Category Archives: Hardware

Stuff

The Leica M

Better. With snaps from those bad old film days.

For an index of all Leica-related articles click here.

The Leica M
Kensington Gardens. Leica M3, 50mm DR Summicron, TriX.

Long term users of Leica rangefinder bodies, meaning chaps like me who go back to when the M2 and M3 were the current models and have 30+ years of these under their belt, would make a strong case that the 1950s Leica M2 was the best ever from what was then the house of Ernst Leitz, Wetzlar. The reasons are many. A body screwed, not riveted, together. A rangefinder which did not flare out into the sun. A viewfinder which had but three frame lines and no clutter, all you needed for the ‘around the world’ kit of 35, 50 and 90mm lenses. And bulletproof reliability thanks to German craftsmen untouched by the production line and the need to make quarterly earnings estimates. A workforce which paid tribute to the power of apprenticeship and on-the-job training by some of the best craftsmen in the world. To get a sense of what it took to make that wonderful range-viewfinder, click here.

The Leica M
Leica M2 and a 35mm lens. The ultimate film-era street snapper.

The M4 retained the build quality, if you could cope with the plastic-tipped advance lever, frame selector and delayed action control, but compromised the finder with unnecessary frame clutter for the 135mm lens. This clutter would only grow in future versions. The M5 was a disaster with a cockamamie CdS TTL meter which popped out of the base of the innards and would be crushed if you forgot and retracted your 50mm Elmar into the body. But, worst of all, it didn’t look like an M. It appeared to come more from Tokyo than Wetzlar.

The Leica M
Plain dumb. The Leica M5.

After that things got progressively worse. The M6, which I owned for a few years, had a ghastly, compromised rangefinder, unusable into the sun. The finder was even more cluttered, squeezing in an additional frame for the 75mm lens. It substituted robust LEDs for the M5’s fragile match-needle meter and a silicon cell which had better color response, but the good bits ended there. You could only meter with the camera to the eye, which sort of destroyed the whole Leica stealth concept and the quality was rapidly going downhill with rivets where screws used to be and Portugese workers trying to make like Germans. Not possible. The shutter lost that magic sound and the whole thing was just …. ugh! I dumped mine and returned to my M2 and two M3s.

The Leica M
Victoria’s Secret. Leica M2, 21mm Elmarit, Kodak Gold 100.

The M7 finally added aperture priority automation but little else and quality did not improve while the price skyrocketed. Finder clutter was now maxed out, like in the 0.72x M6 variant, spanning the range from 28mm through 135mm in pairs. It’s successor, the MP, was an attempt to milk ‘retro’ with the original metal film advance lever from the M2/M3 and a unthinking return of the film rewind knob – one of the worst designs ever, small and painful – where every body since the M4 had a fold out crank which worked well. Indeed, I fitted aftermarket cranks to my M2 and two M3s to make the film rewinding process less reminiscent of Torquemada’s ministrations.The M7 and MP were grounds for despair that it was all over for the House of Leitz, and those extolling the virtues of the M7 have likely not used a well tuned M2 or M3. Then, just when everyone thought Leica would go under after several ownership changes, they discovered the digital sensor ten years after the rest of the world. So where do they go for the sensor? Why, Kodak of course. And which do they use? A crippled APS-C abomination which immediately throws out most of what is good and great about the Leica brand. The lens. The magenta distortion was thrown in free, ineffectually corrected by Leica doling out correction filters to those affected. At least they were free. Sort of like Porsche forgetting the steering wheel and offering one at no charge to all affected ….

The Leica M
Leica M8. A dud to match the M5.

Leica (Ernst Leitz had sold out years ago, so no more ‘Leitz’) tried to make amends with the full frame M9, after years of proclaiming it couldn’t be done in an M body, just in time to introduce a camera with an already obsolete sensor from a soon-to-be bankrupt Kodak. (DxO labs, who know about these things just concluded about the M9’s sensor in uncompromising terms: “In fact, with a DxOMark Overall Score of 68, or 69 for the Leica M9, M9-P and ME Type 220, these cameras offer the worst image quality DxOMark have tested on a full frame sensor, with the exception of the 10-year-old Canon EOS 1Ds. The full review is here). The system of marginal miniature correction lenses in front of the sensor is very smart, it has to be admitted, if designed by Rube Goldberg. These correctly direct oblique light rays so that they strike the sensor at a preferred angle. The new M body is now up to $7,000, meaning only three types of buyers can afford it:

  • Banksters and hedgies (these were doctors and lawyers in the ’50s)
  • The insecure with more money than sense (see above)
  • A few great photographers who can make an M sing

The Leica M
Main Street, South Uist, Outer Hebrides, Scotland. M3, 90mm Elmar, TriX.

It’s fair to say that since that M6 of the 1970s, Leica’s rangefinder bodies have sadly trailed their lenses by a considerable margin. And what lenses! You can read about the driving genius behind their optical mastery, Walter Mandler, here. While QC was not what it should be as the company’s meagre capital base dwindled in the 1980s, its latest recapitalization a few years back has seen the company spring back to life. Hedgies are now everywhere, which cannot hurt demand, and their lenses remain optically, if not technologically, the standard against which all others are measured. “As good as a Summicron” is a label every lens manufacturer in the world aspires to. I write ‘not technologically’ because Leica does not make one RF auto-focus optic in M mount (despite pioneering the first AF system, the Correfot, with Honeywell and producing many world class AF lenses for their medium format S2 SLR body) which rules them out for sports snappers. Arguably, no bad thing. How many more images does the world need of ‘athletes’ powered by Bayer, Hoechst and Pfizer, after all?

The Leica M
35mm Asph Summicron. As good as it gets.

So while AF will likely not darken the doors of the Leica M user any time soon, the new Leica M (that’s all, just M, not M10) really shows that they are progressing rapidly to a full EVF mirrorless full frame body. And you really want full frame because fast wides are what the Leica is all about and APS-C chucks out half the goodness and all of the width. Leica has two other Leica M-style bodies on the market. A ‘bargain’ ME which is nothing more than a rebranded M9 with that tired old Kodak sensor at $6,000. And the beyond foolish $8,000 Monochrom for people who like to pay more and not be able to make color pictures. Best of all, the M comes in a silver chrome option which is how Leicas should be. The amateur looks enhance the user’s stealth rating.


Paris Métro. The colors of France. As befits the most beautiful city in the world, the French
take particular care to see that their subway system is well maintained and clean.
Leica M3, 50mm DR Summicron, Kodachrome.

The Leica M adds one feature which has nothing to do with the rangefinder ethos. A movie mode. You are seriously going to make movies with this body when you can get a better, dedicated movie camera for less? I don’t think so. Live view and movies are not consonant with the Leica M ethos. Still, movie mode/live view add little bulk and you do not have to use either. Think of the M as a viewfinder camera also able to take long lenses with the clip on EVF at a pinch. If most of your work is at 90mm or shorter, then you are missing little.

The Leica M
Marion Campbell spinning Harris Tweed yarn, Harris, Scotland. Leica M3, 35mm Summicron, TriX.

And the ability to use the clip-on EVF made for the overpriced $2,000 Leica X2 point-and-shoot is the signal feature added. It’s named the ‘Visoflex EVF2’. The name derives from the mirror box attachments Leica sold back in the film days which made your M into an SLR. Sort of. You had great bulk and weight, poor responsiveness, awful ergonomics for hand-held use, a restricted lens range, no aperture automation and a myriad of adapters and coupling rings. Focussing on the plain groundglass screen which lacked a fresnel lens was iffy at best, with many opting for aftermarket screens you could actually see in less than noon California sun. It never worked anywhere near as well as an SLR, and I made sure I proved that by owning a Visoflex I, a Visoflex II and a Visoflex III. All just awful. There’s Leica fever for you.


St. James’s Park, London. Leica M3, 50mm Elmar, Kodachrome.

The new Visoflex attachment is notable not so much for what it does – lots of MFT bodies and even Leica’s APS-C X2 offer like gadgets – but for what it promises. And that promise is of an integrated, compact EVF built into the next M’s body. No more flaky optical finder frames, no more marginally accurate rangefinder patch (consistently nailing focus with a 50mm atf/1.4 or a 90mm at f/2 is at or beyond the technical limits of the antiquated prism-and-mirror based rangefinder, a trivial process for any modern DSLR), no more clip-on gadgets, but rather an EVF with focus peaking (the sharp bits go red) and center magnification to make MF simple and accurate. The old Visoflex (and it does fit the digital M bodies!) is a comical comparison to the new Visoflex EVF-2 when you look at capability and bulk:

The Leica M
The new Visoflex, with a Leica R lens fitted.

The Leica M
Visoflex 2. Good luck seeing the image with the lens stopped down.

The Visoflex EVF-2 comes in black only, needlessly emblazoned ‘LEICA’ in huge white letters on the front, at $460. You can buy the Olympus VF-2 in black or chrome for $250, get the same 1.4MP definition and flip up capability for waist level use. Leica has confirmed it works. The LCDs in both are made by Epson. Alternatively, the even cheaper Olympus VF-3 at $180, reduced to 920,000 dots but seemingly well regarded, may work as well. I’m not sure. The big wheel is the diopter adjuster.

The Leica M
Olympus VF-3.

The new Visoflex, and the eventually integrated EVF in the next M which is surely coming, offers the ability to use not only every Leica M mount lens ever made with full focus range and accurate framing, but also just about every SLR lens ever made, whether Leica R (we are talking some awfully good lenses here, also damned by Leica’s inept SLRs – yup, I owned a bunch of those, too), Nikkor, Pentax, Canon, etc. as well as almost every screw mount Leica lens ever made. Nirvana for lens buffs! This new Visoflex should offer constant brightness regardless of how much the lens is stopped down (just like a Panasonic with adapted MF lenses), aperture priority exposure automation and, best of all, an optional 5x-10x selectively magnified center patch for critical focusing, a function activated by a discreet front panel switch with a horizontal control wheel on the back changing magnification. How fast the whole thing is has yet to be determined. Panasonic, which lead the way in EVF DSLRs has proved that an EVF can work superbly, as my G1 and G3 Panny bodies testify.

Plus the new M offers a 24mp sensor, CMOS for the first time, which early reviews suggest is a significant step up from the one in the M9, especially at higher ISO settings, the M9’s sensor being bottom decile in that regard. It’s not made by the spin-out Kodak business used for the M8, M9, MM and ME, but rather by a specialty Belgian manufacturer named CMOSIS. Let’s hope they stay in business.

The Leica M
London gent, Green Park. Leica M3, 35mm Summaron, TriX.

There’s a lot to like here, except for the $6,000 + lens price tag. The 35mm lens is the perfect match for the Leica street snapper. Small, fast, light, not too long and not too wide. The rational buyer’s M would likely sport a 35mm f/2 Zeiss optic because it’s rumored to be every bit as good as the $3,000 Summicron at one-third the price. Likewise, Cosina makes a range of M mount lenses which have a great reputation, their 35/2.5 Color Skopar selling for just $410 new. Cosina – the same Cosina which makes Zeiss branded lenses – will sell you a 35/1.4 Nokton for a bargain $630 with a choice of single or multi-coating, which compares nicely with the $5,000 Leica is demanding for its equally fast Summilux. 90% of the performance for 10% of the cost.

The Leica M
Zeiss Biogon. Yes, Leica quality at 70% off, and in silver at that.

The new M owner is also spoiled for used lens choices, with any number of 35mm Summicrons and Summarons available for a fraction of the cost of a new Asph Summicron in any condition desired. Having used early Summicrons and both f/3.5 and f/2.8 Summarons, I can vouch for these optics unreservedly.

Bottom line? Price of entry with an excellent 35mm lens totals under $7,000. Buy a new Summicron and you are close to $10,000, the cost of a good used car. A new Nikon D4 body runs $6,000 for comparison, though most would agree it’s a far tougher beast and hardly comparable in terms of versatility and speed, where it leaves the M in the dust. But’s that’s comparing chalk with cheese. A Leica is not an alternative to a modern DSLR, it’s an adjunct.


Pall Mall, London. Leica M6, 90mm Apo Summicron-M, Kodachrome.

You can download my free book of Leica pictures here, all snapped on my M3 mostly using a 35mm f/2.8 Summaron or, heavens forbid, buy it here for a pittance, which will make me exactly the same sum but will give you something permanent. It’s all black and white because that’s what almost everyone used in the 1970s and, furthermore, I couldn’t afford color in any case. This was in the days of TriX and D76 and Agfa Brovira and smelly chemicals but the results seemed to come out OK, especially once digitized with a Nikon scanner. I was lucky to be able to scan the original negatives some thirty years after they were taken.

No modern Leica can hold a candle to a cheap, modern DSLR at one third the price. A Nikon D600 or Canon 6D is a far more versatile instrument than the essentially single-purpose M. The M is for stealthy street snapping, something the DSLR can do pretty well if pushed. I do fine with a bulky Nikon D3x and despite all the codswallop about it being ‘threatening’ I have found it to be quite unobtrusive in practice. The DSLR can do lots of other things better and faster than any M body. However, until you have used Leica and its natural – if dated – optical viewfinder with a 28mm to 90mm lens and enjoyed its stealthy nature, you have no frame of reference from which to criticize. The price? Give up some other vice and it’s yours in a year. Whether you really want to carry $10,000 on your shoulder in the rougher parts of town is a trickier question.

Of course, should my ship come in, the first thing that happens to my M is that it’s off to the engraver’s to be corrected, and that gauche red dot removed:

The Leica M
Leica M10.

Note that the new M, which really should be named the M10, no longer has the middle window between the viewfinder and rangefinder. The purpose of that was to illuminate the frames in the finder. That is now done electronically and you can even switch the color from white to red – a solution looking for a problem.

The Leica M
Holocaust Museum, Paris. Leica M3, 35mm Summaron, TriX.

Though a self-admitted Leica fan who gets free testers from Leica, Jonathan Slack has a useful review of the new Leica M with comparison notes on the M9, especially informative when it comes to shutter release feel and shutter sound. You can read his piece here.

Alternatives for the stealthy street snapper:

The only other full frame compact snapper currently out there is the Sony RX1. It comes with a fixed 35mm f/2 Zess lens and the mind-numbing price of $3,000, capitalizing on the Leica’s premium pricing. It has yet to be seen if Sony’s AF is up to the task, and the camera would have to be fitted with a proper optical finder at modest additional cost to be useful on the street in fast paced situations. The inclusion of AF rather puts the Leica to shame by comparison.

Far more interesting is the newly announced Fuji X100S, though unfortunately it’s APS-C not FF. Once again the lens is a 35mm FFE (23mm) and f/2. Ideal. Early reviews suggest that Fuji has fixed the frustratingly long list of design bugs which made me pass on the X100. Most importantly there’s a claimed significant increase in AF speed and the innovative integrated hybrid optical/electronic finder is retained. The lens is not interchangeable but the price is very reasonable at $1,300 for a compact point-and-shoot with quality optics and (maybe) newly found responsiveness. If this body had a full frame sensor there would be very little point in spending many times the asking price on any Leica.

The Leica M
Wedding, Parc Monceau, Paris. Leica M3, 35mm Summaron, TriX.

If anyone can come up with a full frame camera with specs to match the X100S I would think it has to be Fuji. They are the most innovative camera maker in the market, they make Hasselblads so they know all about quality optics and large sensors, and they seem to be tapping a rich vein among gear aficionados. I would think that Leica is looking over its shoulder daily hoping that the M-killing Fuji is not about to hit dealers’ shelves. At $2,000 I would buy one sight unseen.

The Leica M
Those Canadians …. Leica M2, 90mm Apo Summicron-M, Kodak Gold 100.

Technical note: The film images illustrating this piece were variously scanned on Nikon Coolscan 2000 and 8000 and Canon Canoscan 4000US film scanners, then minimally processed in Lightroom 4.

Nikkor-H 85mm f/1.8 lens

Maybe the most significant Nikkor ever.


Shown with the period HN-7 screw-in hood.

If ever a lens deserves the appellation ‘famous’, it’s Nikon’s 85mm Nikkor-H f/1.8, first made in 1964. Nikon has made many f/2, f/1.8 and f/1.4 lenses of 85mm focal length since then, and while the current AF-S f/1.4 probably delivers the highest resolution of the lot, few would place the Nikkor-H far behind optically, and only non-users would argue that the current lens is better made. Much as with its contemporaries, the 20/3.5UD, 24/2.8, 28/2, 35/2, 50/1.4, 50/2, 105/2.5 and the 200/4, the construction quality, fit and finish of this lens have not been improved since.

None of the manual focus f/1.8 optics came with the Ai modification which permits mounting on later film cameras and most DSLRs. Nikon made (ugly and no longer available) Ai ‘kits’ which comprise a replacement aperture ring with the wrong surface finish, so if you want an Ai version of this lens you have three choices. Buy one which has already been converted, send it out for machining, or do it yourself. I did it myself and the task is simple. See this piece for details of how to do it yourself.

But ‘famous’? Why yes. Because this is the lens David Hemmings used in the studio scenes in Michelangelo Antonioni’s ‘Blow-Up‘ to photograph Veruschka while she writhed below him. His Nikon F with the Nikkor-H mounted can be seen in the contemporary poster.


Fame.

I have long lusted after this optic but good ones go for high prices and cheap ones are usually beaten up, the anodizing on the scalloped metal focus barrel worn away and ugly. Well, I finally snapped one up in near mint condition for $210 delivered, and when it arrived the other day I immediately set to machining the aperture ring to permit mounting of the lens on my D2x and D3x Nikons. I would love to have used it on a Nikon F but no digital version of that classic was ever made, and I no longer use film.

Amazingly, the filter size is the same small 52mm common to most Nikkors of that era and the HN-7 hood screws in. No clip-on nonsense waiting to be knocked off.

Comparison with the AF-D version:

I set to making a quick test using the local back yard utility pole as my test target. My test was against the ‘plastic fantastic’ 85mm f/1.8 AF-D lens, set in the most ghastly plastic mount imaginable, but of outstanding performance. This lens is still available new in the US for $460. How Nikon manage to make a bitingly sharp optic encased in ductile materials and cheese beats me, so I confess that I ran my simple test with some trepidation. Could any lens significantly improve on the AF-D or, for that matter, even match it? My Nikkor-H is positively geriatric, having been made in February, 1969, meaning 44 years ago. It cost me $212.

I should have known better than to worry. Central definition and overall contrast of the old lens easily beat those of the newer one from f/1.8 to f/4, and vignetting is identical, disappearing by f/2.8 in the old, f/3.5 in the new. Edge resolution in the newer lens is superior through f/4 after which they are identical. In a lens of this focal length, the ideal portrait lens on full frame, central resolution is what counts.

The focus throw on this lens is very long – fully half a circle from infinity to 3 feet, making accurate focus on close subjects easy. Depth of field is very limited at wider apertures so a slow focus ring is actually an asset.

Here’s my thrilling test target, what passes as utility service in the SF Bay area, allegedly part of the most powerful nation on earth. The old MF lens is the left hand image – focal length and maximum aperture are not reported by Lightroom (in the parentheses) as I had yet to install a CPU when this was taken:

Even viewed via this blog on the 11″ display of my MacBook Air the difference is obvious at f/2, remaining so at f/1.8, f/2.8 and f/4. The enlargement above is from 5 foot 90dpi equivalent print sizes.


Chipped and ready to go, one of Nikon’s best ever.

The CPU confers a host of benefits, described here and installation on the 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor-H is a simple glue-on job. One key advantage is that you can pass aperture control from the control wheel on the camera’s body to the aperture ring on the lens, sidestepping the non-linearity issue I explain here. Your kit will handle better too, allowing apertures to be changed by supporting the lens properly from below with the left hand. $29 for the CPU, 5 minutes to glue it in place and another 15 minutes to program it, as described here.

Can a lens make a better photographer? When it comes with a heritage like this and when the user revels in the operational feel and the results it yields …. well, you can make your own mind up. Me? I’m going to track down Veruschka’s granddaughter.


Veruschka writhes as Hemmings snaps.

Lens correction profile:

This lens is so well designed that what optical shortcomings there are – very minor vignetting down to f/3.5 – are easily corrected with my lens correction profile in LR or PS, which you can download here, but of all the pre-Ai MF Nikkors this one arguably needs a profile least. I can detect absolutely no barrel or pincushion distortion. Likewise, chromatic aberration (color fringing) is negligible, though the profile corrects what little there is. My profile was made at f/1.8, f/2.8, f/4 and f/5.6, with the last prevailing at apertures smaller than f/4. It works with both FX (Full Frame) and DX (APS-C) sensors. The profile was made on my D3x but will work on files from any Nikon DSLR.

To get a sense of what this lens can do in the studio, click here. The handling and balance on a modern full size Nikon DSLR are about as close to perfection as these things get. If you can live without AF, search one of these out.

Use on Panny MFT bodies:

A wonderful lens on the Panny G bodies with a $25 adapter, delivering 170mm f/1.8. Very shallow depth of field, and you retain aperture priority automation, the EVF never dims as you stop the lens down (think about that!) and you have a state of the art MF focusing aid which makes dead on focus trivially simple. Read more about the immense capability of the Panny MFT bodies with MF lenses here. As you are really cherry picking the center of the image circle produced by the lens, definition at any aperture all the way to the extreme edges is not an issue.


The Hemmimgs lens on the Panny G3.

A 1969 lens on a 2012 body, and fully functional. Pretty cool, huh?

Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX lens

Cheep, cheerful, handy.


Mounted on the D2x with the included lens hood.

This ‘plastic fantastic’ APS-C lens sells new for under $200 with a 5 year Nikon USA warranty. Given Nikon’s repair reputation in the US that probably does not mean much but at the price asked with hood, caps and soft case, there’s a lot to like.

I bought it on a whim for those lazy days when I just can’t be bothered to use manual focus, assuming there was little downside.

Nikon wisely deletes the focus and depth-of-field scales from this optic, both utterly useless on modern AF lenses. It also has that handy feature where you can manually override the focus just by grabbing and turning the focus collar, something which is impossible with the previous AF-D series of optics. The included hood clicks on nicely, using a bayonet fit, and the lens accepts standard 52mm filters like most Nikkors ever made before the AF era.

I like this lens a lot. Focus speed is decent if not stellar but the biggest surprise in store is that it is surprisingly useful on full frame.

When images are loaded into LR or PS, the lens’s EXIF file data will invoke the Adobe profile which ships with their applications. That profile was created on an APS-C body and is very useful, taking out minor vignetting and fairly severe barrel distortion, which really has to be removed when snapping architectural subjects.

But you can do much better. Curious to see whether a profile created on an FF body would bring back the heavily vignetted corners, I created a profile using my D3x and Adobe’s Lens Profile Creator software. Because vignetting varies significantly with aperture, I went all in and made this profile at each of f/1.8, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16 and f/22! 81 chart shots in all …. You can use this profile with both APS-C and FF files. It does a far better job on the latter than the one Adobe ships.

If you put the profile here on a Mac –

Replace ‘Tigger’ with your user name on a Mac.

– LR and PS will automatically choose it in preference to the stock one provided by Adobe.

The stock Adobe profile resides here on a Mac – there is no need to delete it if adding my profile in the location shown above.

The respective Windows locations are:

Windows 7 or Vista: C:\User\(User Name)\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\CameraRaw\LensProfiles\1.0

Windows XP: C:\Documents and Settings\(User Name)\Application Data\Adobe\CameraRaw\LensProfiles\1.0

You can find my enhanced profile here. On FF, extreme edge definition is excellent from f/4 through f/11. There’s a lot more to this self-effacing lens than meets the eye.

Here are before and after images on full frame where the lens really is 35mm focal length – ideal for street snapping, no sensor crop involved.. The first pair at f/1.8, the second at f/11. In each case the right-hand image is after applying my profile:


In the snaps below I used my lens profile with the APS-C sensor in the D2x.


Walking the pup. D2x, f/2.8.


San Mateo Post Office. In its usual schlocky under-capitalized way, this failing
business is letting a landmark heritage building rot into oblivion. D2x, f/2.8.


Bits missing and waiting to rot. D2x, f/2.8.


Inside the St. Matthew station USPO. No corner shading whatsoever using my profile. D2x, f/1.8.


Magnificent period detail. D2x, f/4.

Any Nikon APS-C body – such as the D1 and D2 series, the D70, D90, D100, D200, D300, the D7000 or even later bodies – constrained by a lower quality, slow kit zoom lens would benefit from this inexpensive optic. It has excellent resolution and can continue being used with few excuses once the user upgrades to an FF body, provided you also use my profile, above. Further, the discipline imposed by a fixed focal length lens, dictating proper composition before the button is pressed, can only enhance the snapper’s skill set and improve the results. Finally, it’s nice not to have to remember to limit this lens to APS-C bodies only if you use both APS-C and FF.

Some Nikons – the D3 series and the D4 – offer an optional 5:4 aspect ratio frame (too square for my taste) which crops vertical strips either side of the full frame. This format should have no issues with across the frame resolution using this 35mm lens.

Pixel peeping fallacies

Know what you are looking at.

When I migrated from the 12mp Nikon D700 to the 24mp D3x, I did a bunch of thinking about the justification for more pixels.

If you do not propose increasing your print size or cropping more severely, more pixels will likely not serve you well. I contemplate making both larger prints and cropping more when needed. Thus, the higher pixel count sensor makes sense for my contemplated needs.

When I first uploaded D3x images from the D3x to Lightroom, I naturally previewed images at 1:1 and remember thinking “What’s the big deal? This does not look any better than the files from my D700 at 1:1.”

The problem, of course, is that I was not comparing like with like.

Here’s a simple table to illustrate the issue.

I have compiled data for four common Nikon sensors – the math is brand-independent, it’s just that I know these bodies and have RAW images from all. I enlarged these original images using the 1:1 preview function in LR4 and measured the image width on my 21″ Dell 2209WA (1650 x 1080) display. So in the table above, using the D2x as an example, the 12.2MP sensor delivers an image which, if printed 1:1, would be 47″ wide.

What does Adobe’s Lightroom mean by 1:1? It means that images displayed 1:1 are displayed at 90 pixels/inch – you can confirm this by dividing the ‘Sensor – W’, the pixel count across the width of the sensor, by the ‘Width at 1:1 in inches’ and in each case you will get 90 dots per inch. That’s good for an LCD display or for prints looked at from a reasonable distance. If you want to stick your nose in the print, then you want to limit the pixel density to 240 pixels/inch, which is the same as dividing the above ‘Width at 1:1 in inches’ data by 2.7. So a 240 pixels/inch print from the D800’s sensor, for example, would be 31″ wide (83/2.7). But in practice, you do not need that high a density in huge prints.

As you can see, comparing a D700 image with, say, a D800 image, is not fair if identical 1:1 preview ratios are used. You are comparing a 46″ wide image with one almost twice as large at 83″. To make the sensor comparison fair, you need to preview the D800 image not at 1:1 but at 1:2. That will yield approximately the same reproduced image size, making for an objective comparison of resolution and noise if the same lens and technique are used for both.


Preview options in Lightroom.

Yet, I suspect, many snappers fall afoul of these erroneous 1:1 comparisons concluding:

  • I need better lenses with the newer body
  • My images are blurred, I need to use faster shutter speeds
  • My focus is out, there’s something wrong with the camera

All of the above lead to much time and money wasted in fixing the unfixable. Bad data.

It is indeed quite likely that your new sensor out-resolves the limits of your older lenses at 1:1. It’s also reasonable to expect motion blur to be more visible at the same shutter speeds if you use faulty comparisons. And the chances are it’s your technique not your hardware which accounts for poor focusing, the errors only becoming visible at double your former preview magnifications. But, unless you contemplate making crops to one quarter of the area of your previous sensors or making prints 7 feet wide instead of 4 feet wide, your sensor upgrade is only causing you needless pain.

My first conclusion with the D3x compared to its D700 predecessor was all of the above, until I figured out what I was looking at. Some comparisons are easily drawn. It’s clear for example, that the D700 has lower noise than the D2x for the same image size, hardly surprising as we are comparing a recent FF sensor with an older APS-C (D2x) one. The total pixels and 1:1 print sizes are almost identical. On the other hand, comparing the D700 at 1:1 with the D800 at 1:2, for like print sizes, shows little difference. It’s only when you double preview sizes with the D700 to 2:1 and the D800 to 1:1 that you see the greatly superior resolving power of the D800, as the number of pixels you are looking at in such a comparison is tripled in the case of the newer sensor.

Nikon has not helped the situation. After their affordable high pixel count FF bodies – the D600 and D800 – came to market, they started publishing pieces intimating that only their very costliest and newest lenses were ‘good enough’ to extract the best from the new sensors. The rest of the sheep writing purportedly critical analysis followed right along. It’s called sales and makes little sense. Some of Nikon’s highest resolving power lenses were made ages ago, long before digital sensors existed – any Micro-Nikkor macro lens pretty much qualifies (55, 105 and 200mm) – as do a host of pre-Ai lenses, many over four decades old. If you like the latest and greatest (and costliest) have at it. But don’t believe everything you read from such conflicted sources. Their primary focus is not on your image making capabilities but on your wallet, be it through sales (Nikon) or click-throughs (the whores who parrot this stuff as if it was technically proved fact).

So before you chuck out your old lenses and start buying costly superspeed exotics which allow the use of faster shutter speeds, while contemplating return of the body to Nikon for repair of focusing errors, ask yourself what you are really looking at when you preview those enlarged images on your display.

Practical implications: It’s not like you can avoid buying new gear with lots of megapixels by trying to save money on something with fewer. Everything has lots of pixels today. 12MP is hard to find at the lower limit. But the practical implication of this rapid technological advance is that, for those on a budget, substantial savings can result from buying the previous generation of hardware, comfortable in the knowledge that while 8-12MP may not be a lot, it’s more than enough for 99% of needs. DSLR bodies like the Canon 5D, Canon 5D MkII, Nikon D700, Nikon D2x, Nikon D3 and others no less capable from Pentax and Sony offer tremendous savings just because they have been replaced with something that measures better in a comparison table. Heck, a lightly used 6mp Nikon D1x can be had for under $250 and will offer tremendous capability, outfitted with a $50 mint MF Nikkor, far in excess of the abilities of most. The barrier to entry to good hardware has never been lower. 16″ x 20″ prints? No problem. Why do I say that? The D1x’s sensor is 3,008 pixels wide, so for a 90 pixel/inch print (what Lightroom shows at 1:1 preview) you would get a print sized 33″ x 22″. Unless you stick your nose in it, it will show just fine.


Nikon D1x. Add Nikkor of choice.

Nikkor AI conversions DIY

Updating classic Nikkors.

Why pre-Ai Nikkors?

Few would disagree that the ‘pre-Ai’ Nikkor lenses for the Nikon F and subsequent film camera bodies were mechanically among the best ever made by anyone. Aesthetically they are a joy to look at, with their scalloped metal focus collars, and ergonomically a dream to use with smooth focus actions and beautifully detented aperture clicks. Optically, most – as I have shown here many times – can hold their best with the latest ‘plastic fantastic’ lenses, and while there’s no AF or VR, there are no motors to fail, either. Many of my prints made using these testify to their outstanding optical qualities. Later ‘pre-Ai’ lenses adopted rubberized focus collars, and while their optics are largely unchanged, the look and feel – for this snapper – are just not the same. The common nomenclature is to refer to the single-coated metal scalloped ring optics as the ‘F series’, the later multi-coated ones as the ‘C series’ and the yet later pre-Ai lenses with the rubberized focus rings as the ‘K’ series. All mine are either F or C.

A newly Ai converted lens, in this case the 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor-H.

Incidentally, while the oldest pre-Ai lenses nearly always come with scalloped focusing collars, the design of the aperture ring seems to be without rhyme or reason. Some are scalloped (my 20/3,5 UD, 28/2, 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 105/2.5, 135/3.5 and 200/4) whereas others dispense with scallops and adopt fluting only (24/2.8 and 35/2). No matter. All are a delight to use.

Drawbacks:

The snag with pre-Ai lenses is that, if you can live with manual focusing, they will not fit a modern Nikon film or DSLR body. That’s actually an advantage, as the need to make this modification mostly keeps used prices of ‘pre-Ai’ lenses down, as they cannot be used on newer bodies in the absence of the Ai conversion. The work required to ‘Ai’ the lens (meaning it will fit) is very easy as either a DIY project or sub-contracted to a skilled machinist who will charge you $30 or so.

There are two aspects to updating classic Nikkors to work on modern DSLR and late film Nikon bodies.

One is to add a $29 CPU to allow proper recording of EXIF data, something I described at length here. You do not have to do this but I strongly recommend that you do. If you, like me, are a student of your EXIF data from which much can be learned and if you like matrix metering and such great features like shutter block for action photography, adding a CPU makes sense.

The other, and this has to be done first, is to relieve an arc on the rear of the aperture setting ring on the lens to provide the required clearance for the aperture feeler tab on the body. Later bodies dispensed with the spigot on the body which couples with the claw on the lens, opting for a rotating, sprung feeler, concentric with the bayonet flange. If the aperture ring on a pre-Ai lens is not machined down, it will damage the aperture feeler, rendering the camera inoperable.

Exceptions:

To effect manufacturing economies for their less costly bodies, Nikon deleted the Ai feeler and the screwdrive focus motor coupling for AF-D Nikkors. The good news is that these bodies allow a non-Ai lens to be mounted without modification (no feeler tab to foul) but the trade-off is that metering does not work. Use an iPhone app like Photometer for manual exposure measurement. And forget AF with AF-D lenses.

The bodies thus designed include:

D40, D40x, D60, D3000, D3100, D3200, D3300, D5000, D5100, D5200,D5300, D5500.

Sub-contracting the work:

When I first started buying pre-Ai lenses I sent them for Ai conversion to John White who does an excellent job for modest cost.

Do it yourself:

Later, as I got braver, I started doing the conversions myself and what I describe below is what John White refers to as the Type A conversion on his site. This works with newer film bodies such as the FM, FE, F4, F5, F6, N90, FM10, F100 and FM3A and digital SLRs such as the D1, D2, D3 and D4 series and the D200, D300 series, D600, D700, D7000 and D800. If your camera body is an “Electronic Only” body such as the N80, D100, D70, D70s, D50, D80 and D90 I recommend you send your lens to John White to have the work done. There’s a little more to it and I cannot advise never having done a Type B conversion, as all my bodies are of the ‘non-electronic’ kind.

Now ‘machined down’ is a rather high falutin’ way of saying that you use a small flat file to remove a sliver of alloy from the rear of the aperture ring of the lens. The process is very simple and easily done by all but the truly cack handed. The latter should use one of the commercial machinists like John White to ‘Ai’ the lens.

You will need a jeweler’s screwdriver to remove the five (sometimes four) rear chromed flange retaining screws. These are either slotted or Philips, depending on the lens. You want the screwdriver to be a really tight fit to avoid trashing the screws. Sometimes screws are frozen in place – after all these optics are mostly over 35 years old – so a miniature soldering iron, applied to the screw for a few seconds, can help loosen them. A broken screw head is not going to make your day. The several lenses on which I have removed the rear flange have been all over the place with regard to the use of thread locker on the screws. Some have none, some a light application and some gobs. As a generalization, the older the lens, the more thread locking compound is used. This dictates the use of large handled screwdrivers which permit far more force to be applied when engaging the screw’s head, minimizing the risk of a damaged screw. Those poncy little screwdriver sets passing as jeweler’s screwdrivers are a waste of money. Check the link in the picture below for the real thing, made by Wiha. Curiously, I have never encountered any thread locker on the two small slotted screw retaining the old aperture follower claw. Go figure.

Once the chromed flange is removed, the aperture ring can be slipped off. A few lenses attach the aperture ring with a short spring to the aperture actuator inside – like the 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor S and SC – but most do not. The 85mm Nikkor-H, illustrated below, retains the aperture ring to the aperture actuator with a small, radial slotted screw which has to be removed to allow the ring to come off. Once the chromed flange is removed, the aperture ring can be slipped off. It has to be replaced in the same orientation as when removed, so do not fiddle with aperture settings when the ring is off. If you replace the ring oriented incorrectly you will lose the ability to change apertures. Don’t panic. Remove and replace correctly. A little experimentation and you will get it. Force is never involved here. Some lenses (like the 50mm f/1.4) use a claw on the removable flange and this must mesh with the aperture tab inside the lens. Miss the tab and you lose aperture control. Others (like the 85mm f/1.8) use a small radial screw to lock the aperture ring in the correct position. The screw must be replaced so that it enters the thread in the lens barrel.

You will need a small, fresh (meaning not blunt from use) flat file with square edges. Triangular ones work well to if you have decent filing skills. I say ‘square edges’ because you really want the slot you file away to have perpendicular sides.

There are three aspects to making the slot.

  • How deep it should be
  • Where it should start – the left hand end
  • Where it should stop – the right hand end

Depth is very easy. Remove the aperture claw (two small slotted screws). You want to file the slot down to a point where the screw holes just remain intact. You do not want to go down so deep that the screw holes are compromised. There’s no loss of function if you do but your work will look ugly.

The starting point means the left end of the slot when the lens is viewed from behind. This one is critical as it tells the camera the maximum aperture of the lens, and it changes with the maximum aperture of the lens you are working on. But there’s an easy way to avoid making a mistake here by the simple expedient of making the slot too short, then gradually working the end point back with subsequent applications of the flat file. Simply refit the aperture ring and the flange (you need only use a couple of the 4 or 5 screws you removed earlier to retain it, temporarily) and see if the LCD display on the camera’s body will reach maximum aperture (camera set to M or A Mode) when you turn the aperture collar. If not, remove and extend the slot a little more on the left hand side.

This table illustrates where the left end of the slot should be relative to the engraved apertures on the aperture ring of the lens which you have just removed.


Nikkor pre-Ai filing limit
for Ai conversion, maximum aperture.

The focal length of the lens is irrelevant. The maximum aperture is the dependent variable here.

All data in this table are based on lenses I have personally converted or were converted for me by John White. All converted lenses work correctly on Nikon D700, D2x and D3x bodies I own or owned. I can also attest that these data are correct for an F6 film body owned by a friend.

How to use this table:

  • Determine the maximum aperture of your lens
  • File down the rear of the aperture ring to the engraved aperture position in the ‘First try’ column, above
  • Extend the length of the slot around the circumference for a length of approx. 1.5″
  • Reinstall the aperture ring on the lens
  • Fasten the chrome bayonet flange with two opposed screws
  • Insert lens in camera and set to maximum aperture
  • If maximum aperture is indicated in finder or on the LCD you are done on the left end of the slot; if the LCD shows apertures higher than dialed in on the lens, your left slot side needs to be extended
  • Check you can get the finder or LCD to show the lens’s minimum aperture. Once it does you are done with the right end of the slot
  • Reinstall and fasten, re-test.

When an entry in the table states + 0.5 it means you are filing to a half-stop to the left of the stop indicated. For example, ‘f/11 + 0.5’ means filing to a position midway between the f/11 and f/16 engraved aperture settings.

The identical data for f/4 and f/4.5 are not typographical errors. These are based on multiple observations of lenses I own.

Here’s my 105mm f/2.5 Nikkor pre-Ai lens with the slot machined (the focal length is irrelevant, only the maximum aperture matters) – the two claw-retaining screws were replaced after the machining was completed:

As you can see the slot extends at the left to a position between f/11 and f/16 (‘f/11 + 0.5’ in the table, above) and extends around the periphery of the aperture ring for approximately 1.5″.

The right hand end of the slot is not critical. The slot must have a certain minimum length but too long on the right hand end does not matter. The right hand stopping point for the slot is non-critical and needs only be far enough to the right to clear the feeler on the camera’s body with the lens at its minimum aperture. Typically 1.5″ around the circumference is fine. Make the slot too short and the lens cannot be stopped down to minimum aperture (or fitted at minimum aperture, for that matter) as the movement of the aperture collar will be constrained (or blocked) by the feeler on the camera’s body. Make it too long and no biggie. You cannot set the lens beyond its minimum aperture owing to the limit stop in the lens, so making too long a slot makes no difference. It just means you are doing too much work. The limit stop in the lens will make sure that the correct minimum aperture is not exceeded with the lens on the body.

Some paint the machined surface black. That serves only cosmetic needs, as the exposed alloy is not ‘seen’ by the film or sensor in the camera’s body.

The 20mm UD Nikkor: This is the odd man out. Rather than relieving an arc of alloy from the rear of the aperture ring, you must fit a small extension piece to effect contact with the aperture feeler on the body. I reverse and cut down the stock aperture claw to do this. Click here for details.

Proof of the pudding:

Here I illustrate the process of adding the Ai slot on my latest ‘pre-Ai’ lens acquisition, the magnificent 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor-H Auto optic, made in the early 1970s.

The alloy of the aperture ring is fairly soft and little time or effort are needed to do the work. I do not advise the use of power tools like a Dremel. They are far too aggressive and you run the risk of removing too much alloy. When testing the limit point of the left hand (the maximum aperture) end of the slot, by refitting the aperture ring and bayonet flange for fitting of the lens to the camera, I make sure to use compressed air to clear any remaining filings from the aperture ring. Getting these into the lens or camera will not make your day.

My first lens took me an hour (nervy-dervy!) but I can crack these out in about 15 minutes now, no stress.



Tools of the trade. Flat file, compressed air,
Wiha miniature screwdriver kit, Nikkor awaiting surgery.
Magnetic screwdrivers sometimes help, but Nikkors do not consistently use magnetized screws.


The screws and the bayonet flange removed.


Some lenses, like the 20mm f/3.5 UD and this 85mm f/1.8, have an aperture ring retaining screw. Remove it.


The aperture ring removed, ready for machining.


With the aperture ring removed, the spring spigot which engages
the detents inside the aperture ring, conferring ‘click stops’ on the action,
is accessible. If you wish to convert the lens for movie use – meaning no noisy
click stops – remove this spigot, retained by two screws.


15 minutes with a flat file and the machining is completed. The aperture ring is
first blasted with compressed air to make sure any trace of metal filings is removed.
The small aperture ring retaining screw is replaced followed by the flange.
The flange screw holes are not evenly spaced so the flange can only be replaced correctly.
Two flange retaining screws are used here to test the fit on the camera body.

When reinstalling the flange retaining screws tighten them in two stages in a criss-cross pattern, much as you would a car’s wheel. Tightening each down first time with massive torque risks distorting the flange, meaning the lens will not sit dead parallel to the body. I do not advocate the use of threadlocker and Nikon’s more recent MF lenses use none, bearing this out. A properly torqued screw will not come out.

The CPU can now be installed if required.

Factory Nikon Ai conversion kits: Nikon used to make ‘plug-and-play’ conversion kits, consisting of a replacement aperture ring. Most are long sold and it’s unlikely you will find the one you need. You can see which ring your lens needs in this database. If you can find them, they generally run $30-35 and invariably have the awful, non-matching diamond machined texture which will not match the look and feel of the original lens, which is why I avoid them. (My 24mm pre-Ai Nikkor came thus converted and it kills me every time I use it).

Claw replacement: When you are done you can replace the old aperture claw if you like the look or if it helps you key the lens to the body. It serves no other useful purpose. I replace the screws but leave the claw off. In the many lenses I have modified, these screws have always responded to a magnetic screwdriver which makes an almost impossible task easy. Hardware stores carry small gadgets to allow a screwdriver’s head to be magnetized or demagnetized. A few bucks and highly recommended. Be sure to demagnetize your screwdriver if you contemplate using it on sensitive electronic components.

Final touch – color mounting index for protection:

I add a spot of fluorescent orange paint between the fourth and fifth CPU pins (very little, to avoid run off into the pins) which I find greatly helps with indexing the lens when mounting it on the camera body. For those lenses which accept a simple glue-on CPU installation, this also lessens the chance of striking the edge of the fairly exposed CPU on the camera’s bayonet throat, something I once did, managing to damage the CPU in the process, necessitating replacement. Only Leica ever got this right with its red, raised plastic buttons on their lenses which permitted mounting by feel only. Later, Pentax with their M series did the same, though the plastic hemisphere was white and hence less visible. It’s so simple, it mystifies me why others have not done this. My paint dot does not help with feel, but it helps greatly when aligning the lens with the camera’s bayonet mount.

The collector’s dilemma: I have little time for gear collectors. If I do not use something I sell it. Nevertheless, there’s a body of believers out there who will tell you that machining classic Nikkors to make them work on modern bodies is some sort of sacrilege as it impugns the ‘collector value’ of the lens. Utter rot. Most Nikkors of all types were made by the tens and hundreds of thousands – not my idea of scarcity value. The only ‘rare’ lens I would not consider converting is the 13mm f/5.6 (one just sold for $100,000 at auction – only 51 were made!). The other rarity, the $4,000 58mm/1.2 Noct came in Ai and Ai-S versions only, so no conversion is needed.