Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Coffee With Mentors > Nikon Historical Society

Nikon Historical Society -- hosted by the founding member Bob Rotoloni and members of the society. The NHS, based the US, has a worldwide membership. Our "Nikon Journal," published four times a year, concentrates on the history of Japanese photo equipment from the perspective of the Nikon Camera Company. The Nikon Journal often includes Nikon information not published anywhere else in the world. This forum provides an opportunity for conversation between collectors and users of classic film Nikons. See forum “stickies” for more information about the Society. If you are a serious Nikon Collector, you MUST be a NHS member. Join at http://www.nikonhistoricalsociety.com/!

View Poll Results: Vote for Your Pick for the Rarest Nikon Nikkor Rangefinder Lens!
21/4 2 3.64%
35/1.8 Black Rim 3 5.45%
35/3.5 #612 Series 2 3.64%
35 Stereo 11 20.00%
50/3.5 (not micro lens) 3 5.45%
50/2 All Black 3 5.45%
50/1.4 Aluminum 4 7.27%
85/2 #811 Series 1 1.82%
135/4 #611 Series 1 1.82%
500/5 0 0%
1000/6.3 Black 8 14.55%
1000/6.3 Grey 17 30.91%
Voters: 55. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 09-29-2007   #41
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,683
[quote=NIKON KIU]I believe Wes reviewed the records of the Occupation forces

I guess those COULD be wrong

Kiu[/QUOTE

yes indeed.

Stephen
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-29-2007   #42
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
 
NIKON KIU's Avatar
 
NIKON KIU is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington DC suburbs
Age: 57
Posts: 1,937
Are you implying Nippon Kogaku exaggerated? They built the lens and sold it but didn't report it to the occupation forces, even when they were required to do so?

The records at the National Archives of the United Stated should have some credibility, right?
The occupation forces endorsed companies such as NK to produce stuff,they even endorsed it so much that they let them sell it in their PX shops. Would it be wise to assume that NK designed,produced and sold the 3.5cm but slipped it past General McArthur?

IMHO
Indeed it is not!

Kiu

Last edited by NIKON KIU : 09-29-2007 at 13:23.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-29-2007   #43
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by NIKON KIU
Are you implying Nippon Kogaku exaggerated? They built the lens and sold it but didn't report it to the occupation forces, even when they were required to do so?

The records at the Archives of the United Stated should have some credibility, right?
The occupation forces endorsed companies such as NK to produce stuff,they even endorsed it so much that they let them sell it in their PX shops. Would it be wise to assume that NK designed,produced and sold the 3.5cm but slipped it past General McArthur?

IMHO
Indeed it is not!

Kiu
countless paperwork inaccuracies have been made
intentional and or unintentional

until Wes has time to reply and explain his source(es)
it's a waste of time for us to talk about it.

Stephen
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2007   #44
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
 
NIKON KIU's Avatar
 
NIKON KIU is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington DC suburbs
Age: 57
Posts: 1,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by CameraQuest
countless paperwork inaccuracies have been made
intentional and or unintentional

until Wes has time to reply and explain his source(es)
it's a waste of time for us to talk about it.

Stephen
I guess we have to wait for the book!!

Kiu
  Reply With Quote

hmm
Old 10-30-2007   #45
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,683
hmm

  Reply With Quote

Old 10-30-2007   #46
MikeL
Go Fish
 
MikeL's Avatar
 
MikeL is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,190
Whoa, any photos from that beast?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-07-2008   #47
Hacker
黑客
 
Hacker's Avatar
 
Hacker is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by skhan
...and I thought 50/1.1 is one of the rarer ones!

Grey sounds rare.
There is always the 50mm f1.1 in LTM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-22-2012   #48
F6Roger
Registered User
 
F6Roger's Avatar
 
F6Roger is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Crawley, West Sussex, UK
Age: 72
Posts: 85
Surely got to be the 35mm f1.4 Nikkor-S or 50mm f1 Nikkor-O only one of each known.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-25-2012   #49
skahde
Registered User
 
skahde's Avatar
 
skahde is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 71
Honestly, I don't quite get the point.
  Reply With Quote

The age of the first 35mm f3.5 W-Nikkors
Old 03-07-2013   #50
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
 
wes loder's Avatar
 
wes loder is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Weisenberg Tep, PA
Posts: 242
The age of the first 35mm f3.5 W-Nikkors

I note that I never had a chance to follow up on the issue of the when the first 35mm f3.5 W-Nikkors for the Nikon Rf cameras became available.
For all of you who have read my book, you will know that the SCAP records indicate the 35mm, f3.5 as a "New product" in April 1950 with a production of 77 for that month. It is possible that NK had manufactured as many as 125 in the 1940s, but had not yet put them into mounts, getting around to that only in 1950 when they had both the market and funds to do that. While these first 35s are cruder than the production runs that follow, they do share a common feature with all the other Nikkors from early 1950: The MIOJ mark is on the rear of the rangefinder cam. Prior to 1950, the other accessory lenses such as the 135 f4 and the 85 f2 had the MIOJ mark on the outside barrel. For those two reasons, I stick my position that the 35mm f3.5 was not available for purchase prior to April 1950.
  Reply With Quote

Numbers for the 500mm f5
Old 03-07-2013   #51
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
 
wes loder's Avatar
 
wes loder is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Weisenberg Tep, PA
Posts: 242
Numbers for the 500mm f5

I would question the numbers of 157 lenses for the 500mm f5 Nikkor T. Does this include the 500mm in all mounts, or just in Nikon bayonet? That might quite a difference in the total number.

My records indicate a production run from 647001 to at least 647123 with no noticeable break (nos 647021 is the earliest recorded). The changeover from the "INF" to the "lazy 8" for infinity occurs somewhere between 647090 and 647099. A small number of Leica mounts are in that range. The lowest number in the next series that I have records of is 647206 with a run up to 647285. Then a final series starting 647501 through at least 647531, all in direct Bronica mount. That would yield a total of at least 233 lenses. Perhaps there are other gaps, but they are not apparent, and as more lenses turn up, they may be closed. Hope tihs helps. WES
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-07-2013   #52
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
 
Tom A's Avatar
 
Tom A is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 75
Posts: 6,074


Maybe not the rarest - but with only 265 made, up there with them. The Zeiss C Sonnar 50mm f1.5 in S mount.
The Nokton 35mm f1.2 was strictly a one-off, maybe 4 or 5 made in total.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2013   #53
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by wes loder View Post
I note that I never had a chance to follow up on the issue of the when the first 35mm f3.5 W-Nikkors for the Nikon Rf cameras became available.
For all of you who have read my book, you will know that the SCAP records indicate the 35mm, f3.5 as a "New product" in April 1950 with a production of 77 for that month. It is possible that NK had manufactured as many as 125 in the 1940s, but had not yet put them into mounts, getting around to that only in 1950 when they had both the market and funds to do that. While these first 35s are cruder than the production runs that follow, they do share a common feature with all the other Nikkors from early 1950: The MIOJ mark is on the rear of the rangefinder cam. Prior to 1950, the other accessory lenses such as the 135 f4 and the 85 f2 had the MIOJ mark on the outside barrel. For those two reasons, I stick my position that the 35mm f3.5 was not available for purchase prior to April 1950.
I disagree and believe the 35/3.5 was available pretty much from the git go with the Nikon One. I discussed this with Bob Rotoloni, who concurs.

Your theory seems to be based upon only one source, the "new product" reference in SCAP. All it would take for an error in that source is a bad translation from Japanese to English, or someone new on their job who was not familiar with prior lens production. Likewise does "new production" indicate a new focal length in the lens lineup, or a new version of 35mm lens?

Additionally there is no question the 35-135 Version 1 finder was introduced pretty much with the Nikon One. It would make little sense for such a finder if Nikon did not have a 35mm lens to go along with the finder.

Lastly, for decades after the Nikon One launch, most of the people who worked on the original Nikon camera and lenses were available to give interviews. Its inconceivable that they would have allowed the widely held belief that 35mm lenses were available and concurrent with the Nikon One to be circulated as fact, if that was in fact not the case.

When looking at the overall picture, not just an obscure single reference, it just makes no sense that Nikon's original 35/3.5 was not introduced until 1950.

Stephen Gandy
  Reply With Quote

Sorry, Steve, where is your proof?
Old 03-19-2013   #54
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
 
wes loder's Avatar
 
wes loder is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Weisenberg Tep, PA
Posts: 242
Sorry, Steve, where is your proof?

Steve, you and Bob are certainly entitled to your opinions, but the SCAP records are a primary source and there is no indication that they are false at any point. Numbers are confused occasionally, but not dates. I find it a bit odd that Bob would so willingly accept SCAP dates and numbers for both the 85mm and the 135mm, but not the 35.
To back up the SCAP records, you might note that Nikon, Inc's own write-up on the wide-angles for the Nikon RF series that the company posted on the web indicated an availability date for the 35mm f3.5 of March 1950, only one month before the SCAP records indicated production start of this "New product."
In addition, all the early 35s have the MIOJ mark on the rangefinder cam, a location not used for either the 85s or the 135s until 1950. If the 35 was available prior to 1950, one would expect the MIOJ mark to be on the barrel exterior.
Yes, NK manufactured variable-frame finders with the 35 setting during 1949, and clearly intended to make a 35mm lens, but intentions and availability are two different beasts. NK had enough trouble in 1948 getting the camera working and out the door, let alone worry about the accessory lenses. The company didn't get the 135mm f4 into production until November 1948 and the 85 off the ground until the spring of 1949. Longer lenses were where the sales and money were. It made sense to postpone the production of the 35mm Nikkor until camera sales had picked up enough to create a market for the least-popular focal length.
It is possible that NK might have made an early production run of the 35 optics in the late Forties, perhaps the 612X series, but when did these get put into mounts for sale? NK probably held off until it was clear that there would be enough Nikon owners around willing to buy a 35mm lens. There would be no point in investing time and limited money in putting a lens out for sale that had almost no cameras to go on.
The 1947 book of all NK's products assembled for the Occupation authorities does list a 135 and a 35 lens for the new Nikon camera. But that is a dream sheet assembled to convince SCAP that NK was now a model citizen and not a munitions manufacturer. Not even the camera was in production, and the Nikoflex illustrated on the same page never saw the light of day. That same report shows a fisheye lens! And no one contends that NK put THAT into production in the 1940s.
If you had tried to buy a 35mm Nikkor in 1948 or 1949, the answer would have been "Yes. Wait. Coming soon." But you would not have been able to actually buy one until Spring of 1950. WES
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-19-2013   #55
Bar8barian
Registered User
 
Bar8barian is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 179
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx
__________________






  Reply With Quote

Continued discussion of 3.5cm W-Nikkor
Old 03-20-2013   #56
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
 
wes loder's Avatar
 
wes loder is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Weisenberg Tep, PA
Posts: 242
Continued discussion of 3.5cm W-Nikkor

Bar8barian:
Interesting. What is your source for these early 35mm W-Nikkor lens numbers dates? Were these productions in mounts, or serial numbered optical assemblies? The problem is that NK used serial number prefixes that were date-based, but the date was design-based, not manufacture date. Thus the 612X series would indicate a design approval date or finalization of December 1946. Not bad considering that NK had approved the "final" design for the Nikon camera in September [609X]. But just as camera would not go into "production" for another 18 months, and then only in ones and twos until August 1948, it is possible that the 35mm lens did not see light of day for some time.
The 910XX series that followed, as you note, would indicate October 1949 for design approval. That would match in well with a start of production in March, 1950 and the first lens out the door and on the SCAP lists in April.
So when were the 612X series out and available? Probably not until the spring of 1950 either, because not enough Nikons had been sold to generate a market for the least popular accessory lens—although they might have been sitting around the factory waiting for mounts until then. The 612X series might even have gone out at the same time with the 910X series. Remember, NK's biggest market for its lenses was not its new camera, but the screw-mt. Leica copies.
Or, it is possible that NK just held the 612X lenses in the factory until sales of the camera got going. That does not sound likely, since inventory on hand got heavily taxed.
Bob believes that a third of the first Nikon owners would have bought a 35mm lens. I would disagree. Sales of accessory lenses were always lower than one would imagine. If someone did buy an accessory lens, it was almost always the 135mm first—and that was the first accessory lens that SCAP indicates that NK put into production. Logical. This held true throughout the 35mm era. Only with the opening of the CPO to camera sales in the spring of 1950 were enough Nikons being sold on a continuing basis to support large numbers of accessory lenses.
An additional personal note: When Hans Liholm was in Tokyo in April-May 1950 to negotiate the export contract with NK, Nagaoka gave him a Nikon M with a 50mm f2 lens, an 85 and a 135 and a variable frame finder. Although generous, NK did not give him either a 35 or the new 50mm f1.5. Why? Because they did not have enough of these new optics to afford to give them away?
Where did these first 35mm Nikkors go? Almost all of them went to the CPO. Thanks for keeping up this discussion. WES
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-20-2013   #57
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 4,298
Wow, had no idea they made so few. Thought they made at least 300.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom A View Post
Maybe not the rarest - but with only 265 made, up there with them. The Zeiss C Sonnar 50mm f1.5 in S mount.
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.
--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery

My Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-20-2013   #58
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
 
Tom A's Avatar
 
Tom A is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 75
Posts: 6,074


Very early Nikkor 50mm f3.5 collapsible. It came on an enlarger with a home made S to screw mount adapter. Turns it was a pre-production 50f3.5 for the Nikon 1 and it ended up in Hong Kong and later here in Vancouver. Supposedly the lowest serial number of any 50mm f3.5. I kept it for a while, used it on a S2 - but in the end sold it at Christies for a lot of money. This was all in the mid-nineties. I kind of like the dome shaped lens cap too!
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-22-2013   #59
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by wes loder View Post
Steve, you and Bob are certainly entitled to your opinions, but the SCAP records are a primary source and there is no indication that they are false at any point. Numbers are confused occasionally, but not dates. I find it a bit odd that Bob would so willingly accept SCAP dates and numbers for both the 85mm and the 135mm, but not the 35.
To back up the SCAP records, you might note that Nikon, Inc's own write-up on the wide-angles for the Nikon RF series that the company posted on the web indicated an availability date for the 35mm f3.5 of March 1950, only one month before the SCAP records indicated production start of this "New product."
In addition, all the early 35s have the MIOJ mark on the rangefinder cam, a location not used for either the 85s or the 135s until 1950. If the 35 was available prior to 1950, one would expect the MIOJ mark to be on the barrel exterior.
Yes, NK manufactured variable-frame finders with the 35 setting during 1949, and clearly intended to make a 35mm lens, but intentions and availability are two different beasts. NK had enough trouble in 1948 getting the camera working and out the door, let alone worry about the accessory lenses. The company didn't get the 135mm f4 into production until November 1948 and the 85 off the ground until the spring of 1949. Longer lenses were where the sales and money were. It made sense to postpone the production of the 35mm Nikkor until camera sales had picked up enough to create a market for the least-popular focal length.
It is possible that NK might have made an early production run of the 35 optics in the late Forties, perhaps the 612X series, but when did these get put into mounts for sale? NK probably held off until it was clear that there would be enough Nikon owners around willing to buy a 35mm lens. There would be no point in investing time and limited money in putting a lens out for sale that had almost no cameras to go on.
The 1947 book of all NK's products assembled for the Occupation authorities does list a 135 and a 35 lens for the new Nikon camera. But that is a dream sheet assembled to convince SCAP that NK was now a model citizen and not a munitions manufacturer. Not even the camera was in production, and the Nikoflex illustrated on the same page never saw the light of day. That same report shows a fisheye lens! And no one contends that NK put THAT into production in the 1940s.
If you had tried to buy a 35mm Nikkor in 1948 or 1949, the answer would have been "Yes. Wait. Coming soon." But you would not have been able to actually buy one until Spring of 1950. WES
Actually Wes, the real question is where is YOUR proof?
You are the one going against conventional wisdom in every standard Nikon RF reference book.

One reference in SCAP might make an interesting theory, but its certainly not proof. As you yourself point out, SCAP was inaccurate in claiming a early Nikon fisheye lens, so why should a claim of 1st production 35mm lenses in 1950 be any more accurate?

To make your starting 1950 production 35mm lens theory credible you need original Nikon data, either from NK records or from 1946 NK workers.

Failing that, the death knell to your theory is the popularity of Nikon collecting in the 1980's and 1990 in Japan -- while many of the Nikon One workers were still alive and able to share their experiences with Japanese collectors. IF indeed the 35/3.5's were not produced until 1950, that fact would have been shared and common knowledge long ago.

Lastly Nikon is still a going concern and arguably the most dedicated to its own history than any other Japanese camera company. Wes, do you really think Nikon would allow a misconception about the Nikon One's original lenses to continue 60 plus years? Really ?

Stephen
  Reply With Quote

Proof, Steve?
Old 03-22-2013   #60
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
 
wes loder's Avatar
 
wes loder is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Weisenberg Tep, PA
Posts: 242
Proof, Steve?

Steve: Go to the National Archives in College Park Maryland and look at the records yourself if you doubt their "Proof." Sometimes "conventional wisdom" can be simply wrong.
Did you even read my last response? I noted that Nikon Inc., itself listed the 35mm f3.5 as coming out in March 1950 on the company's own web page. You are relying on fifty-year-old memories, not on documents. I am relying on documents, not on some company veteran recalling "Oh, yeah, we had the 35mm lens back then."
As for the 1947 fisheye lens, NK included a photograph of the lens in their booklet for the SCAP authorities. Neither NK or SCAP ever claimed that the lens was available or in production, just that the company had prototyped and was "capable" of making such a lens. That is not an "inaccurate" statement as you maintain. The booklet also included the Nikoflex, and we all know what happened to that camera.
A lot of false information went out about the early days of the Nikon camera. Some of that misinformation was deliberately sowed out by Ehrenreich to enhance his own reputation. The Oft-made Statement that SCAP banned the "Export" of the Nikon One is definitely false—as proved by research in contemporary publications, interviews with Liholm and Gasser and SCAP records, yet you have never gotten around to correcting that statement in your own web pages on the Nikon One.
What is possibly true is that the Nikon camera was not allowed to be sold through the CPO (military exchanges stores). But that is not the same "export."
To return to the 35mm f3.5 W-Nikkor. SCAP optical production records appear to have picked up and listed items when the various companies finished them and moved them to an availability-for-sale status. Which would mean that the 35mm Nikkor was not "Available" prior to April 1950. That does not mean that NK had not manufactured 35mm optics prior to 1950, it just means that a customer (whole-sale or retail) could not buy one.
NK manufactured a bunch of 80mm lenses for its Nikoflex, but they do not appear on SCAP records because NK never actually made the camera. They would have appeared on the Aires Camera entry when that camera appeared on the SCAP lists.
Please read through all my past entries on this topic. I am not relying on hazy memories, wishful thinkng or even just on optical production reports from SCAP, but a wide range of sources. When I first read the production reports, I was as surprised as you appear to be to find the 35mm lens not appearing until 1950, but then I went back and compared the records with all the other information I was gathering and what other contemporary writers was stating, and I had to reach the conclusion I have.
You may "wish" to believe that a person buying a Nikon in the fall of 1948 could buy a 35, or a 135 in addition to any normal that the camera came with, but it did not happen that way. NK planned to sell the 35mm lens, may have advertised it that way and even believed that would have that lens available "Real-soon-now," but it did not happen. Unless you, or Bob or someone else can show me a receipt for a delivered, production 35mm w-Nikkor dating prior to 1950, I will stick to my position.

WES
  Reply With Quote

Thoughts on 35 and other rare lens
Old 03-24-2013   #61
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
 
wes loder's Avatar
 
wes loder is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Weisenberg Tep, PA
Posts: 242
Thoughts on 35 and other rare lens

I believe this discussion of the earliest 35mm f3.5 W-Nikkor for the RF Nikons is not getting anywhere at this point and is certainly off topic for this thread. I would be happy to discuss this personally further via e-mail <[email protected]>. Let me know.

But to return to the thread, how about a "production" lens of which there may exist only one, or maybe two or three?
The 1956 "R-Nikkor."
NK designed the first Micro-Nikkor as a lens for 35mm reproduction work, similar to that of an APO-Nikkor. Indeed, the first statements claimed that the lens was an apochromat. The first pictures (such as the one that Wolbarst wrote up for Modern Photography) show the beauty ring with a label of "R-Nikkor" and a serial number of 523001—the first in the regular production series for the Micro-Nikkor. Was this a once-off? Actually a prototype? or did NK change its mind almost immediately and go with "Micro-Nikkor" to better define the lens' use in microfilming? Anyone ever find another lens with the "R-Nikkor?" label? Where is that lens now? Now that would be a find. Cheers, WES
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-21-2013   #62
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by wes loder View Post
Steve: Go to the National Archives in College Park Maryland and look at the records yourself if you doubt their "Proof." Sometimes "conventional wisdom" can be simply wrong.
Did you even read my last response? I noted that Nikon Inc., itself listed the 35mm f3.5 as coming out in March 1950 on the company's own web page. You are relying on fifty-year-old memories, not on documents. I am relying on documents, not on some company veteran recalling "Oh, yeah, we had the 35mm lens back then."
As for the 1947 fisheye lens, NK included a photograph of the lens in their booklet for the SCAP authorities. Neither NK or SCAP ever claimed that the lens was available or in production, just that the company had prototyped and was "capable" of making such a lens. That is not an "inaccurate" statement as you maintain. The booklet also included the Nikoflex, and we all know what happened to that camera.
A lot of false information went out about the early days of the Nikon camera. Some of that misinformation was deliberately sowed out by Ehrenreich to enhance his own reputation. The Oft-made Statement that SCAP banned the "Export" of the Nikon One is definitely false—as proved by research in contemporary publications, interviews with Liholm and Gasser and SCAP records, yet you have never gotten around to correcting that statement in your own web pages on the Nikon One.
What is possibly true is that the Nikon camera was not allowed to be sold through the CPO (military exchanges stores). But that is not the same "export."
To return to the 35mm f3.5 W-Nikkor. SCAP optical production records appear to have picked up and listed items when the various companies finished them and moved them to an availability-for-sale status. Which would mean that the 35mm Nikkor was not "Available" prior to April 1950. That does not mean that NK had not manufactured 35mm optics prior to 1950, it just means that a customer (whole-sale or retail) could not buy one.
NK manufactured a bunch of 80mm lenses for its Nikoflex, but they do not appear on SCAP records because NK never actually made the camera. They would have appeared on the Aires Camera entry when that camera appeared on the SCAP lists.
Please read through all my past entries on this topic. I am not relying on hazy memories, wishful thinkng or even just on optical production reports from SCAP, but a wide range of sources. When I first read the production reports, I was as surprised as you appear to be to find the 35mm lens not appearing until 1950, but then I went back and compared the records with all the other information I was gathering and what other contemporary writers was stating, and I had to reach the conclusion I have.
You may "wish" to believe that a person buying a Nikon in the fall of 1948 could buy a 35, or a 135 in addition to any normal that the camera came with, but it did not happen that way. NK planned to sell the 35mm lens, may have advertised it that way and even believed that would have that lens available "Real-soon-now," but it did not happen. Unless you, or Bob or someone else can show me a receipt for a delivered, production 35mm w-Nikkor dating prior to 1950, I will stick to my position.

WES
Hi Wes,

I'm happy you, or anyone else, is researching the early Nikons and their lenses. I'm fine with whatever position you care to believe regarding them. What I do care about is you representing your theories as established fact on my site when they are not. Saying you have a theory or belief is one thing, but steadfastly maintaining your theory about 1st 35mm lens production is right and established early Nikon Rangefinder history is wrong is quite another.

First of all its disrespectful to all the historians who worked hard on putting Nikon Rangefinder history together. How could they have missed something like that ? Very serious Nikon Rangefinder collecting has been around at least since the 1970's. There was ample opportunity to interview the people who worked on the Nikon One before their passing.

1) the earliest 35/3.5's serial numbers start with 612, suggesting December of 1946. Why would that serial number be delayed and not used during M production of 1950 ? SFAIK that was not done with any other lens, so why the 35mm serial numbers ?

2) the earliest 35mm, 50mm 85mm and 135mm all share the same production characteristics: hand MACHINED rear caps and hoods, and very heavy duty front cap. These expensive items were soon replaced by stampings. Why would a 35mm lens 1st introduced in 1950 have the early machined front and back caps of the 1948 lenses ? Obviously a 1950 lens would have period lens caps, not machined 1948 rear lens caps.

3) if you add up the MIOJ lenses in Bob's book, 35mm MIOJ production is consistent with the other early 85 and 135 lenses. That is unlikely if 35mm lenses started production in 1950

4) The two Nikon ONE brochures on Nikon's site both list the 35/3.5.
In fact, the 35/3.5 and 135/4 lenses are listed at the first Nikon One lenses besides the 50's.

Furthermore brochure B specifically says "five lenses being available" referring to the 50/2, 50/3.5, 35/3.5, 85/2, and 135/4.
see http://www.nikon.com/about/feelnikon...03_e/index.htm I can't believe they would list the 35/3.5 with the Nikon One unless it was available for sale.

5) The fisheye lens you refer to may have existed. It depends upon what they were calling a fisheye. As I understand it, the first Nikon fisheye lens was for the sky camera, vintage 1948 according to the NHS Journal. A few sky cameras were in fact produced.

Wes, you may not believe the two Nikon One brochures represent accurate information concerning 35mm lens production, but its a very safe bet that most serious Nikon collectors take the info in the Nikon One brochures at its face value.

Best,
Stephen

Nikon Rangefinder Newbies: its essential you buy Bob Rotoloni's The Complete Nikon Rangefinder Book - its the Bible for Nikon RF collecting! http://www.amazon.com/The-Complete-N...efinder+System
  Reply With Quote

Rare and early Nikon
Old 04-22-2013   #63
enasniearth
Registered User
 
enasniearth is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 473
Rare and early Nikon

Thanks for the link to the early brochures which were quite interesting .

The first Nikon one brochure A. Lists the 5 cm 1.5 for sale with the first lenses for the Nikon one . The 8.5 cm is not listed .
Usually early numbers are based on completed design dates or perhaps introduction .
The 8.5 cm was designed / intoduced jan 1948
The 5 cm 1.5 was designed / introduced may - July 1949
Odd that. 1.5 was listed but the 8.5 was not .

The second brochure B lists the 8.5 cm
Also there is a 5 cm 1.8 availible - however this was a prototype
That did not reach production - the glass types were not availible ( rotoloni )


The 3.5 cm 3.5 design existed as a Nippon kogaku prototype for the prewar canon Hanza camera ( dechert ) perhaps two known . So the optical design is early .

Zeiss and leitz had wide angle lenses of 3.5 cm and 2.8 cm availible prewar .
Any system camera that desired to compete with the German cameras would have to have a 3.5 cm availible at the minimum .

Once nippon kogaku was able to perfect their camera , many innovations followed . I don't think the German industry was prepared for the advanced
Large aperature optics that were developed and introduced at a quick pace .

The early cameras and lenses were produced in a time of shortages of the required materials . Some optical glasses were not availible although prototypes were produced .

Since unlike leitz exacting production records are not availible , exact dates and numbers are difficult to determine .
The idea of using other delivery records does add another dimension to the picture and makes it clearer .

I want to know what happened to the prototype motor driven black dial Nikon s2's
From the NYC show in 1957 .
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Most Famous Nikon RF Photog Contest CameraQuest Nikon RF 76 02-18-2007 20:43
Lens Cleaning 101 mike goldberg Rangefinder Photography Discussion 13 10-21-2006 06:47
Is this a real Nikon lens ? ch1 Nikon RF 12 10-28-2005 17:36



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 21:25.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.