Nikkon E 100 2.8

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
OP fferreres Veteran Member • Posts: 3,760
Re: One of the best 100/2.8 low cost lens

AlexTG wrote:

fferreres wrote:

Do you know if there's this same optics in another well machined higher end Nikkor? I mean, exact or almost identical optic. I find I really like it.

Series E lenses which have direct corresponding AI-S models (i.e. 50/1.8, 135/2.8, 70-210/4.0) have simpler AR coatings, but otherwise are optically identical indeed.

Other models, including 100/2.8, were designed from scratch, so there's really nothing to compare them with.

Thanks for confirming. I now recall with I even ordered the lens. It has a structure that is very similar to the Rollei Zeiss 85mm f2.8 but in a 100mm FL and being a much later release would have orders of magnitude better coating than the QBM one in a FL I love.

http://allphotolenses.com/lenses/item/c_3099.html

This, whereas the legendary 105mm f2.5 AI-s has much thicker glass (second group is thick thick thick) and is more symmetrical (closer to Double Gauss than what would be Ernostar?).

Why should I care, or anyone about the glass thickness, or the lens structure. I shouldn't. But having the 105mm f2.5 and several Planars (so very sharp), I tend to not love the picture in the same way. Also those with very thick glass, I tend to not like that much, something happens to the image that is unconvincing to me, which cloud be lower global contrast or something I can't quite quantify.

So I went through alllensesdatabase looking for a lens that could be derived from the Topcro, and didn't find any, but found this one which resembles the QBM Sonnar, also being ultra compact, then looked at pictures.

I think if there was an AI-s or AI version, I'd buy it, but I couldn't find anything like it at all.

When I see some MTF charts of moderns 100mm they are just so brilliant. I'm sure they are gorgeous. I don't know why I am more attracted to the rendering style of simpler optics, usually 4 elements in more Ernostar fashion.

Note the Ernostar was developed by the same person from Contax (even before Zeiss acquired the company that design it). So it's a very small deviation from a triplet, the traditional Sonnar being in things like Topcor 135/2.8 and 100/2.8, but around early 1970 the multi-coating made it so the cemented (3rd) element could be just air.

Actually, as @Lightshow mentioned, it's a cinema lens design adaptation: He has taken for a basis an optical scheme of cinema lens Ultrastigmat, a modified triplet, which was calculated by Charles C. Minor in 1916 and being produced by Gundlach Company.

So it is a really simple design, probably as simple as it gets.

Because they are very cheap, with simpler parts, usually much less costly to produce, the computation is probably so that they are as good as it gets and with very negligible sample variation.

Did you make the drinks yourself? They look awesome

Thank you, that is the basic Aperol Spritz cocktail,

and I had mixed it myself ("make" is kinda too serious word for that, as it's just four ingredients).

First time I hear about it. Will order it if I see in a bar!

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow