Nippon Kogaku W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 LTM
Lenses

Nikon (Nippon Kogaku) W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 LTM – Nikon’s Tiny Gems, pt 2 – By Agata Urbaniak

October 4, 2021

The W-Nikkor 3.5cm f/2.5 I covered in part 1 of this short series exceeded expectations. Reading about a lens is one thing, but using it is quite another. And just because a lens looks good on paper doesn’t necessarily mean it will appeal to a particular photographer and make them get out there and shoot. A lot of the time aspects that have little to do with optical quality, such as size, can set a lens apart from similar offerings. And if pocketable camera gear floats your boat, it doesn’t get much better than the W-Nikkors for LTM.

I don’t quite remember how exactly I encountered the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5, I’m guessing Ebay is to blame. You throw your net wide enough, you will find some must-have goodies. But other than a hunch that it might be an interesting lens I didn’t have much to go by.

Background

There seems to be very little information on the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 lens online, even less featuring sample photos. There isn’t even an entry on it in Nikon’s lens history section, The Thousand and One Nights. There’s just a brief mention in story number 12 dedicated to the Nikkor-H Auto 2.8cm f/3.5 about how the rangefinder lens was a benchmark they intended to supersede when designing the SLR lens. It’s a single-coated, symmetrical, Orthometar-type, non-retrofocus design released in 1952 for LTM and S-mount. I wasn’t sure what to expect from it but I did hope it wasn’t going to be significantly inferior to the 3.5cm.

W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 LTM

W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 LTM mounted on the Leica M Monochrom typ 246

Build and handling

The W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 looks pretty much like a twin of the 3.5cm. It’s slightly shorter at about 21mm, same width (35mm), ~180 degree focus throw, 1 metre minimum focusing distance, 34.5mm filter thread, comes equipped with an infinity lock. The 8 straight blade aperture stops down to f/22 at 1-stop clicks. And just as in the case of the 3.5cm lens, the viewfinder blockage is zero.

W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 LTM

W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 LTM mounted on the Leica M Monochrom typ 246

LTM or S-mount?

The LTM version can be adapted to a digital Leica without any issues and will bring up the 28mm framelines if used with the correct adapter (requires the version with the cutaway to accommodate the infinity lock).

The S-mount version might unfortunately interfere with the focus cam at shorter distances so if you’re going to use this lens on a Leica M, definitely go for the LTM version.

Filters and hood

Same as in the case of the 3.5cm lens, the filter thread on the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 is 34.5mm. The front of the lens is the same size so you can use the A36 filters or a SOOGZ adapter. The only “but” here is, the mouth of the lens is slimmer and so the clamp-on filter will overlap the dot indicating the selected aperture. This is a minor inconvenience as you can always line one of the screws of the filter up with the dot to know at a glance which aperture is currently selected.

I am yet to acquire a hood for it (they are out there but cost hundreds of pounds) but I figure the SOOGZ adapter might potentially come in handy and allow a generic 39mm screw-in hood.

W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 LTM with a red Leitz E36 slip-on filter attached

W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 LTM with a red Leitz A36 slip-on filter attached

Image quality

Sample photo taken with the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5

Leica M Monochrom typ 246 + W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 + Leitz R (red) A36 filter

The image quality from the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 exceeds that of the 3.5cm lens in most regards. I find it produces better sharpness that’s also more uniform across the entire frame. Forgive my getting quite technical here, but the images pack just a tiny but noticeable bit more oomph. The contrast is excellent and distortion is nowhere to be found.

Sample photo taken with the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5

Leica M Monochrom typ 246 + W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 + Leitz R (red) A36 filter

Sample photo taken with the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5

Leica M Monochrom typ 246 + W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 + Leitz R (red) A36 filter

As far as downsides go, the vignette is more pronounced (although I wouldn’t call it heavy), which I personally like but not everyone does. Flare-resistance is nowhere near as good as the 3.5cm. The bokeh is once again very nervous but how crucial is a creamy bokeh in a relatively slow wide angle lens?

Sample photo taken with the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 demonstrating flare and bokeh

Leica M Monochrom typ 246 + W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 + Leitz R (red) A36 filter; example of flare and bokeh

Sample photo taken with the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 demonstrating flare

Leica M Monochrom typ 246 + W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 + Leitz R (red) A36 filter; example of flare

There’s of course the simple matter of personal preference – 35mm or 28mm? Personally, I find the 2.8cm, due to its slightly wider angle, proves to be more useful in everyday shooting. In almost every other regard the lenses go head-to-head, with the 2.8cm having a slight edge (in my purely subjective opinion). For a day trip somewhere I pack this lens and the 8.5cm and I’m good to go!

Sample photo taken with the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5

Leica M Monochrom typ 246 + W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 + Leitz R (red) A36 filter

Sample photo taken with the W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5

Leica M Monochrom typ 246 + W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 + Leitz R (red) A36 filter

Final Thoughts

The W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 is the third 28mm lens for Leica that I’ve used. The others were Voigtlander 28mm f/2 Ultron and MS-Optical 28mm Perar f/4 Super-Triplet. The Voigtlander’s selling point was the fast aperture but in practice it proved to be quite soft (although perhaps there was something off with my copy because it generally garners positive reviews). MS-Optical is an incredibly thin pancake which unfortunately feels quite flimsy, and the 19mm filters for it (if you do manage to screw them into the teeny tiny hood) are as hard to find as 34.5mm. The W-Nikkor.C 2.8cm f/3.5 is a totally different class in terms of quality of build and is by far my favourite 28mm lens.

Support 35mmc

For as little as $1 a month, you can help support the upkeep of 35mmc via Patreon. Alternatively, please feel free to chuck a few pennies in the tip jar via Ko-fi:

Become a Patron!

Learn about where your money goes here.
Would like to write for 35mmc? Find out how here.

8 Comments

  • Reply
    Mike Watkins
    October 4, 2021 at 11:07 am

    Once again a great article! I used to have an S-Mount version of this lens and your pics are making me think seriously about picking up an LTM example.

  • Reply
    Neal A Wellons
    October 4, 2021 at 11:30 am

    Great story, photos and a very neat lens. I have another 28mm f/3.5 LTM that I shoot regularly, the Canon. I have mainly been using it on my wide-angle Barnack, a Canon IV with color film. Your article makes me want to give it a try with B&W.

    I don’t know how it would compare with the Nikon but I suspect most would be happy with either.

  • Reply
    Daniel
    October 4, 2021 at 1:32 pm

    hello , many thanks for this article . you are indicating ” The LTM version can be adapted ….if used with the correct adapter (requires the version with the cutaway to accommodate the infinity lock). ” . I am not sure to identify which adapter it is ? could you please be so kind to explain us whats is it or add a picture . thanks daniel from france

  • Reply
    Kurt Ingham
    October 4, 2021 at 3:31 pm

    Very interesting and well presented Thanks

  • Reply
    Dan Castelli
    October 5, 2021 at 12:24 am

    Another informative article.
    I took the 28 Voigtländer on a vacation to Ireland. I used my M-4P, and was less than happy with my results. Good looking lens, well built, but for me it just fell short.
    Others may have had better results. Guinness did not play a factor in any of this.

  • Reply
    Sroyon
    November 2, 2021 at 5:58 pm

    The Thousand and One Nights article on this lens just dropped 😁 I am reading it now, about halfway through. It’s a really good article, Sato talks about his initial tendency to think of every lens as some sort of complicated triplet, and how the Orthometar led him to rethink his approach.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.