Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: 300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

  1. #1

    300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    I will be purchasing a 300mm lens soon and was planning on getting either the fuji 300mm f/8.5 C, or the 300mm f/9 nikkor-M. But while perusing KEH, i saw a listing for a 300mm f/9 nikkor-Q. Can anyone tell what the difference is between the M and Q lenses? I've read in a few posts that the Q was the predecessor to the M, but not much was said about their differences. Is the Q multicoated? Is the M a significant improvement over the Q? Thanks for all your help.

  2. #2

    300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    Very different lenses. The "Q" is a dialyte/artar type lens (much like the Fujinon I think) while the "M" is a tessar. Both should be good lenses, but all things equal but I would go for the M if for no other reason then it is Multi-coated (the Q is not) and designed as a taking lens (the Q is a repro-lens). Both lenses should cover 4x5 and 5x7 fine, but for 8x10 the Q will be right on the edge while the M will cover a bit more.

  3. #3

    300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    JG, what is the basis for your statement that the f9 Nikkor-Q lenses are dialyte designs? The common belief has been that they are tessar types, just like the Nikkor-M. All that the "Q" for Quad designation tells us is that the lens has 4 glass elements -- it doesn't indicate how many groups the lens has. Photos I have seen of the f9 Nikkor-Q lenses on eBay have looked very much like the Nikkor-M -- I think a dialyte would be somewhat longer. The photos have all shown lenses in shutters, so I think they were sold that way, and are probably not repro lenses.

    Kerry Thalmann in his article on LF Nikkors in the March/April 2003 issue of View Camera states that the f9 Nikkor-Qs are single-coated tessars.

  4. #4

    300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    Well now that you mention it...

    I may well be spreading misinformation; however I had a 300mm Nikkor-Q which was definitely a dialyte type repro lens in barrel. However, I wonder now if it was a f/10 not an f/9. Memory already fading and I haven't even hit 40...

    jason

  5. #5

    300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    There was a f10 Nikkor in barrel for the repro trades. The full name was the Process-Nikkor. I think early versions were also labeled Nikkor-Q. The lens used four air-spaced elements, but it wasn't a dialyte/artar design. The coverage is higher. These lenses can be recognized by the extreme curvature of the outer elements. AFAIK, the longest focal length was 260 mm, so between the aperture, shutter, and focal length, a different lens from the 300 mm Nikkor-Q that Adam is asking about.

  6. #6
    Ted Harris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    3,465

    300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    Just ti stire the pot a bit why are you limiting yourself to those two lenses? Assuming you want to stay relatively light and small you also have the absolutely superb 300mm Fujinon A ( a used copy is available now from Jum at Midwest for ~ 700) and the 305 G Claron ... both in #1 shutters.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,470

    300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    Michael, I have a 260/10 Nikkor-Q that seems to be identical to the Process-Nikkor you mentioned. It is a 4/4 double Gauss type.

    Cheers,

  8. #8

    Re: 300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    The 300mm f 9 Nikkor-M and the 300mm f 9 Nikkor-Q are the same lens with the M having updated cosmetics, that is a newer version of the Copal shutter. They have exactly the same specs and are both multi coated Tessar type lenses. Neither the M or the Q have anything to do with Nikon process lenses. How do I know this? I called Nikon and asked a technical advisor to look them up for me. He also informed me that Nikon never made any large format lenses that were not multi coated and they would not be distributing large format or enlarging lenses in the US any longer. They have dropped all their 35mm SLR cameras except for the F-6 as well. Since the 300mm M is bringing well over $500 on eBay I bought a 300mm Q from KEH for $399. At least I can send it back if it's a dog.

  9. #9

    Re: 300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    Hi Steven, Kerry Thalmann wrote an excellent review of Nikon lenses for View Camera magazine (March/April 2003). He alludes to a Nikkor Q series which he dates to the late 1960s or early 1970s. He also states these lenses were single coated and came in the earlier chrome ring copal shutter. There are other specifics mentioned as well but this seems to be the lens you are describing. I am a beginner myself so take my opinion with a grain of salt but I think the main differrence between your lens and the latest 300mm Nikon will be the lens coatings. I have used 35 mm lenses of this vintage and although the lenses were not technically "single coated" (as the lens rep you talked with seemed to suggest) the coatings are much simpler coatings than on modern multi-coated lenses, and so people generally refer to these lenses as single coated. My experiences, atleast with older 35 mm lenses from this time period (even those of simple four element construction), were that contrast seemed a little lower particularly noticeable with color films. However, I was also interested in this KEH lens and was tracking it as well as a used 300mm Rodenstock Geronar lens offerred by Badger at the time. I would be very interested in hearing about your experiences with the lens and I am sure other members of the forum would be as well. All the best, John

  10. #10

    Re: 300mm f/9 nikkor-m vs 300mm f/9 nikkor-q

    I realize this is an ancient thread, but one of these has popped up on ebay. And it looks like a convertible. It has two scales on the aperture for 300 & 450. The full name on the lens is; "Nikkor-Q 1:9 f=300mm Nipon Kogaku Japan no. 903273". Copal #3 w/silver ring, $350 and looks clean. I'd include a link but someone might get grumpy.
    Last edited by scheinfluger_77; 24-Dec-2015 at 10:18. Reason: adding more info
    --- Steve from Missouri ---

Similar Threads

  1. Nikkor-M or W 300mm
    By Austin Space in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 3-Mar-2005, 07:10
  2. Nikkor-M 300mm
    By Austin Space in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 1-Mar-2005, 15:08
  3. Caltar II-N 300mm vs. Nikkor W 300mm
    By Peter Hruby in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 18-Dec-2004, 00:07
  4. 300mm Nikkor M or 360mm Fujinon A - Is the Nikkor THAT Much Better?
    By Scott Rosenberg in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 23-Jun-2004, 05:09
  5. need a Nikkor M 300mm f/9
    By chris jordan in forum New Products and Services
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 24-Jan-2004, 03:19

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •