Since you guys seem to know what you're talking about: I have the chance to buy an old all metal EL -Nikkor 50/2.8 for a good price. What is the difference to a new EL-Nikkor 50/2.8 N, exept the plastics? Is the same optical design?

thanks/Fredrik Annell

-- Fredrik Annell (freann@mac.com), March 24, 2002

Answers

Shootin from the hip (I may be wrong) - I think the plastic one is a different optical design. In any case, always study a second hand e.l. carefully - they often have mould/fungus in them. BTW, I wouldn't use a nikkor for enlarging from leica lenses as you loose the dreamy tonality to a large extent - I replaced my 502.8el (n) for a rodenstock rodagon and have been pretty consistently pleased. Just my opinion, of course...

-- Steve Jones (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), March 24, 2002.

A few years ago I went from an El-Nikkor 50/2.8 (circa 1970) to a more recent Rodenstock APO Rodagon. The difference was immediately apparent. Grain is crisper, images have more "depth." The enlarger lens is a vital link in the chain from negative to print. I wouldn't mess with an old lens; coatings improve over the years, even if the optical formulas stay the same.

-- Phil Stiles (Stiles@metrocast.net), March 24, 2002.