Nikkor and Canon 50mm 1.4 LTMs

[richfx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I found both these vintage lenses for my MM in extremely clean condition and had both CLA'd (the Canon by Youxin Ye and the Nikkor by Don Goldberg).

The Nikkor is substantially softer wide open. In fact, there's not much of a comparison between both lenses at f/1.4.

My understanding from research was that Nikkors of this vintage were stellar lenses (my Nikkor 35mm 1.8 LTM is an amazing lens on the MM and tack sharp wide open). Is this just the way the Nikkor renders or might my copy have something wrong with it?

[Stealth3kpl]

I believe the Nikkor Millenium 50/1.4 is the one to get.

I think Pico mentioned a while back that he prefers the Nikon 50s to those of Leica.

Pete

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Lenshacker]

I've owned Two Canon 50/1.4's, have twelve Nikkor 5cm F1.4's between Leica mount and S-Mount.

 

I would suspect that something is wrong with your Nikkor. Do a focus check on something like graph paper. The Nikkor is a Sonnar formula lens, has more field-curvature. Normally the Nikkor is optimized for wide-open/close-up work, center sharp. The focus is controlled by a simple shim.

 

My Nikkor was sharper than the Canon in the center, the Canon had better flatness-of-field.

[Lenshacker]

I believe the Nikkor Millenium 50/1.4 is the one to get.

I think Pico mentioned a while back that he prefers the Nikon 50s to those of Leica.

Pete

 

The Millenium Nikkor must be used with a Nikon to M-Mount adapter, was never made in native Leica mount. I have one, it is very good. It is not a Sonnar formula lens, as most of the 1950s Nikkors.

[richfx]

Thanks for the focus test suggestion. It isn't front or back focusing; it's just extremely soft wide open.

[Lenshacker]

Post some shots. The Nikkor has a lot of focus shift, which shows up as a low-contrast image when used wide-open. I end up using the Zeiss 5cm F1.5 Sonnars more than the Nikkor.

[uhoh7]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have both, though my nikkor, 1954 5cm /1.5 uses amedeo adapter.

 

It's not soft wide open.

 

Here on A7r:

Vic by unoh7, on Flickr

 

These lenses are so different, there is no either or. The nikkor is a portrait sonnar, the canon is a more all around lens with totally different rendering.

 

Canon LTM WO on M9:

L1001685 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

at f/4:

L1001696 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

The LTM Nikkors are notorious for being beat up and out of calibration. They were mostly used by pros. For best results I think you are better off with a pristine SC mount adapted to M:

DSC01569-2 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

The jena sonnar is again totally different. No relation real world to the nikkor, though it's the inspiration. Optimized for infinity, while nikkor shoots best at 2 meters.

Edited December 12, 2014 by uhoh7

[uhoh7]

1937 Jena WO on M9

Shy Friend by unoh7, on Flickr

 

f/8:

jena blue by unoh7, on Flickr

no post on last, that's the real contrast on M9. This was the best all around 5cm lens in the world for over 20 years, not for nothing.

 

jena on M9 via amedo adapter:

DSC06958 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

Again LTM copies not likely to be great. Native Contax mount preferred.

Edited December 12, 2014 by uhoh7

[Lenshacker]

My early Leica Mount 5cm F1.4, "Tokyo" wide-open, on the M Monochrom

 

Nikkor 5cm F1.4, early

 

Nikkor 5cm F1.4, early, Leica Mount

 

Nikkor 5cm F1.4, early

Edited December 12, 2014 by Lenshacker

[Lenshacker]

1937 Jena WO on M9

 

....

 

Again LTM copies not likely to be great. Native Contax mount preferred.

 

I cheat.

 

1934 5cm F1.5 CZJ Sonnar, now Leica Mount. Wide-open on the M9,

 

Marine Museum, Quantico

 

 

1936 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, now Leica Mount, Wide-open on the M Monochrom.

 

 

L1003963 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

 

Both are uncoated. The out of focus areas of the Zeiss lenses are smoother than the Nikkor. The Nikkor tames down at F2. My two "best" F1.5 Sonnars, a 1943 5cm F1.5 Sonnar "T" and a 1950 Jupiter-3 that was made in April 1945. Both required a lot of work to bring the elements back into alignment.

 

jupiter3_1950 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

Edited December 12, 2014 by Lenshacker

[uhoh7]

I cheat.

 

1934 5cm F1.5 CZJ Sonnar, now Leica Mount. Wide-open on the M9,

 

Marine Museum, Quantico

 

 

1936 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, now Leica Mount, Wide-open on the M Monochrom.

 

 

L1003963 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

 

Both are uncoated. The out of focus areas of the Zeiss lenses are smoother than the Nikkor. The Nikkor tames down at F2. My two "best" F1.5 Sonnars, a 1943 5cm F1.5 Sonnar "T" and a 1950 Jupiter-3 that was made in April 1945. Both required a lot of work to bring the elements back into alignment.

 

jupiter3_1950 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

 

LOL yes I love your hybrids, but the results are hard earned. Whipping out a simple amedeo adapter feels more like cheating LOL

[richfx]

Post some shots. The Nikkor has a lot of focus shift, which shows up as a low-contrast image when used wide-open. I end up using the Zeiss 5cm F1.5 Sonnars more than the Nikkor.

 

Here are wide open shots with my Nikkor 50mm 1.4 LTM and Canon 50mm 1.4 LTM, respectively. Crops follow each photo. Focus is on the aperture ring numbers. The Nikkor is fuzzy (some may say it glows), for lack of a better word, and the Canon is quite bit sharper, at least to me (in addition to being noticeably contrastier).

 

Is this the way both lenses are supposed to render?

Rich

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Lenshacker]

The shots with the Nikkor- show a lot of flare. Shining a light through the back of the lens, is there any haze on the inner surfaces or fine scratches on the surfaces?

 

My Nikkors do much better than this; I have seen Nikkors do this due to cleaning marks, and other lenses do this because of haze.

 

I chose this shot as an example, note back-lit leaves against the tree, the edges are well defined. This lens is the earlier design, around 1953 (or so) the optics changes slightly.

 

Nikkor 5cm F1.4, early

Edited December 14, 2014 by Lenshacker

[Lenshacker]

Later Black 5cm F1.4 Nikkor-S, wide-open on the M8. This version was current with the Nikon SP, the diameter of the optics and fixture was increased "about" the same time that Nikon moved to the 24x36 format.

 

Nikkor 5cm F1.4 on the Leica M8

 

Also chosen for the lighting.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Lenshacker

[uhoh7]

wow superb, and really shows off the M8 as well

 

here my 1954 5cm f/1.4, the plain Jane:

 

L1022622 by unoh7, M9

 

It can be quite glowy and I find it very particular as to the circumstances in which it decides to shine

 

But the lens can deliver like no other. Here an early shot with my Nex-5.

DSC01631-1 by unoh7, on Flickr

[uhoh7]

The Canon is just a very nice all around lens:

L1001716 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

the M9 seems to like it quite a bit.

 

L1001683 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

For daily use I would prefer the canon.

[richfx]

The shots with the Nikkor- show a lot of flare. Shining a light through the back of the lens, is there any haze on the inner surfaces or fine scratches on the surfaces?

 

My Nikkors do much better than this; I have seen Nikkors do this due to cleaning marks, and other lenses do this because of haze.

 

I chose this shot as an example, note back-lit leaves against the tree, the edges are well defined. This lens is the earlier design, around 1953 (or so) the optics changes slightly.

 

Nikkor 5cm F1.4, early

 

No haze or scratches on the rear or other elements. It's completely clean. The mystery continues.

[Lenshacker]

Try a picture of something flat with structure- brick wall or fence slats. Look to see if any of the corners are more out of focus than others. If the front element or inner triplet is misaligned, you might get increased flare. I've seen some strange aberrations from lenses before, there is usually a reason why some are worse than others. I've seen some that were misassembled at time of manufacture, NEVER worked right until reconstructed.

[rscheffler]

My understanding is Youxin Ye does not have a collimator to ensure lenses are optimally reassembled. It would make me a bit skeptical about sending lenses for CLA. But then Brian, you're doing a lot of stuff to lenses, do you think this a collimator is a necessity?

 

BTW, I have both the Nikkor 5cm/1.4 LTM and the Canon (I guess the second version). They're certainly different and enjoy each one very much. I recently did some infinity test shots with a bunch of lenses on the a7S and M240, including the Canon. I wouldn't classify it as tack sharp wide open. It has SA glow and needs f/2 to get the center nice and snappy, while stopping down continues to improve the image towards the edges.

 

I also tested the CV50/1.5 LTM and while it's sharper/higher contrast centrally - probably at least a stop ahead of the Canon, towards the edges it's not that much different/better.

 

As Charlie said, the Canon is a really good all-round lens and tough to beat for the price if looking for a cheap, fast RF compatible 50.

 

BTW, my test is here, with high-rez downloads.

Edited December 15, 2014 by rscheffler

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Lenshacker]

I use my M Monochrom to set shims, and at best can reseat glass when the corners show a smear. J-3's and Zeiss Sonnars- the construction lends itself to these methods working. I actually own a 1950s Nikon Collimator, but it is a museum piece.

 

I also have the 50/1.5 Nokton in LTM: the front doublet came loose in it, the inner retaining ring was not tightened all the way down. The group finally fell out of position, and focus was off and image smeared. Turns out that if you use standard flat tips to tighten the ring, the tips hit a ridge and someone thought it was tight. I ended up using my modified needle nosed pliers for the final turn, all is good now. The name "lenshacker"- I chose for a good reason!

 

If the lens fails the corner tests, I would send it to DAG.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Lenshacker