Nikkor Lens Set Recommendations

R

robotsound

Well-known member
I recently put together a set of Nikkor manual focus prime lenses to use for filmmaking. I did a fair amount of research on this, and wanted to share what I had learned.

If you are looking to get into Nikkor glass and have a Canon DSLR, I encourage you to do your own research, but this is a great starting point for your research.

I have a Canon T2i, so I got three lenses that would be good focal lengths for wide, medium, and telephoto shots on an APS-C or Super35mm sized sensor. If you have a different camera like a GH2 or something, you may want slightly different focal lengths. Beware that not all lenses are created equal though. I've found that Ken Rockwell is pretty trustworthy when it comes to his reviews.

These are the lenses that I ended up getting:

nikkor-primes.jpg

Nikkor AI-s 28mm f/2.8
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28f28ais.htm

Nikkor AI 50mm f/1.8
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50f18ai.htm

Nikkor AI-s 85mm f/2
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/85f2ais.htm

Everyone's needs will be a bit different, but these lenses hit the sweet spot for my needs. I was aiming for maximum image quality and reasonable low light performance, on a budget. There are faster Nikkor primes than this, but one thing I have learned is that although the faster lenses cost more, they were optimized for wide apertures at the expense of sharpness, flare resistance, barrel distortion, etc. Thus, these lenses are the sharpest and most flare resistant of their immediate peers. They also cost less. I can get at least f/2.8 throughout the whole range, and at least f/2 at medium and telephoto distances.

These (and other brands of manual focus primes) really are universal lenses. They have absolutely no electronic components, it's just glass and metal. With the right adapters, they will work on a video camera 35mm adapter, Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Sony, RED, Arri, or just about any other kind of camera you could think of.

Some people say that vintage lenses are fuzzy, but these are sharp!

They were designed for manual focus, so the focus ring travels between about 170 and 270 degrees, depending on the lens.

I got Fotodiox Nikon F to Canon EOS mount adapters and Canon back lens caps and they work great.

They all take 52mm filter threads. Since I already had a set of 58mm filters, I simply bought a Fotodiox 52mm to 58mm step up ring for each lens, and a Nikon 58mm lens cap to put on the front of each one.

I'm sure in a couple years or so I'll have a different camera. Maybe it will be another Canon, maybe it will be something else. However, as long as I stick with roughly the same sensor size (or buy one more prime in a different direction, like a 20mm or a 105mm), I will be able to keep using these lenses on practically any camera the future has in store.

If anyone has any questions, I'll do my best to answer them.
 
I have those same lenses except my 50mm is the f/1.4 I also use them on my 550D and Sony EX3 coupled with the Redrock M3, it's a great prime set.
 
28mm is wide on full format bodies, but in my opinion, not wide enough for APS-C sensor.

some alternatives you guys might want to check out:

105mm AI-s Micro
85mm AI
20mm AI-s
50mm AF-d (closer minimum focus) - I also have the AI-s version and more often then it should, I run into this problem.
55mm AI , AI-s Micro - sharp, but 105mm is a more usable focal leanth overall

Keep in mind that the AF-D's are just as good as the AI-s in terms of optics (and arguably build quality) and have updated coatings for better flare/refraction control.

Also, get those filters off the lenses unless your using them in really shady situations - they cause extra, and usually ugly refraction and flares. I also remove the aperture prong since it can be damaged (or cause damage) - keep it in a safe place.
 
Last edited:
I am setting up my first DSLR kit as well and my choices are almost identical. However, instead of the 28mm I decided to get a 20mm f/2.8 lens to have a true wide lens.
 
I just sold all my Canon FD's for Nikkors:

Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8D

Nikon Series-E AI 28mm f2.8

Nikkor Non-AI 105mm f2.5

Nikkor Non-AI 50mm 1.4 (already owned this one)


I am in love with these. They make a great set. I'm happy until I can afford a good super-wide: a 20mm or wider would be ideal, and I've been keeping my eyes open.
 
Efexone said:
28mm is wide on full format bodies, but in my opinion, not wide enough for APS-C sensor.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I hate suuuuper wide FOV's on a full frame camera, but something like 24mm or it's equivalent would be nice. I have a T2i and EOS lenses, but I'm slowly making the switch over to Nikons so that I can use them on the FS100 when it comes out. The Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 L series is a fantastic lens for the APS-C sized sensors, plenty wide at the 16mm end (equivalent FOV to a 25mm on APS-C). Does Nikon have something equivalent? I already have Nikkor 35mm and 50mm lenses, so I'm pretty much covered in the normal and short tele ranges, but going wider is a little problematic without spending lots of cash.
 
I have a similar set, also for a T2i. I have a 20mm f2.8 pre-AI, a 24mm f2.8 pre-AI, a 35mm f2.8 pre-AI, a 50mm f1.4 pre-AI, and a 100mm f2.8 E series lens. I love them and they are all amazing lenses. The 20mm is pretty wide on the APS-C sensor and I am very pleased with the angle of view. It was the most expensive of the lenses I have bought and it looks like the price is not going to be going down anytime soon. I first got the 24mm so I passed on the 28mm and went with the 35mm as a "Normal" lens. I really like the 35mm angle of view on this size sensor and find that I am using it more and more. Sooner or latter I may try to pick up a faster 35mm. I think that there is a f1.8 or f1.4 Nikkor available. I also want to pick up an 85mm f1.8 pre-AI. The manual Nikkors are great lenses and you have a good set there. Like you said, everyone would need to set their own requirements. I started picking up the pre-AI lenses because they are less expensive (because they are older) and I am glade that I did. I really like them. Some folks say that because they do not have the same lens coatings as the new glass that lens flare is unacceptable on them. I have found that this is not the case. I posted a test with the 24mm f2.8 pre-AI lens on Vimeo, shooting into headlights at dusk, and you can see for yourself that lens flare is not an issue (Link below). I think that it is very smart to pick up Nikon manual primes now. First off, being designed for full frame 35mm still film, they will cover just about any large sensor camera we are likely to run across for a while, second, the Nikon F-mount is the most popular lens format ever produced and is adaptable to most lens mount systems available. Nikon manual primes rock!

http://vimeo.com/14047259
 
hendosan said:
Totally agree. I hate suuuuper wide FOV's on a full frame camera, but something like 24mm or it's equivalent would be nice. I have a T2i and EOS lenses, but I'm slowly making the switch over to Nikons so that I can use them on the FS100 when it comes out. The Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 L series is a fantastic lens for the APS-C sized sensors, plenty wide at the 16mm end (equivalent FOV to a 25mm on APS-C). Does Nikon have something equivalent? I already have Nikkor 35mm and 50mm lenses, so I'm pretty much covered in the normal and short tele ranges, but going wider is a little problematic without spending lots of cash.
Click to expand...

There is a Nikon 17mm - 35mm f2.8 zoom available used that offers manual/auto focus and manual aperture control. I am also looking at getting the FS100 and I want to get this Nikon zoom as the run and gun/event lens. Be aware though, even used, it is expensive, relatively. Be prepared to spend around $1000.00 to pick one up. The Nikkor 20mm f2.8 manual lens will run you $300-$500. I picked one up for $375.00 and it looks like I was pretty lucky to get one at that price. The 20mm is a pretty amazing lens. The angle of view on it is wide, but does not get into that exaggerated fish eye world that going wider may get you. I may look to get, or on occasion rent, a wider lens, but to be honest, the 20mm is plenty wide for my aesthetics on an ASP-C or equivalent sized sensor. That why I am excited about the FS100. With its S35mm sensor size and native 800 ISO sensor my choice of getting Nikkor manual primes, that are mostly at f2.8 and purchased for a very low end HD-DSLR, means that when I get the FS100 I will hit the ground running with a pretty bad ass set of lenses! Can I get an, "Amen"!!!
 
Be careful about Ken Rockwell's site. For example, based on that 50 1.8 write-up I'm fairly sure he hasn't actually used one (which is the case with about half of his write-ups).
 
I don't plan on keeping those UV filters on there all of the time. I have definitely noticed that they can cause artifacts in some cases. For reasons I'm not entirely clear on, the UV filters on the Nikkor lenses show more artifacts than they do on my Canon lenses. Maybe it's a difference in the lens coatings.

Several people have said that they don't think 28mm is wide enough. I think this may fall into the realm of personal preference. That 20mm Nikkor f/2.8 sure does look nice. Personally I've found that anything wider than about 24mm is, for me, almost like a "special effect" due to the perspective such a wide lens creates. Sometimes that's awesome though! I do have some other Canon lenses already that I can use on the super wide and telephoto ends, but I wanted to have a core set of primes for "normal" shots. Since we're not all making the same movies in the same style, I wouldn't expect everyone to come to the same conclusions here.

Also, regarding the AF-D lenses, I think you are mostly correct. The one exception might be the 28mm f/2.8 AI-s lens, as I understand the 28mm f/2.8 lenses before and after it had different optical designs. I'm sure they're all pretty good though, frankly.

I can't say for sure whether Ken Rockwell used that 50mm lens or not. It seems to me from reading it that he just doesn't like 50mm lenses that much, based on his personal preferences that have absolutely nothing to do with filmmaking. So far I feel it's been a pretty good source of information, especially considering these lenses are probably almost 30 years old.
 
28mm is pretty good (I prefer more like 24, but it's close enough), but on a cropped sensor you're getting closer to the normal range as opposed to wide. I think that's why people will always clamor for super wide glass, unless they are shooting on a full frame camera.
 
I also have a Canon 18-55mm IS kit lens, a Canon 17-40mm f/4 L lens, and a Canon 70-200mm f/4 L lens, for the rare occasions that I need to go outside of 28mm, 50mm, and 85mm. Again, everyone's shooting style is different. If I switch to a non-Canon camera but roughly Super 35mm sized camera system that doesn't come with a wide angle lens in the future, I suppose it's possible I might also need to pick up a 20mm Nikkor lens.
 
I have Nikon Nikkor AI-S: 18mm f/3.5, 24mm f/2.0, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.2, and 35-70mm f/3.5 constant, all 'cine-modded'. I used to have the 85mm f/1.4 as well, but sold it to get my GH2; I miss it and will be buying it again, though. IMO, the 35-70mm f/3.5 is an underrated gem with loads of functionality. It's tack sharp and has a macro focusing mode at 70mm. It can be found used for less than $200.
 
for the wide end, I already had a sigma 10-20 1:4 to hold it down. great lens for video and the price has gone down since they launched the newer versions.

24-85 2.8-4 AF-d is an incredible lens and can macro up to 1:2 I believe.
18-70 3.5G AF-s also a great lens, cheap now too.. I had both at one point and thought its optics were superior to the newer 16-85 3.5G - VR makes up for that loss.
 
Last edited:
vcassel said:
IMO, the 35-70mm f/3.5 is an underrated gem with loads of functionality. It's tack sharp and has a macro focusing mode at 70mm. It can be found used for less than $200.
Click to expand...

yes!! I have the same one and it is great!!
does yours hold focus while zooming?

I have the following set:
24/2.8
35/2
50/1.4 (actually a pentax SMC)
85/2
105/2.5
135/2.8
180/2.8

I love them all!!!
 
Actually, I bet it wouldn't be too difficult to mod the 35-70mm to do macro focusing along its entire range of focal lengths...
 
robotsound said:
I don't plan on keeping those UV filters on there all of the time. I have definitely noticed that they can cause artifacts in some cases. For reasons I'm not entirely clear on, the UV filters on the Nikkor lenses show more artifacts than they do on my Canon lenses. Maybe it's a difference in the lens coatings.

Several people have said that they don't think 28mm is wide enough. I think this may fall into the realm of personal preference. That 20mm Nikkor f/2.8 sure does look nice. Personally I've found that anything wider than about 24mm is, for me, almost like a "special effect" due to the perspective such a wide lens creates. Sometimes that's awesome though! I do have some other Canon lenses already that I can use on the super wide and telephoto ends, but I wanted to have a core set of primes for "normal" shots. Since we're not all making the same movies in the same style, I wouldn't expect everyone to come to the same conclusions here.
Click to expand...

Yeah, UV filters can cause flares and ghosting, and can be more acute on cheaper filters.

I do like the 20mm Nikkor and am very glad I was able to pick one up. Like you said though, everybody has their own aesthetic tastes and there are no "Perfect" focal length. As I noted I am really liking the 35mm Nikkor on the ASP-C sensor. It really seems to be my choice, now, as my "Normal" lens. As a long time reader of American Cinematographer, I have noted that a lot of old timers really love the 40mm as their normal lens for motion picture work. The ASP-C is pretty close to the size of the 35mm film cinema frame, so I think that the 35mm lens hits near that focal length "Sweet spot" as the 40mm might. The 50mm is, to me, a tad long, but is very good for portraiture. The 100mm is way long, but also good for portraiture. I really want to get an 85mm to round out my variety on the longer end for portraiture.

I did forget that I also have a 200mm "Q" f4 AI lens which I picked up real cheap ($60.00ish) . It is an interesting lens to have. It is a little softer than the other Nikkors, but really reaches out there. The bokah is pretty sweet and it seems to be lower contrast but with good color. For the price it worth picking up even just as a specialty lens. I can see shooting romantic interlude types of shots with it for sure.

What I find amazing about these lenses, which were all bought off of eBay and manufactured from about 20 to 40 years ago, is that I can cut between them, shot to shot, and they match without any noticeable variation in color, contrast or sharpness. That blows my mind. I guess that is why Nikon has had such a great reputation for lenses for 60 years or so.
 
Last edited:
vcassel said:
Actually, I bet it wouldn't be too difficult to mod the 35-70mm to do macro focusing along its entire range of focal lengths...
Click to expand...

I was thinking about that too.
you should do it and then tell me how to, haha
I would love to be able to focus closer at 35
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top