Nikon's amazing 28/3.5

NikonUser · Post by **NikonUser** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:13 pm

This early Ai (EDIT: Not Ai) 28mm f/3.5 Nikkor was produced in the 1970s. There seems to be 2 versions.
The one made before 1977 is shown here; the lens data is on the outside of the filter threads, in the later version it is on the inside of the threads.
Another one of my recent aquisition. They can be obtained at bargain-basement prices

NU09250
Cluster fly with lens reversed on minimum bellows extension: FOV: 5.5mm, 4.3x mag on 23.6mm sensor. WD: 4 cm
f/5.6, 55 frames @ 0.05mm, single flash, Slushy Cap + paper towel diffuser, ZS PMax stack
Top: full frame
Bottom: 1000px crop
A great cheap lens.

NU09251 & NU09252

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:18 am

Now look here. This simply won't DO.

If you keep on getting cracking results from any old bit of glass you pick up, people are gonna think it must be EASY!!

lauriek · Post by **lauriek** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:35 am

Certainly looks sharp for a cheapie lens, but is that noise I can see in the crop, did you accidentally shoot this at higher ISO than usual?

Incidentally I shot a fly with a very similarly shaped head the other day, I was wondering what it was, had it pegged as a Blow fly of some kind, Wikipedia tells me a cluster fly is the same thing as a blow fly, does that sound right to you?

PaulFurman · Post by **PaulFurman** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:44 am

I've got a pre-Ai copy with SN 852690 from'73-'74 and yeah I just checked, it looks darn good. I disassembled it to tinker: http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgehill/2051949226/ which ends up working nicely reversed with less junk in the way. I've tried a 24mm f/2.8 Ai reversed & was amazed, although on closer examination it's not spectacular at full bellows. I got the 28/3.5 at a little camera shop for $25.

lauriek · Post by **lauriek** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:17 am

While we're on the subject of cheapo lenses, all of my early stacks (which went up to around 4:1) were with a reversed OM 50/1.8 standard lens, which cost me about $10 on ebay including postage.

You can't shoot it at f1.8 it's soft as heck but at f4 or 5.6 it's actually quite good reversed... (Just remember to jam the little auto aperture lever so the lens stops down to the selected aperture)

NikonUser · Post by **NikonUser** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:32 am

Just found an excellent site that lists
ALL NIKON LENS SERIAL NOS.
My lens illustrated in not Ai but is listed as a "K" type lens made between Feb 1975 and March 1977; one of 83,315 made.

I also bought an Ai 28/3.5 made after Jan 1977 (these lenses and other Nikon stuff were in a 'box lot' at a local auction; - small town, no competition, very low price.

Chris: will stop this immediately, after tomorrow. But as I am still buying lenses (3 more in the mail) and finding bugs to shoot, it will always be 'after tomorrow'.

Laurie: ISO 100, my background grey sheet is not evenly grey (a spray paint jobie); the lens picks up the subtle differences and (I believe) ZS tends to emphasize them; I'm also rather heavy handed on sharpening.
Yours is most likely a Cluster Fly (Pollenia sp.), very common overwintering fly in Europe (and NA). Cluster flies belong in the Blow Fly family (Family: Calliphoridae).
Thus all Pollenia spp. are Blow Flies but not all Blow Flies are Pollenia

Paul: with that serial # your lens is listed as "multicoated". You can't beat the price.

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:11 pm

NikonUser wrote:my background grey sheet is not evenly grey (a spray paint jobie); the lens picks up the subtle differences and (I believe) ZS tends to emphasize them; I'm also rather heavy handed on sharpening.

I can't think of any reason why either ZS method would emphasize uneven background. PMax will definitely emphasize pixel noise, however, by picking out the very worst that appears in any frame. I think what we're is seeing here is pixel noise, further emphasized by heavy sharpening.

--Rik

NikonUser · Post by **NikonUser** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:49 pm

Just ran a test, same fly, with an Ai version of the 28/3.5 made after Jan 1977, Ser# 1783410

LENS IMAGE HERE

an equally sharp lens

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 1:24 pm

The retrofocus Nik 28mm which is supposed to be good reversed is the late 8 element manual focus F2.8. You can tell it at a glance because it focuses down to 0.2m, rather than the 0.3m the lesser ones do.
It's a very good lens the rght way round eg for architecture, but I've never flipped it. One day I'll compare it with the other (6?) 28s I have, somewhere.

It's hard to gauge lenses from single pics, perhaps one we could standardize on for comparisons is the Schneider 28mm f4 enlarging lens, which is extraordinarily good value. I imagine quite a number of us have one. They pass through moderately often a under $50.

The other worth a special mention, now I have one winging its way to me to break my mirror with is the Olympus which Charles brought to our attention.