Another new (old) Nikon lens

I found a nifty old Nikon lens for $100 which is really impressive.
Nikon Series E 75-150mm f/3.5

Super bokeh, fairly fast fixed aperture zoom, withstands addition of a
closeup lens and even a reversed lens for macro work, presumably even
better with an extension tube. Lightweight & compact. Sharp. Nice
contrast. Stops down to f/32. It is long and skinny: funny looking on my
bulky D200 but pretty small considering the focal length and speed.

Disadvantages: push-pull zoom is extra slippery, front element rotates
when focusing, very slight extension also (none when zooming), only
meters on a D200 or above and exif data will not show the extent of zoom
(focal length).

I compared it side by side with my 105/2.8 VR macro with first a +2
diopter closeup lens, then a reversed 45mm f/2.8, both at closest focus
compared to the 105 on stacked teleconverters and the closeup lens at
about 5x life size, closest focus:
http://edgehill.net/Misc/photography/9-4-07-lens-test
....and some flower closeups with the closeup lens:
http://edgehill.net/California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/edgehill-garden/Nursery/plants/9-4-07
....and some evening street shooting, trying my hardest to break the
bokeh (without luck):
http://edgehill.net/California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/gritty/9-4-07-night/pg1pc4

As with the old 135mm f/2 I got recently, there is dust inside which
shows in the most extreme OOF shots:
http://edgehill.net/California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/gritty/9-4-07-night/full-set/pg3pc12
I suppose there must be some place that will open & clean these old
lenses? the dust doesn't show in normal shooting.


--
Paul Furman Photography
http://edgehill.net
Bay Natives Nursery
http://www.baynatives.com

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
t...
I found a nifty old Nikon lens for $100 which is really impressive. Nikon
Series E 75-150mm f/3.5

Super bokeh, fairly fast fixed aperture zoom, withstands addition of a
closeup lens and even a reversed lens for macro work, presumably even
better with an extension tube. Lightweight & compact. Sharp. Nice
contrast. Stops down to f/32. It is long and skinny: funny looking on my
bulky D200 but pretty small considering the focal length and speed.

Disadvantages: push-pull zoom is extra slippery, front element rotates
when focusing, very slight extension also (none when zooming), only meters
on a D200 or above and exif data will not show the extent of zoom (focal
length).

I compared it side by side with my 105/2.8 VR macro with first a +2
diopter closeup lens, then a reversed 45mm f/2.8, both at closest focus
compared to the 105 on stacked teleconverters and the closeup lens at
about 5x life size, closest focus:
http://edgehill.net/Misc/photography/9-4-07-lens-test
...and some flower closeups with the closeup lens:
http://edgehill.net/California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/edgehill-garden/Nursery/plants/9-4-07
...and some evening street shooting, trying my hardest to break the bokeh
(without luck):
http://edgehill.net/California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/gritty/9-4-07-night/pg1pc4

As with the old 135mm f/2 I got recently, there is dust inside which shows
in the most extreme OOF shots:
http://edgehill.net/California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/gritty/9-4-07-night/full-set/pg3pc12
I suppose there must be some place that will open & clean these old
lenses? the dust doesn't show in normal shooting.

I've got two of these.....On one, the zoom slips if the lens isn't
horizontal, but that's OK.....It is a great portrait lens, and I almost
always use it horizontal....This lens was used heavily by New York fashion
photographers about 30 years ago, and was known for it's great portrait
characteristics.....It is an "E" type lens, which was Nikon's cheaper line,
and the pro's wanted Nikon to come out with a professional version, but they
never did. Today, at a price of less than $100, (when you can find them at
all) it is one of the great buys in photography......

"Paul Furman" wrote:

I suppose there must be some place that will open & clean these old
lenses? the dust doesn't show in normal shooting.

I had mine cleaned and tightened at Sanford Camera in Arlington,
MA. The cost was around $85. http://www.sanfordcamerarepair.com/

The other "gotcha" of this lens is trying to find the "correct"
HN-21 lens hood. It took me several months to locate one.

--
Michael Benveniste --
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.

On Sep 5, 6:21 pm, Paul Furman wrote:
I found a nifty old Nikon lens for $100 which is really impressive.
Nikon Series E 75-150mm f/3.5

Super bokeh, fairly fast fixed aperture zoom, withstands addition of a
closeup lens and even a reversed lens for macro work, presumably even
better with an extension tube. Lightweight & compact. Sharp. Nice
contrast. Stops down to f/32. It is long and skinny: funny looking on my
bulky D200 but pretty small considering the focal length and speed.

Disadvantages: push-pull zoom is extra slippery, front element rotates
when focusing, very slight extension also (none when zooming), only
meters on a D200 or above and exif data will not show the extent of zoom
(focal length).

I compared it side by side with my 105/2.8 VR macro with first a +2
diopter closeup lens, then a reversed 45mm f/2.8, both at closest focus
compared to the 105 on stacked teleconverters and the closeup lens at
about 5x life size, closest focus:http://edgehill.net/Misc/photography/9-4-07-lens-test
...and some flower closeups with the closeup lens:
http://edgehill.net/California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/edgehill-garden...
...and some evening street shooting, trying my hardest to break the
bokeh (without luck):
http://edgehill.net/California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/gritty/9-4-07-n...

As with the old 135mm f/2 I got recently, there is dust inside which
shows in the most extreme OOF shots:
http://edgehill.net/California/Bay-Area/San-Francisco/gritty/9-4-07-n...
I suppose there must be some place that will open & clean these old
lenses? the dust doesn't show in normal shooting.

--
Paul Furman Photographyhttp://edgehill.net
Bay Natives Nurseryhttp://www.baynatives.com

Paul I just recently had my lens contact points replaced, the lens
dissasembled and all elements cleaned & focus mechanism lubed by a
local Nikon Authorized repair center near Chicago. IT WAS NOT CHEAP!
They work on Nikon products from throughout the US. Would not trust
anyone else to do that on my 400 2.8.I can get the address/phone # if
you are interested. I just drive there but don't have a business
card. Could get it for you, just let me know.

Paul Furman wrote:
I found a nifty old Nikon lens for $100 which is really
impressive. Nikon Series E 75-150mm f/3.5

It's a rather well known "cult" lens! Widely reputed to
have bokeh that is as good as it gets. I'm surprised at
the $100 price tag though, as they were commonly going
for significantly less than that not all that long ago.

Disadvantages: push-pull zoom is extra slippery, front

The "E" series lenses were supposed to be inexpensive,
and only designs that could be manufactured at low
prices were considered. The 75-150mm zoom was actually
so good that it was an embarrassment, once the high
optical quality became well known. However, it _was_ a
low cost lense... but the single place where it showed
was that there is no adjustment for the tension on the
push-pull zoom. It is a very simple friction fit with a
small rubber backed felt bushing, and when the felt part
is compressed for enough time it stays compressed, and
the zoom then slips very easily.

There are at least three ways to correct it. The
easiest, and probably best for most people is to put a
little strip (or two) of black tape on the outside of
the inner tube, to give the felt something to rub on.
Electrical tape will work, but in a really stubborn case
some fabric tape, which isn't as smooth, is perhaps
better.

The second way is to dismantle the front section, remove
the felt strip, put rubber contact cement into the groove,
replace the felt strip, and then re-assemble the lense.
It works very well.

The third method is to find a repair facility that will
fix it. I would want some sort of warranty, given that
the stories I've heard suggest they don't always find
ways to actually fix it (e.g., replacing the felt with a
new strip of felt is a poor solution).

element rotates when focusing, very slight extension
also (none when zooming), only meters on a D200 or above
and exif data will not show the extent of zoom (focal
length).

I compared it side by side with my 105/2.8 VR macro with
first a +2 diopter closeup lens, then a reversed 45mm
f/2.8, both at closest focus compared to the 105 on
stacked teleconverters and the closeup lens at about 5x
life size, closest focus:

There are rumors, but no confirmation as far as I know,
that the lense or the design may actually have been
built by Kiron. Whatever, there are other MF lenses
that are not as good, but Kiron did make a 75-150mm that
is as good.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

"Paul Furman" wrote in message t...

I found a nifty old Nikon lens for $100 which is really impressive. Nikon Series E 75-150mm f/3.5

Ah, you have found one of the all time gems in lenses - it is
just plain GOOD, while also being cheap! ;-) It is still good on
a TC14A, and it even isn't too bad on a TC200/201 at wider
stops, unlike most other lenses. The 50-135mm f3.5 Nikkor
isn't quite so good, but it is also fine (and it satisfies some of
your complaints about the 75-150). Also take a look at the
E 100mm f2.8, since this was another cheap "gem" in the
E series of lenses...
--
David Ruether

http://www.donferrario.com/ruether

Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:

I found a nifty old Nikon lens for $100 which is really
impressive. Nikon Series E 75-150mm f/3.5

It's a rather well known "cult" lens! Widely reputed to
have bokeh that is as good as it gets.

I'm really amazed that the bokeh will not go loopy even with added
lenses at extreme 5x macro or my 'christmas light test', car headlights,
reflective metal... too bad it's not a little faster, the situations
where I can show off the OOF are pretty much just closeups, but I do
have use for that doing flower closeups for the nursery web site, where
I often have troubles keeping the background smooth.

I'm surprised at
the $100 price tag though, as they were commonly going
for significantly less than that not all that long ago.

I should have asked for less when I saw the dust inside. KEH has them
from $60 to $210 but I got put off by that approach having to pay
shipping for the round trip and this one I was able to inspect before
paying. They were asking $150. I don't know if it's even possible to get
a 25 year old lens without dust. I just wanted to snatch it up.

Disadvantages: push-pull zoom is extra slippery, front

...There are at least three ways to correct it...

Thanks for the details on that. It's really not important for me to fix
the slipperiness but I would like to get the dust out, unfortunately
that sounds expensive.

PS here's what it looks like on the D200:
http://edgehill.net/Misc/photography...-lenses/pg1pc2
-peculiarly long and narrow.

The photog I bought it from was unloading her whole kit to move to Canon
digital... a little too fast IMO with the new Nikon bodies just released.

On a related note, I was talking to a young video artist who I traded
some old super-8 equiptment to and he said there is a demand for old
Nikkors for use with high end video cameras because the video cams are
not capable of giving shallow DOF. The adapter on the 3CCD camera he was
using was an interesting thing, the lens was a really fat approx 80mm
thread but those things still have small sensors and the inherent deep
DOF... the adapter was a box with a piece of ground glass that the
Nikkor 'projects' onto and the camera focuses at more than 1:1 macro to
capture the image.

We were doing a transfer of my old film movies (trade for my projector)
and one thing that was really obvious is the limited dynamic range of
digital, even with a very fancy high end camera with special settings to
mitigate that, the film had way better shadow and highlight detail. I
can overcome that in post-processing for stills but it's too much work
for thousands of video frames. He was loving the old film projector...
anyways, I'm rambling...

--
Paul Furman Photography
http://edgehill.net
Bay Natives Nursery
http://www.baynatives.com

uw wayne wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:

I found a nifty old Nikon lens for $100 which is really impressive.

As with the old 135mm f/2 I got recently, there is dust inside which
shows in the most extreme OOF shots...
I suppose there must be some place that will open & clean these old
lenses? the dust doesn't show in normal shooting.

Paul I just recently had my lens contact points replaced, the lens
dissasembled and all elements cleaned & focus mechanism lubed by a
local Nikon Authorized repair center near Chicago. IT WAS NOT CHEAP!
They work on Nikon products from throughout the US. Would not trust
anyone else to do that on my 400 2.8.I can get the address/phone # if
you are interested. I just drive there but don't have a business
card. Could get it for you, just let me know.

Thanks, yes I would like to talk to them to at least get an idea what it
would cost to open up & clean the dust. Sounds like not very affordable
but maybe justifiable in this case.

--
Paul Furman Photography
http://edgehill.net
Bay Natives Nursery
http://www.baynatives.com

"Paul Furman" wrote

It's really not important for me to fix the slipperiness but I would like
to get the dust out, unfortunately that sounds expensive.

Taking apart an NAI, AI or AI-S lens for dusting isn't that
difficult - well, most of them aren't that difficult - the
old 300mm/4.5 is a PITA. When I buy a used lens I figure I
will have to take it apart and dust and clean the inner glass
and re-lube the helical and aperture ring. Dust and fog don't
get inside the lens cells so you don't have to take the elements
out.

You don't need a spanner wrench - just loosen the setscrews and
unscrew the sub-assemblies. It is a bit more involved than that,
but that's the gist of it. Be sure to mark how the helicals line
up at the point where they just come apart [which should be the
point where they go back together]. And work over a fluffy white
towel to catch any itty bitty bits that might otherwise roll off
on to the floor.

OTOH, I confess to never taking apart an 'E' lens: if it's
held together by melting the plastic then I would leave it alone.

PS here's what it looks like ... peculiarly long and narrow.

Doesn't look peculiar to me, looks like a perfectly normal civilized
lens. Breaks neither bank nor back.

We were doing a transfer of my old film movies (trade for my projector)
and one thing that was really obvious is the limited dynamic range of
digital, even with a very fancy high end camera with special settings to
mitigate that, the film had way better shadow and highlight detail.

Hmmm, processed transparency film is usually 2.0 OD thereabouts. Digital
video cameras should have no trouble with range.

The problem is contrast. The toe and shoulder of the original film has
compressed the highlights and shadows and when duped to regular film all
detail in the H's and S's is lost. Duping film has very little toe and
shoulder.

A digital camera is set up with an artificial toe and shoulder
because compressing the detail at the ends is better than losing it.

If the camera supplies linear direct-from-the-CCD voltage values in
the RAW file then it should be possible to make excellent digital
dupes from a camera. Just look at how well a scanner makes a dupe
of a color slide...

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:

Paul Furman wrote

...but I would like
to get the dust out, unfortunately that sounds expensive.

Taking apart an NAI, AI or AI-S lens for dusting isn't that
difficult

Maybe I'll try... worst case is send the pile of parts to be reassembled
grin

We were doing a transfer of my old film movies (trade for my projector)
and one thing that was really obvious is the limited dynamic range of
digital, even with a very fancy high end camera with special settings to
mitigate that, the film had way better shadow and highlight detail.

Hmmm, processed transparency film is usually 2.0 OD thereabouts. Digital
video cameras should have no trouble with range.

Maybe the projector setup was making things worse. Some clips were very
high contrast and the loss was major.

The problem is contrast. The toe and shoulder of the original film has
compressed the highlights and shadows and when duped to regular film all
detail in the H's and S's is lost. Duping film has very little toe and
shoulder.

A digital camera is set up with an artificial toe and shoulder
because compressing the detail at the ends is better than losing it.

If the camera supplies linear direct-from-the-CCD voltage values in
the RAW file then it should be possible to make excellent digital
dupes from a camera. Just look at how well a scanner makes a dupe
of a color slide...

It was a really nice pro video camera and he set it to compensate but
still major losses. The model was perhaps this one:
http://www.markertek.com/SearchProdu...m=DCR%2DVX2100

I think video is much worse than still digital.

--
Paul Furman Photography
http://edgehill.net
Bay Natives Nursery
http://www.baynatives.com