Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
GN Non-AI Nikon 45mm f2.8 pancakes as good as AI-P?
#1
The 'Zone showed us how great the 17mm long Nikon 45 2.8 Ai-P pancake lens is.



Wonder if the $100USD "GN Nikon 45mm

f2.8 Non-AI" lenses are optically identical, except perhaps for lens coating? Think have also seen

some lenses with the "E" label. Sony Nex users currently have no use for the AI computer chip version

of this lens that sends aperture information back to a Nikon body. And Photozone has shown some interest

in pointing out compact lenses for the Nex, like the quite expensive Leica-type rangefinder lenses.



Anybody know if all the Nikon 45mm f2.8 variants are basically optical performance equivalents of the

superb AI-P 45mm f2.8 Nikkor? Given his interest in careless and careful pancake lens designs, Klaus

should have a bit of enthusiasm for the topic.



Hmm, would it be EVIL to start a "pancake watch" topic?
#2
According to Bjorn Rorslett, the optical designs are not fully identical:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_norm.html



This page describes the 45/2.8 GN:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/com...GN45mm.htm



There was no "E Series" version of the 45/2.8. There is, however, a Series E 50/1.8 which is quite compact and comes close to a pancake.



FWIW, for the majority of people a 45/2.8 on APS-C is not overly useful. Some will use it just because They Can™ and very few will actually find it useful. No need for a review, IMHO.

After all, there M-mount Voigtländers that are both smaller and faster if you account for the F-mount adapter you would need.
#3
Quote:FWIW, for the majority of people a 45/2.8 on APS-C is not overly useful.

Shame on Klaus for ever having reviewed it.



Quote:Some will use it just because They Can™ and very few will actually find it useful.

Sure, why would anyone ever want to use the smallest, sharpest (at F5.6/8/11), super-quick-focusing

medium-distance portrait lens ever created, with the inherent flare resistance of a

minimalist 4-element/3-group design, that costs less than a Leica lens hood,

on their lightweight Sony Nex?



Quote:No need for a review, IMHO.

True, who would care about such a $100 GN Nikkor optic on the Nex, when we can already read about

the slower, heavier, longer, much harder-to-find, far poorer optically (including somewhat

greater chromatic aberration and 3 times the geometric distortion) Voigtlander Heliar 50mm f3.5,

for only 7 times more money? Or the 43mm f1.9 Pentax lens (also with more distortion and chromatic

aberration) for a mere 5x more $$$?



Quote:After all, there M-mount Voigtländers that are both smaller and faster if you account

for the F-mount adapter you would need.

Perhaps everywhere but Ebay, where the phrase "45mm voigtlander" returns no matches. And we must be talking

about different things in general, because every non-Sony-E-mount lens in the world requires a roughly

inch-long (~3cm long) adapter for the Nex, not just Nikon lenses.



Actually, thanks much for pointing out the interesting material on Nikon "normal" lenses, which of course

on APS-C cameras are all nice portrait lenses. Sounds like until we know more, we have to get the

Ai version of the lens if we want to make sure we have performance of the 45mm pancake

that Photozone reviewed.
#4
[quote name='RussellB' timestamp='1286891757' post='3593']

Perhaps everywhere but Ebay, where the phrase "45mm voigtlander" returns no matches.

[/quote]

I think he meant the voigtlander nokton 40 f/1.4. Sure it too might have a bit more CA at f/2.8 than a lens made for 2.8... but it can do a heck of a lot more in terms of usability. Some folks like that <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' /> Plus anyone wanting the cleanest image wanting to go for an APS-C is a bit beyond me.



[quote name='RussellB' timestamp='1286891757' post='3593']

And we must be talking about different things in general, because every non-Sony-E-mount lens in the world requires a roughly inch-long (~3cm long) adapter for the Nex, not just Nikon lenses.

[/quote]

That's not true. While the flange distances for the SLR mounts are long (e.g. ~42-55mm), the rangefinder mounts have much closer ones. E.g. Leica M mount is 27.80mm, which is a much thinner adapter than what you'd need for a Nikon F, relative to the thickness of the Nex body too.



GTW
#5
Quote:I think he meant the voigtlander nokton 40 f/1.4...but it can do a heck of a lot more in

terms of usability{than a 45mm f2.8 lens}.

Heck of a lot more? Maybe for some people.



Many others of us find no use for f1.4 lenses, even in APS-C, because of the shallow depth-of-field.

For example can't remember selling any photos with very little depth of field, most people tend to want

their paid photographer to produce photos with lots of detail and clarity. Have been paid for very few

photos in my life that were taken at less than f5.6 or f8. Now before electronic viewfinders, it was

nice to have fast lenses for easy viewing/focusing, but those days are long gone now that EVIL has

spread across the land.



However thanks for the tip, hey the Voigtlander 40mm f2 seems particularly interesting and the Photozone tests

are indeed superb, and happily there's one on eBay for $150.



Quote:Plus anyone wanting the cleanest image wanting to go for an APS-C is a bit beyond me.

Hey old-timer, have you looked at the latest APS-C hardware? Full frame 35mm is starting to feel about

as practical as my old 4x5 view camera, and Mamiya 645 medium-format iron.

[url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/finaldesign/5078361256/lightbox/"]APS-C-SonyNex-demoPhotoISO800[/url]



Hmm, what if all you want is a very clean image for enlargements up to a likely maximum size,

such as 8x10 inches (20x30cm)--rather than the abstract Platonic ideal of "the cleanest" image?

Not much meaning to talk about "the cleanest image" without more specifics, because on their own

such statements can be equally read to imply that really high-quality photographs demand the use of

11x14 inch view cameras.



I for example see little point in providing clients with more than 150 dots per inch resolution in

their final color prints, which rarely exceed 8x10 inches even for magazine ads.



And the Nex APS-C 3000x4500 pixel sensor at ISO 800 already has way more quality

than my clients will ever notice in their final prints. Even with the none-too-spectacular kit

zoom lens used in my demo photos, that Klaus has so clearly described in terms of adequacy for many tasks.



Quote:While the flange distances for the SLR mounts are long (e.g. ~42-55mm), the rangefinder mounts have much closer ones. E.g. Leica M mount is 27.80mm, which is a much thinner adapter than what you'd need for a Nikon F, relative to the thickness of the Nex body too.

Sounds like you are reaching to make the superb, inexpensive Nikon 45mm lens that is only 17 mm long

look big and unwieldy. Yes, I suppose the adapter is "much thinner" for Leica M mounts on the Nex

than the Nikon adapter. But then, the Nikon f2.8 pancake at the top of this discussion is perhaps

in your words "much thinner" than the Voigtlander...with a final height of about 43mm for adapter

plus Nikon pancake lens.



Not sure why we would encourage people to ignore the sweet, small, plentifully available Nikon pancake

medium portrait lenses (67mm full frame equivalent), just because we can find some (for many people

pointlessly) faster, shorter focal length Voigtlanders that cost a lot more and are in the end no smaller.



Anyway, the point of this thread is to find out if the cheap GN Nikkor 45 2.8's are optically equivalent

to the somewhat harder to find Ai-P Nikkors that tested out so well at Photozone. You seem pretty anxious

to want to suppress the question, but the tone of dry written forums is hard to divine, and I am sure

that if we were all standing around talking to each other in person we would not be quite so

argumentative. (But in that circle of friends you would not remain standing the longest, weighed down

as it were with your old-timey 4x5 press camera/Pentax 6x7/35mm full frame armor/whatever.)
#6
I don't get your point.



If you are looking for someone first-hand experience, you will hardly find someone on this forum, since the lens is quite rare.

Let me suggest to search for original sized images on Flickr using "45 GN" or "45mm GN".



Everybody just wants to be helpful in pointing out the potential negatives and the alternatives. If you really want _exactly this_ lens then you can ignore this or just tell us that you are not interested in alternatives, but there is really no point in denying these arguments in an -- at least -- questionable manner.
#7
Russel,



You started with "And Photozone has shown some interest in pointing out compact lenses for the Nex, like the quite expensive Leica-type rangefinder lenses."



And that is the point of others.... the lenses Klaus has tested on the NEX are NOT of SLR 135 format character. They sit CLOSE to the body, and they make sense that way.



Now you propose to test a Nikon F-mount (135 format SLR lens) because it is so small (pancake).

But that is exactly what does not make sense. It stops being small on NEX because it needs a big fat adapter, making its big plus... disappear.



And that is a very simple and evident point.



Besides that, the Nikon has been out of production for ages, and is hardly to be found easily in the 2nd hand marker.



So, there are two reasons to wonder why Klaus "should" test it on NEX.... it is NOT compact on NEX, and it is hardly a lens one can purchase.
#8
Quote:Now you propose to test a Nikon F-mount (135 format SLR lens) because it is so small (pancake)...

First of all, I never asked that Klaus test the 45mm focal length GN Nikkor.

I simply asked if anyone knew whether or not the $100, 31mm physical length GN version

was as good as the $320 (US dollars) 17mm long Ai-P version that Klaus

did review, on a Nikon camera. It makes sense to me to ask Photozone folks, you are a

pretty sophisticated bunch.



I confess to having an indirect hope to intrigue Klaus as to the topic,

but thank heaven I never proposed any such heresy as a "non-Leica-mount, inexpensive"

lens test for the Nex on Photozone.

Quote:But that is exactly what does not make sense. It stops being small on NEX because it

needs a big fat adapter, making its big plus... disappear. And that is a very simple and evident point.



Brightcolours, you're making the same mistake I did at first. EVEN WITH the

18mm-longer-than-Leica-M-mount Nex-to-Nikon adapter,

the Nikon AI-P 45/2.8 and the GN 45/2.8 lenses ($100 on eBay!) are about as small or smaller

than ALL the non-e-mount (and expensive) lenses Photozone has tested on the Nex:



45mm long with adapter, 120g Nikon Ai-P 45mm f/2.8 (PZone reviewed on Nikon camera, several on eBay)

59mm long with adapter, 150g Nikon GN Auto Nikkor 45mm f2.8 (not reviewed, plentiful on eBay)



52mm long with adapter, 147g Voigtländer Heliar 50mm f/3.5 (this and the rest PZone reviewed)

53mm long with adapter, 230g Voigtländer Ultra-Wide Heliar 12mm f/5.6 Aspherical II

61mm long with adapter, 230g Leica Summarit-M 50mm f/2.5

75mm long with adapter, 230g Voigtländer Color Heliar 75mm f/2.5

78mm long with adapter, 240g Zeiss Biogon ZM T* 35mm f/2

78mm long with adapter, 230g Zeiss Planar ZM T* 50mm f/2

100mm long with apater, 260g Voigtländer APO Lanthar 90mm f/3.5


One could argue that the 50mm f3.5 Voigtlander collapses to ~33mm length in the non-operating position,

but the overall point is clear that there is nothing physically disqualifying about the Nikon 45mm f2.8

lens sizes that make them silly to consider for the Nex.



Quote:Besides that, the Nikon has been out of production for ages, and is hardly to be found easily in the 2nd hand marker.

So, there are two reasons to wonder why Klaus "should" test it on NEX.... it is NOT compact on NEX, and it is hardly a lens one can purchase.



That's like saying the 50mm f1.8 FD Canon lens is hard to get, because it's not made any more.

The world appears to be awash in 45mm GN Nikkors, take a glance on eBay. There are the multiple $320 Ai-P

versions on there as well.



So I still want to know if any of you brainiacs have had a chance to use the 45mm f2.8 GN nikkor on a digital

camera...
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)