02-19-2015, 06:18 AM
testing historic lenses? Introduced in 1979 and a year later updated with the version you tested tells something about how happy Nikon was about it. It's not even listed on Nikon's lens overview. No idea what you expect from those old designs: back in 1980 Nikon were not the best one could get, they were just more affordable. Here's a bit of it's history
![[Image: MICROGROUPexten.JPG]](http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/micronikkor/images/MICROGROUPexten.JPG)
You won't catch me buying such old glass for a modern camera. Of course, the next comment is only a question of time. "Fabulous lens, I recall me getting great shots out of it" - blah. Back in those film days were better lenses than that one, especially for macro. And those were double or more more expensive.
Do you want to counter tests like that one (with MTF
)? Are you sure you got a good copy? One thing I learnt from Roger Cicala's MTF experiments: Never trust a single copy. Especially not in museum lenses, I'd like to add.
Btw, the only "spec" I read in your post is the focal length. Being only 0.119 mm off their spec is an excellent value. Or do I miss the other specs?
You won't catch me buying such old glass for a modern camera. Of course, the next comment is only a question of time. "Fabulous lens, I recall me getting great shots out of it" - blah. Back in those film days were better lenses than that one, especially for macro. And those were double or more more expensive.
Do you want to counter tests like that one (with MTF
)? Are you sure you got a good copy? One thing I learnt from Roger Cicala's MTF experiments: Never trust a single copy. Especially not in museum lenses, I'd like to add.Btw, the only "spec" I read in your post is the focal length. Being only 0.119 mm off their spec is an excellent value. Or do I miss the other specs?