Re: [Leica] Nikon 35mm f2.5 LTM lens

[Ken Iisaka <kiisaka@pacbell.net>]

I do not know the particulars, but I would also suspect it would be a
Tessar configuration, as practically all point'n'shoot cameras of the
day had some type of Tessar configuration lens, in focal length of
between 35mm and 45mm, and an aperture of 2.8 to 3.5.  What is
interesting is that the shutter leaf and aperture are all behind the
optical elements in most of these.  There is practicaly no space between
the elements, and all the mechanical parts are separate from the lens
block, presumably to reduce manufacturing cost.  However, many of them
work very well, and certainly far better than most of the current zoom
point'n'shoots.

What I found interesting is that Nikon did not elect to use the 35/2.5
lens for its 35Ti compact.  Instead, Nikon designed a slightly telephoto
lens that would not protrude too much.  If the 35/2.5 was used, it would
protrude too much and would not be possible to retract the lens block
into the body.

Ken Iisaka kiisaka@pacbell.net
Lost in Mill Valley in Marin County, California
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Durling <durling@widomaker.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2000 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikon 35mm f2.5 LTM lens


> Ken:
>
> I've always suspected that an old Nikon "One Touch" P&S camera had the
same
> lens.  Do you know if this is true?  I always thought that the lens
was a
> Tessar type but that was just an assumption on my part.  Looks too
small for
> a Gauss.
>
> I confess my impression of softness is not based on recent experience.
I'll
> have to get it out now that I'm printing again.
>
> Mike Durling
> KD4KWB
> http://www.widomaker.com/~durling/
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ken Iisaka" <kiisaka@pacbell.net>
> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2000 1:13 AM
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikon 35mm f2.5 LTM lens
>
>
> > I think it is one of Nikon's greatest lenses.  It is somewhat soft
and
> > flarey at wide open, but it is extremely sharp and contrasty by 5.6.
> > For a lens that was designed in the early fifties, mere few years
after
> > the end of the war which devastated Tokyo where Nikon is based, it
is a
> > remarkable lens, arguably better than Leitz Elmar and perhaps
Summarons
> > of the equal focal length.  It is in a classic double Gauss
> > configuration, I believe, with six elements in four groups.  35mm
focal
> > length providing 60 degrees of coverage is really a practical limit
for
> > this design, and there is some vignetting at wide open, as well.  It
is
> > interesting to note that Nikon's equally venerable 28mm 1:3.5 is in
> > Orthmetar configuration, also with six elements in four groups, but
with
> > outer elements being cemented.
> >
> > It is interesting to note that virtually the same lens, save one
> > element, is still produced as the normal lens for Nikon's underwater
> > Nikonos system.
> >
> > Ken Iisaka kiisaka@pacbell.net
> > Lost in Mill Valley in Marin County, California
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Robert Browne <rbrowne@iopener.net>
> > To: <Leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2000 8:59 PM
> > Subject: [Leica] Nikon 35mm f2.5 LTM lens
> >
> >
> > > Dear LUG,
> > >
> > > Does anyone have any opinion on or personal experience with the
Nikon
> > 35mm f2.5 LTM lens? I plan to use it on my IIIf with an old Alpex
> > viewfinder I've had forever.
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance for your replies.
> > >
> > > Robert Browne
> > >
> >
> >
>