Rebirth of the Nikon "E" Lenses

Way back when I was in high school (seemly eons ago), the then king of all things professional photography, Nikon, decided to dabble in the lower end of the amateur market. Yes, I'm well aware that they had the Nikkormats, and even the ill-fated/short-lived Nikkorex out for a decade or more, but for those of use who had priced the Nikkormats in those years, they were simply "slightly less expensive" Nikons, and not really competitors of the Pentax, Olympus, and Fujicas that sold in far larger quantiies. By the later part of the 70's, the handwriting was already on the wall in the form of the wildly successful Canon AE-1. Between it and the Olympus OM-1, and misc. clones such as the Pentax MX, ME, it was obvious the the highly lucrative advanced amateur market was clearly headed toward compact, electronics oriented camera with a LOT more plastic in the build. While many consider the 70's the decade that the Japanese SLR reached it's pinnacle, the same could also be said of the "third party" glass manufacturer, with the "Big Three", Tamron, Sigma and Tokina, not only reaching acceptability, but dominance in some sectors of the market. Included with them were the brands created by marketing consortiums such as Vivitar, Soligar and even the "house brands" such as Cambron (Cambridge Cameras), and Spiratone. 

In 1979 Into this high-speed, high-profit and highly volatile part of the market steps, Nippon Kogaku of Tokyo, otherwise known as Nikon, with (for them) a revolutionary product line; the "E" Series. This would be based on the "beginner" camera the EM, which was wildly different than anything the Nikon had ever done before. It was mostly plastic, mostly automatic and aimed at a part of the market that they hadn't attempted entry since the ill-fated Nikkorex 35 of 1960....and some would argue that even those weren't aimed at the beginning photographer either. 

 As would be typical Nikon, they didn't just bring out a camera, but an entire system, complete with a flash, motor winder and several lenses designed to not only complement the small size and light weight of the EM, but the price-point as well. In order to accomplish that in those days of the brass helical focusing mechanism, Nikon designed in (gasp) quite a bit of structural plastics in the construction! At that point in time, coming from Nikon it was a shock and these lenses were routinely panned in the press and snubbed by most users. Over their production run, not nearly as many of these lenses were produced as one would think given the price and the Nikon glass that they contained. It would have been a very sad end to some very decent lenses had not a weird thing happen on the way to technology's dumpster, ........AUTOFOCUS, then DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY. What the.........?!!?

By the late 80's, auto-focus was sweeping all before it's onslaught on the photographic landscape, and as a part of that, it became evident that focusing via motors could not be accomplished efficiently using the traditional helical mechanism. There was simply too much drag. So, virtually all modern lens use the pin-in-slot method, though much more efficient, doesn't give that satiny smooth mechanical feel of the traditional manual-focus lens. 

Then digital photography happened, and a number of weird things converged together to create a strange set of circumstances. With APS-C sized sensors, or smaller such as 4/3rd, Micro 4/3rd, older lenses designed to deal with a "full-frame" 35mm were quite often found to be very sharp since you were only using the center of the glass. Then it was found that these lenses could easily be used on many cameras through an inexpensive adapter. This made the old Nikon lenses especially popular since: 1. they were some of the best glass, and 2. the relatively long back-spacing requirement allowed them to be easily adapted. This is especially true for the so-called "mirrorless" cameras such as the various Micro 4/3rd and the Sony Nex (although there are many more).

This combined with the advent of DSLR based video, has caused a boom in the "old" manual focus lens market. Many lenses that were considered inferior whether by perception or actual comparison of their time have become popular....which brings me back to the Nikon "E" Series. Ultimately, it's been found that they are not only highly competent, but given their compact size and low weight they make a good physical match for modern digital cameras. Even their focusing action is seen as comparatively smooth compared to modern autofocus lenses used in manual mode!

For me personally, it began with my slightly odd obsession with the "pancake" lens. I've always liked them in an "ugly duckling" sort of way and have thought that a slightly "wide" focal length would be perfect for my "street-shooter" project. However, the price has always been an issue. If I was somebody else, I'd probably just shell out the $500 or so that it cost to buy the Cosina made Voigtlander SL II, 20mm or 28mm lenses. And neither is the priginal "pancake", Nikon 45mm/f2.8 that I've previously written about. Of course the updated 45mm "P" of 2001-2006 has attained collectors status (~$600+ range), they are nowhere close to the budget of a frugal person of any kind.

Therefore, back to the "E" lenses. They seem to have been made over most of the 80's. There was of course the 50mm/f1.8, as well as the very typical range of 28mm, 35mm, 100mm, 135mm as well as a few zooms, 35-70mm, 70-150mm and 70-210mm. Some of them have even attained a mythical status (eg. 70-150mm). As it happens, I actually have one of them, a 50mm/f1.8 which came attached to the a broken EM that I traded for, which I've tried out on my D300. And let me tell ya; it's not an accident that it's often referred to as a "pancake" lens. It balances oddly on the D300 which is a big camera (especially with the MB-D10 attached), but it has the linkages to meter with the old AI lenses. However, what I REALLY liked was that lens attached to the D50 "Plastic Fantastic" camera! Wow, it is super-compact and easy to handle! Two problems though: 1. 50mm equals 75mm on my DX sensor'd cameras, and 2. it doesn't meter on the camera that I'd really like to use it on. What to do?

What you can see here if you look closely on the mount of this old Nikkor 80-200mm zoom is electronic contacts from modern AF mount. Apparently you can buy these things in kit form complete with a jig that helps you to correctly attach them to the mount of an old lens which allows it to send the lens data to the modern Nikon DSLRs! About $50.

So, what all this amounts to is a nice little project shaping up. I need to chase down a 28mm Nikon "E" Series lens (~$50 or so), add a "chip" and get the equivalent of a 42mm lens in a very compact form attached to a compact camera, thus creating a "do-it-yourself" street-shooter.


 

Great Deal: The 6 Megapixel DSLR

In the later half of 2003, a huge shift occurred in the photography world. Although Single Lens Reflex cameras equipped with digital sensors had been around for some time, going all the way back to midway through 1990s. They were unwieldy, expensive and didn't have enough resolution to pose a threat to film. And although the Nikon D1 of 1999 with it's 2.7 Mp sensor was the killer hardware for professional photojournalists, the $5500 price tag barely made a ripple in the consumer market. Then came the Canon Digital Rebel (300D)!
Most of you know that I'm not a Canon shooter, but I'm happy to give credit where credit is due. List priced at $899, this was the camera that kicked down the door that led to the world-wide consumers stampeded....along with the rest of the camera manufacturers that had the where-with-all to build a similar product. Nikon followed with the D70 in January of 2004 and the DSLR rush was on!
So, why then, with those cameras? Let's start from the beginning. Ever since the 1960s, the single lens reflex (more specifically Japanese SLRs) had dominated the photography scene. Virtually all serious photographers bought them, and those that didn't (serious or not) wanted one. When digital came along in the mid-to late 90's, it was obvious that, that was going to be the next big thing in photography, however, the sensors didn't give enough resolution for pictures to not look grainy and "pixelated" when blown up beyond snapshot (4x6) size and there was so much electronic "noise" in the image beyond ISO 400 that they were all but unusable.
However, between 2000 and 2003 a series of technologies converged to form the perfect storm of consumer market-dom! First, noise was conquered in larger APS-C format sensors which was the size first used in market-viable DSLRs. At the same time, manufacturers were able to get enough photo-sites onto them to get resolution up to 6 Mp, thus enabling prints blown up to 11x14 (and beyond) to be virtually indistinguishable from film! The third and main event was the breaking of the $1000 barrier which brought in the flood of consumers which has further driven the costs of production (and price of cameras) down through the magic of economies of scale! You take these advances, cram them into a cheaper to produce plastic body, get rid of a few expensive features; a seminal product is created!
At this stage of the game, everyone from serious amateurs to soccer-moms were snapping them up as fast as Canon and Nikon could build them. This led to pretty much every other manufacturer jumping into the pool. I'm not going to do a timeline here, but suffice to say that between 2003 and 2005, everyone from Pentax, Olympus to Konica/Minolta got something out into the sub-$1000 market-space. What does that mean to us......the frugal propellerheads of the world?
The fact is that to the "Average Joe" who just wants to shoot pictures of their kids growing up, family events and maybe even dabble in some artsy things like shooting the moon or wildflowers, 6 Mp is plenty. And these barrier-breaking cameras are now hitting the used market by the thousands! With entry-level replacements MSRPs at something south of $599, that puts fully functional used DSLRs in the sub-$300 range and I've seen them sell for close to $200 or less!
Think about this. Here's cameras which are all legitimately competent at virtually anything a normal person might ask of it. Give's the user the capability to access a virtually limitless treasury of lenses of every description, quite often for a "song", shoot pictures to your heart's content AND simply delete the non-keepers.....without the costs of film.....ALL AT THE PRICE OF A HALF-DECENT POINT-AND-SHOOT!!! That's just crazy! Is this a great country or what!?!

Which one should you consider? That's contingent on a few factors, the most important being what feels good in your hands and you like the interface the best. It's like the Mac vs. PC question. So here are my recommendations to look at and see what fits you the best:

• Canon Digital Rebel XT (300D) and XTi (350D)
• Nikon D70, D70s, D50, D40
• Olympus E500, E510, E520, E610, E620
• Pentax *ist D, *ist DS
• Konica/Minolta 5D
• Sony A100, A200 (first two models after Sony took over the Konica/Minolta line)

I chose these, because they are all at least 6 Mp, and can routinely be found in the $200-300 price range. All of them are systems that have been around for some time and therefore have sold quite a lot of cameras (with Nikon and Canon being far and away ahead of the others), lenses and other accessories. Some of them, such as Nikon and Pentax still use the same lens mount (with some modifications) going back to their film camera days thus allowing a user access to a huge inventory of glass, both OEM and after-market.
Which brings up the reasons for choosing one manufacturer over another:

• Feature set. Research, research and research. All of these cameras have ridiculously long lists of features, some useful, some not as much. Most have similar ones, others (like the Konica/Minolta sensor-shift), not as much.
• What do you like. Be a pest. If you have friends with any of these cameras, by all means ask them about it and see if you can take a few pictures with them. For instance; you may find that while most reviewers don't care for Canon's grip size/shape, that maybe with small hands, you are fine with it.
• Personal history. Does your dad have a bunch of old gear in a closet that you can have? Maybe there are several old Nikon or Pentax lenses that will work with your "new" camera and put you ahead of the game?
• Cast a wide net. After looking at the other factors, if it doesn't look like one is an overwhelming favorite, then create a list of all the ones that might work and find the best deal among them.
• Other factors. What else might you want to do with it in the future. It could be anything from underwater photography to astro-photography. Understand that the most popular (read common) models such as Canons and Nikons generally have had the most accessories made for them. This could range from something as common as dedicated flash units, to something as esoteric as telescope adapter mounts or macro-photography bellows units.

If you used to use SLRs back in the film days, the decision is a "no brainer". If you haven't and have been shooting pictures with a digital point and shoot, the difference in using a DSLR is astounding, almost indescribable. You'll wonder why it took you so long to do it. No, although $200 isn't inconsequential, the fact of the matter is that for a rather modest investment you can open yourself up to a whole new world.
Next time: how to collect important DSLR accessories, the Frugal Propellerhead way.