NIKON KIU said:I believe Wes reviewed the records of the Occupation forces
I guess those COULD be wrong
Kiu[/QUOTE
yes indeed.
Stephen
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
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
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:
NIKON KIU said:
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
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
CameraQuest said:
I guess we have to wait for the book!!
Kiu
hmm
hmm
hmm
MikeL
Go Fish
Whoa, any photos from that beast?
Hacker
黑客
skhan said:
There is always the 50mm f1.1 in LTM.
F6Roger
Established
Surely got to be the 35mm f1.4 Nikkor-S or 50mm f1 Nikkor-O only one of each known.
skahde
V for Victory!
Honestly, I don't quite get the point.
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
The age of the first 35mm f3.5 W-Nikkors
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.
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.
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
Numbers for the 500mm f5
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
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
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
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.
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
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
Sorry, Steve, where is your proof?
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
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
Bar8barian
Established
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
Continued discussion of 3.5cm W-Nikkor
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
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
furcafe
Mentor
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
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!
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
wes loder
Photographer/Historian
Proof, Steve?
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
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