worked around, you just need to get a feel for how the lens images so you can use the quirks to your advantage. For example, field curvature can be exploited to get two objects at different distances in focus at the same time. Of note, this version of vintage 28mm Nikkor is particularly prized by those who shoot infrared film or use infrared-modified DSLRs: it is one of the best performing lenses for the IR spectrum ever made. The 35-70 zoom is overpriced by this seller. It is a low-end kit lens, not terrible but not particularly good either. The size and zoom range is very convenient, but its very slow at 50mm and 70mm, making for dim viewing/focusing and shooting limitations in low light. Unlike similar AF kit zooms made for later DSLRs, this lens does not have aspheric elements to boost performance: its altogether just an average lens. Performance is fine stopped down to f/8, otherwise nothing special. If the size and zoom range appeal to you for travel/landscape use, I'd recommend looking for one at another shop or perhaps on eBay: in today's market this is an unpopular lens that can usually be found for much lower cost than 125 euro. You could try offering the shop 85 euro, if they accept that might be a decent deal if you want to get the lens quickly.

Thanks to neil_grant for his idea of removing the rear cap, and David_Shanley for the tip re Marvel oil! I replied to your other Mamiya Press 65mm thread with my experience trying to loosen up my own stiff 65mm: results weren't quite as successful as yours, but I didn't have Marvel oil at hand when I tried.

Inspired by neil_grant's post in a similar thread: https://www.photo.net/forums/topic/550432-mamiya-press-lens-problem/#comment-5815810 I looked at the back of my Mamiya Press 65mm and realized the helicoid cap could be removed, revealing the entire threaded circumference without disturbing any of the other mechanics. The rangefinder cam gave me pause until close examination showed its position is not critical, and it can be replaced exactly without fuss. The cam needs to be removed first to completely free the rear baffle cap, which is held by three tiny fragile JIS cross head screws: be sure you do NOT use a typical Phillips screwdriver on these or you will strip the heads. I don't have a proper JIS driver in this size, but years of experience taught me a small Huffy multibit cross head will do the job if used very carefully. Proceed at your own risk, of course. My results weren't as successful as neil-grants, mostly because I don't have the Marvel oil he specified on hand. At first, a couple tiny pin drops of sewing machine oil did make the seized helicoid turn silky smooth: I was elated. But after re-assembly of the baffle and RF cam, the effect diminished considerably to just slightly improved. Possibly the cap and/or cam exert some mechanical pressure causing drag: I will need to try it again once I lay hands on this Marvel oil. In retrospect, I don't believe its actually necessary to take the rear baffle off: the same amount of thread access is available thru the RF cam slot opening (you just need to keep turning the focus ring to expose a different section to lube). Still, many thanks neil_grant for posting the disassembly idea and Marvel oil suggestion!

Followup to above, I just came across a 1975 ad for the Miranda DX3 promoting its unique oversized concentric-microprism focus aid that simultaneously functions as a huge multi-angle split image aid. For decades since the demise of Miranda with this ill-fated final camera, I've wondered why no one has ever offered that focus aid concept again. Once you've experienced it, going back to dinky traditional split image circles is very disappointing. It would be especially helpful in a medium format camera screen: if only Rick Oleson could find a way to offer it!

Interesting topic, AG! In all my years using Hasselblad, I've never before now come across any reference to an alternative soft focus filter pre-dating the Softars. But sure enough, upon checking Freytag's Hasselblad Way book per your post, there was the info on the "diffusion filters". Oddly, these aren't mentioned at all in the fraternal twin Hasselblad Manual by Ernst Wildi, and most starngely they aren't mentioned in Nodins comprehensive Compendium book! This led me to comb thru my collection of old Hasselblad brochures and price lists. The earliest list I have is from 1961, which notes the "#50C Diffusion Filter" but has no reference to Softars. The 1971 price list adds the well known trio of Softars, drops the Bay 50 Diffusion, but adds the "Series 63 Diffusion DF1". My 1969 lens brochure indicates the same single 63 model, the 1970 brochure shows 63 DF1 and DF2, then the 1975 brochure drops back to just the 63 DF1. Curiously, all iterations of the Diffusion filter are consistently priced at half the cost of the similar Softar over the years: whether that was due to higher mfg cost of the Softars or proprietary price gouging is difficult to determine (the Hasselblad Diffusion filter seems to have been based the Rolleiflex Duto filters, which in turn are based on an apparently unpatented generic design). The Softar design has completely dominated the soft focus filter category since it was introduced, so today it is incredibly difficult to find good image examples showing the different effect of the Diffusion/Duto (or even discussions of the difference). A little sleuthing did turn up a couple of examples and comments on Amazon, however: surprisingly, the Diffusion/Duto concentric filter has had a recent comeback of sorts and modern versions are offered by the likes of Hoya and Kenko. The Diffusion/Duto is described as a relic of the chemical photography era, because the effect it was employed for only really worked in prints or magazine ads and doesn't fully come across with digital imaging. Apparently the concentric ring effect doesn't so much soften the image as force visual attention toward the central subject: it was most popular for studio product photography during the golden age of magazine ads. Hasselblad (or its studio users) seems to have decided the Diffusion/Duto was more useful for the 50mm, 60mm and SWC wide angle trio, hence its availability primarily in only Series 63 size. The effect is variable with aperture and diminishes considerably as you stop down, in contrast to the Softars which remain soft across the entire frame even when stopped down. The current spike of interest in the concentric Diffusion/Duto design is coming mostly from digital astrophotographers, who've discovered these concentric filters have an "undocumented" ability to brighten stars at the edges of the frame (or some such: I forget exactly how they deploy it, but it helps with some tricky star fields that would otherwise get swallowed by some camera sensors). Since this topic is unlikely to ever come up again in a newer thread, I thought it might be a good idea to post the relevant paragraph from Freytag below for anyone who might need the info in future:

Can always count on Rick to regularly unearth a pristine, near-untouched, yet perfectly functional vintage camera, then proceed to shoot a stunning portfolio of "test shots" with it. This time around its the seldom-seen ELW: nice find! And great pics using it! The ELW was a stop gap effort: Nikon desperately needed to counter the revolutionary AE-1 from arch competitor Canon, but had nothing in its immediate pipeline. Nobody really did: Canon came out of left field and undercut the entire industry at that price point with that combination of AE, idiot proof flash, and perhaps most importantly the optional cheap winder motor. The only AE body Nikon had in production was the pricey EL, whose Copal Square shutter had not previously been considered motor drive friendly. Nikon took a chance anyway, grafting a quick-n-dirty winder modification to the baseplate and offering what had to be the crappiest most unreliable winder in camera history. Their goal was to jazz up the appeal of the now suddenly dowdy EL model with the newly white-hot must-have winder accessory. But the ELW received at best a lukewarm reception: the basic EL body was designed a few years earlier when Nikon still completely ruled 35mm photography, so it was overbuilt and still too expensive for the new budget market niche Canon had opened with the AE-1. The ELW clumsy pre-AI lens indexing system, CdS cells, aperture priority meter and lack of flash automation were also a tough sell against the robotic wow new Canon. To its credit, Nikon gave the venerable EL one more final makeover as the EL2, with silicon meter cell and AI lens mount upgrades: the last of the legendary old-guard Nikkormats and best/only incarnation with autoexposure (the FT3 being the culmination of manual mechanical Nikkormats). Of course, we all know Nikon eventually scored big when they repackaged the EL2 heart and soul into the more modern, compact, glamorous FE and FE2. These cleverly maintained a price and build margin over competing Canons, with the speedy 3.5 fps MD12 motor drive (and FE2 TTL flash) as advantage points. Re Camera Barn: like other traditional NYC camera retailers Olden and Willoughbys, by the mid-1970s the chain had become a rundown clip joint whose customer base had dwindled to naive walk-in trade and clueless tourists. Any photographer with savvy was buying their gear direct from the NYC mail order discount dealers advertising in the back pages of Popular Photography. These discounters also had retail space in NYC that operated as assembly lines of selling: little in the way of customer service or display, but joints like 47th Street Photo in the Diamond District had a line out the door of customers who already knew what they wanted to buy. Unlike Olden and Willoughbys, Camera Barn was able to pivot into wholesale OEM products via Uniphot-Levitt, Albinar and Star D. The profits from this enabled the Camera Barn storefronts to remain open several years past their expiration date, but eventually the chain dropped to just the one big store near Macys Herald Square (which did look like a literal barn when you walked into it). A good friend of mine worked the film counter at that location on and off for nearly twenty years: he kept quitting for other jobs because he loathed Camera Barn management and policies, but every couple years would grudgingly drift back for another stint. Talk about a love-hate relationship: I could never quite figure why they would re-hire him each time, let alone why he'd think anything would change. The bottom had dropped out of NYC full service "white glove" camera retail in the early '70s with the arrival of mail-order-centric discounters 47th Street Photo, B&H Photo, Adorama etc. Olden, Willoughbys, and Camera Barn transitioned from nice friendly shops to competing in The Hunger Games: "fleece the foreign tourists" became their last stand business model. I'll never forget the face of a veteran camera salesperson I'd known when he recounted applying for a staff position at Olden in 1978: the owner listened to his enthusiastic pitch re his breadth of knowledge and customer service record, then acidly replied "you're exactly the wrong type for my company: I don't WANT photography enthusiasts on my floor, I want disinterested sales sharks who will reliably push product I need them to sell week to week". Olden came to be known as a dusty museum, Willoughbys the place to showroom shop before you bought from a discounter, and Camera Barn as a dump to buy film in a hurry or find an arcane second-hand accessory unavailable elsewhere. Once they all finally wound down, B&H cleverly re-invented itself to become the lucrative combination of retail showroom, mail/web discounter, and professional vendor its been since the 1990s. To whatever degree anyone still needs an old-school camera store, B&H keeps the concept alive and relevant. Other discounters who came on the scene at the same time still survive in some form (i.e. Adorama), but B&H took the ball and ran to the moon with it. The best thing about Camera Barn from a "street" perspective was its annual catalog and reference book, which peaked in late 1975. In tribute to the Nikkormat ELW and Camera Barn, here's the Nikon advertorial page from that catalog :

ben_hutcherson posted a nice summary of how the non-AI, AI, and AI-s lenses couple to their respective generations of camera body. I would only add that the "upgrade" to AI-s ended up being a wet firecracker during the film camera era. Pretty much no Nikon cameras that anyone cared (or still cares) about actually utilized the AI-s features fully. Other than the fussy, flaky, ill-fated FA camera that AI-s was invented to accommodate, there aren't any classic-era film bodies that strictly require the AI-s linear aperture lever for full practical functionality. The FG and 301-401-501 don't often fall into the category of beloved sought-after cult classic Nikon models, but they are perhaps the only ones that make any use of the AI-s focal length lug (mounting a tele lens will shift their AE metering to favor faster shutter speeds). The EM (and some of the above) are the only bodies that read the fixed max aperture lug near the rear element of both AI and AI-s lenses (it affects their autoflash metering, and program mode of the models that have program exposure). Many film and digital Nikon SLRs do "detect" an AI-s lens via the depression ground into their silver bayonet mounts, but then don't do anything much with that information. The convoluted FA design with its linear aperture requirement for program mode was simplified almost immediately into the FG system of "instant stop down" program metering. So unless you're a masochist babysitting a ticking-time-bomb Nikon FA, or a heavy user of auto flash metering with the two or three film bodies that couple with rear element lugs, you can safely ignore AI vs AI-s: just buy whichever version you can find at the best combination of condition and price. For 95% of Nikon film bodies, the most significant factor is pre-AI/non-AI vs AI/AI-s. if you have an AI body, you'll need AI or AI-s lenses for broadly compatible mounting and meter coupling. If you have a pre-AI camera model, you don't need to even think about it: all manual focus Nikkor lenses have the "rabbit ears" that couple with pre-AI meters. The big gray area of "gotcha" territory comes into play only with pre-AI lenses that have been hacked with aftermarket (non-Nikon) modifications for "AI compatibility". Nikon itself once provided a conversion service that swapped the old aperture rings for a genuine new AI aperture ring (as seen with the 28mm lens pictured earlier). Older pre-AI lenses updated with this genuine Nikon AI ring are safe to use on any Nikon film or digital camera body. Unfortunately Nikon's supply of genuine AI conversion rings was depleted decades ago, so a great many pre-AI lenses have been "unofficially" hacked by their owners or independent techs. The majority of these Frankensteined lenses omit a crucial modification to make them safely mount on many of Nikons DSLRs, because its a lot of extra work and wasn't even on the radar during the film era when most were hacked. These very common "partial AI" lenses are fine to use on most Nikon film cameras, but should be avoided if you plan to also use on Nikon DSLR (unless the seller explicitly states and shows the lens has a "EE-Minimum Aperture" post carved on its aperture ring). If unsure, stick to later AI/AI-s lenses, or lenses that have the genuine Nikon aperture ring update (two engraved sets of aperture numbers, and perforated rabbit ears). Other potential considerations would be the handful of lenses which were optically changed in the migration to AI-s, differences in operational feel, and the AF-D lens paradox. Some lenses like the 28mm f/2.8 got completely revised optics when they moved from AI to AI-s, others (mostly teles) were put in somewhat smaller barrels and/or got built-in lens hoods. The AI-s lenses all have much shorter focus ring travel (from close to far) than the AI or pre-AI: some photographers prefer this, others do not. The screw-drive AF and AF-D lenses can be an interesting alternative if you want to share lenses between manual focus and (some) autofocus Nikon cameras. They are all AI-s by nature, coupling mechanically to manual AI bodies and electronically to AF bodies. However:, they lack the old rabbit ears that couple to the old pre-AI film camera meters. Nikon provides dimples on the aperture ring showing where rabbit ears can be optionally installed if desired, but I've never actually seen an AF lens that was modified that way. You can still mount an AF-D lens on a pre-AI camera, but you'll need to use less convenient stopped down uncoupled meter mode. Same applies to the small handful of manual focus Nikon Series E lenses sold for the EM/FG: these are AI-s but have no rabbit ears.