Inherant Differences between a Nikkor 50mm pancake and non pancake?

[blazer003]

Just wondering if anyone has any insight on whether there is a difference in quality or any other image aspects between a 50mm F1.4 Nikkor and a 50 mm F1.8 Pancake Nikkor lens if you have them both at the same F Stop. Trying to decide which of these to buy off of E-Bay. Thanks!

 

[Aki_Hartikainen]

Unfortunately no info on Nikon lenses, but I use a 45 mm Rokkor-X f2 pancake. This is one of the few low cost lenses that really is sharp and useful at f2 with plenty of contrast. It's 10% wider than a 50 mm lens. The focus ring only waits for a follow focus to be installed. Might want to give it a try, because they cost almost nothing but are comparable to modern high value lenses.

Now if only I could find similar f2 quality for 35 mm and 28 mm I would be all set, but that might be a lot more difficult.

 

[blazer003]

Thanks for the input. I have several Rokkor lenses. The 50mm F1.4. A pristine, mint 28mm F2.8, and a 50mm F1.7, as well as some Minolta brand, and a Vivitar. I'm all about the MD mount lenses, however I jest can't seem to get the sharpness that I'm looking for. So, actually, the reason I posted the original, is I was thinking that I would try a Nikkor to compare and am debating on which to get. The good news is they won't loose value. I actually picked up a Nikkor 50mm F1.8 this morning off craig's list for $10 because it had a considerable spot of fungus. I took it apart this afternoon and cleaned the elements and now this puppy is pristine. I'm just waiting for my Nikon adapter to get here now.

So now I'll at least be able to compare images from the Rokkor and the pancake Nikkor 50mm. It will be a fun test. I'm trying to get all of my gear ready for a pretty substantial short film we're doing pre production on now, and will be filming in May.

Something I just thought about... are Rokkor and Nikkor at all related/the same company? Just noticed how similar their names are.

Anyway, I'd still love to hear anyone else's input on differences specifically between the pancake and non pancake design of the same lens, if there is one.

 

[Aki_Hartikainen]

The sharpest lenses at full aperture I have and have selected for production are MD 28 f2.8, MD 35 f2.8 and MD 45 f2. The reason I mentioned the MD pancake f2 is because I think it may be the sharpest I've had at f2 so far. It also resists flare quite well. I try to provide some samples real soon.

The general consensus at some photographer tests I've read seemed to indicate that Nikkors from the same era aren't quite as sharp at full aperture, but it will be interesting to hear about your experience. Nikkors and Rokkors are not related, Minolta worked with Leica and several of the MD lens desings were adopted by Leica. At some point in time Nikon had some collaboration with Carl Zeiss.

One thing that comes to mind is the MD adapter, which may have some impact on the sharpness. The register distance might not be quite as accurate as it should. I've had MD adapters that have as much as one millimeter or even more difference in length, quite significant. The other thing is that the lenses are 20 - 30 year old and the newest of the manual lenses seem to have the best sharpness. The last manual MD lenses are from circa 1990, and they had the best coatings and improved desing. Nikon has manufactured their manual lenses quite recently, so they may have improved and quite possibly superior desing and coatings to Rokkors.

The newest manual MD lenses have 49 mm filter thread compared to 55 mm for the older versions. The newer versions indeed seem to have better resistance to flare, so improved coatings and thus recommended over the older versions.

As mentioned it will be interesting to hear about your experience with the Nikkors, because they are almost the only lens brand I have not yet tried. And I hope you will get the answer for your question about Nikkors too.