Nikkor AIS - other vintage lenses vs. Rokinon?

[nickbeef]

While I shoot most of my commercial and corporate work on several Canon L series lenses because they are quick and easy, I have a set of vintage Nikkor AI-S primes that I use for more narrative and creative work (35 f/1.4, 50 f/1.4, and 85 f/2.0).

For the most part, I like them. I prefer to achieve a more "vintage" look over "super sharp and clinical". However, there are a few things that I don't like about them.

1) they can be too short. I can't put a large filter on the front at the same time as a follow focus, as they bump into each other. A longer lense wouldn't have this problem, although being light weight can be nice sometimes.
2) the 35mm blooms so much wide open, it's basically unusable. Although I have used this as a quick "beauty filter" for a glowing ethereal look. Not sure if this is common for all 35 f/1.4 or just mine is defective.
3) some of the wider focal length lenses aren't as fast as some other modern cheap options.


I'm currently looking to add both a wider (probably 20mm) and a longer (probably 135mm) lens to my set. So basically, I have two questions: First what other possible vintage lens options could or should I be looking at? Ideally they would be in a similar price range, but I've had them for long enough that I wouldn't mind "upgrading" if I felt it was worth it. Don't want to go over $1000 per lens, and $500 range would keep me happy.

Or, should I just suck it up and buy the modern Rokinon Cine lenses that are so popular. They are bigger, faster at wide focal lengths, and as far as I know, probably don't have the same flaws that some of the older lenses have (like my 35mm blooming wide open). They are also in the same price range.

 

[morgan_moore]

Remember nikons focus 'the wrong way' so mixing them with other lenses is generally a head-f_ck.. so look to lose them all or keep nikon

some of the wider focal length lenses aren't as fast as some other modern cheap options.

Nikkors cover full frame so if you have image circle space for a speed booster .. so a 20 2.8 becomes the same as a 15/2 or suchlike.. not many affordable lenses give you that FOV/Speed

If you bought into the idiot EF mount system (either by buying a Canon or a BMC in the wrong mount) that has no space for a speedbooster then you are a bit stuffed for fast wides from the vintage pit which is all designed for full frame, in that case a rokinon 16 or tonka 11-16 will probably come on your radar

 

[Greg_E]

Canon L series suggests a Canon camera (or native canon mount)... Kind of leaves you on the long side of things. You can get FD lenses and change the mount to EF, or you can buy a couple more AI-S lenses to supplement what you have. I'd either replace the 35mm or have it serviced, it probably shouldn't bloom worse than the other lenses which suggests it may need to be cleaned inside.

http://fdtoef.com/

I have most of my FD lenses converted with the mounts from the above site. Need to fix the 35mm and get a mount for my 200f2.8

 

[QuickHitRecord]

I have a similar set that I put together quite a few years ago, before the original Cine Rokinons:

Nikkor AIS 18mm f/3.5
Nikkor AIS 28mm f/2.8
Nikkor AIS 50mm f/1.8
Nikkor AIS 85mm f/2

Sometimes I also think about switching or upgrading, but I've never gone through with it because I feel like the images from these lenses have some warmth, soul, and interest that the Rokinons lack. Also, they match better than one might think. Optically, I am very happy with them. I ultimately went with the 28mm over either of the 35mm lenses because it was so well-regarded, and I have no complaints (maybe worth an upgrade?). Also, if you're looking for something even wider, I recommend the hard-to-find 18mm f/3.5 over the 20mm f/2.8 (there's too much distortion at the center of the image from the images I've seen). The 18mm is a champ here.

Mechanically, there are some challenges, as you've mentioned. Mine have all been declicked and geared, and I've added extension tubes/step up rings to address the problem of bumping up against filters (stacking as many as possible before they start to vignette on a full frame camera). They're still not great with matteboxes, so I use 82mm circular NDs with Xume adapters, and a little flag on an articulating arm mounted on my camera to make them workable. I've actually come to prefer this approach. Also, I use an Edelkrone follow focus that has a reversible gear so that I can pull focus in the right direction. If I didn't do this, I'm not sure how much I would use them.

I think the reason that I continue to hang onto them is that many other shooters haven't; they've all gone to Rokinons. I think that they give my footage a little something extra.

 

[puredrifting]

I have several Nikon Ai and Ais lenses, they used to be dirt cheap before the DSLR craze snapped up a lot of them. Here's what I can say about using them with a modern digital cinema camera like the C100/300/300 MKII. They have a different look than the EOS lenses or the Rokinons. Kind of a "thinner" image to my eye. Very sharp but the color and contrast are different than Canon. I like them for interviews and interiors. I really dislike them for exteriors, at least the ones I have. The flares and chromatic aberrations are too much, they seem to wash out in color and contrast when shooting out in bright sun. I have used my hand as a shade and a french flag to try to mitigate this, I probably should have hunted down a few lens hoods but overall, I am much happier with my Canon lenses when shooting exteriors. They have better contrast and richer color. My Nikons are from the 1970s, lens coatings have come a long way in forty years.

As far as using them for something artsy versus "normal" work shooting, the Nikons are good. They are beautifully built. I don't find the reverse focus focus and mount direction to be such a big deal as others, I just use them and they work. If you hunt, you can still find them relatively inexpensive. As far as others to explore, the cheap Russian stuff can be fun if you can find them. Older Minoltas or Olympus lenses can look great. Even Pentax older lenses can give a unique look. All of these are inexpensive, you just have to hunt them down and find the right adapter for the EF mount. As QuickHitRecord states, these days, with most shooters using the same gear, it all comes down to lighting, movement, composition, but having some lenses that resolve the image differently can make your work stand out, if you understand how to best exploit those differences. Heck, people have been adopting old view camera lenses and enlarger lenses that were made 100 years ago with interesting results. Poetically, we are all painters, right? The lenses are just different brushes, they can make a difference in the final painting, but it's your eye and hand that shape it into something moving.

 

[Greg_E]

I have a set of old FSU (Former Soviet Union) lenses sitting here that I don't use, but they are M39 thread so they won't work one anything but short flange mirrorless cameras.