Brief Comparison Of Various Lamy Extra Fine Nibs' Output

[A Smug Dill]

These are writing samples using just a single unit of each model of LAMY EF nib I have, without any claim or implication that one unit of (say) Z55 EF nib will be identical or comparable with a different unit of such.

The first six nibs were all fitted in turn onto the same feed on the same pen drawing from the same reservoir (i.e. converter) of LAMY Benitoite ink. Each nib was cleaned in a dilute solution of ammonia and detergent and patted dry on a paper towel immediately before fitting on the LAMY cp1 pen used, then pressed against a paper towel until the ink being drawn through is dark enough, then written with on another sheet of Rhodia Dotpad 80g/m² paper until the colour and flow appear stabilised.

The last of the nibs listed is the EF nib that came fitted on my LAMY 2000 blue Bauhaus pen.



There are discernible but relatively minor differences between the ink flow and output of the first six nibs; the LAMY 2000's EF nib is what stood out as glaringly different, and incidentally I find its output the least pleasing.

The first nib is somewhat scratchy, to the point that it ripped and picked up fibres from the paper surface from time to time. I don't suppose every Z50 EF nib is equally as damaging, but I didn't feel like either going through my other Z50 EF nibs to find a better, smoother unit to test, or modifying the nib such that it is significantly different from factory condition (or at least as it was supplied to me by the retailer) by smoothing it with micro-mesh.

The Z52 and Z53 nibs are both harder than the Z50 nib, but can put down lines that are at least equally as broad when pressed.

The gold nibs feel softer than the steel nibs, and I can physically see more elastic deformation in the body when they are pressed, but their tines don't spread as far apart and thus the "maximum" line widths are not as broad.

Even though there has been several reports that the EF nibs on LAMY Dialog 3 pens — which use Z55 nibs — exhibit the characteristic of an architect's grind, in that lines left by downstrokes are narrow and cross-strokes wider, the one I tested proves not every Z55 EF nib is like that. (I have two Z55 EF nibs, but I haven't looked at the other one yet; it's on a new pen that only arrived on the weekend.)

The Z57 EF nib tested had more of the Sailor Zoom nib-like quality, in that the incident angle between nib and page changes the line widths of cross-strokes notably.

The Lamy 200 EF nib is wettest and broadest of them all, and has the least potential for delivering line variation through hand pressure moderation or fluctuation. Ugh.

 

<EDIT>

I just tested another Z50 EF nib, and it was as scratchy as the one used above. Alrighty then, micro-mesh it is.

 

All better now.

Edited December 23, 2019 by A Smug Dill

[tamiya]

Neat lineup! The L2k line looks a lot wetter.

 

Yeah I've polished & tweaked all my Lamys in use... if only to matchup with the first Al-Star that came from a proper penshop. It's generously wet & smooth; the others bought untested from other sources usually aren't.

[WLSpec]

That's really great, thanks for sharing! As Tamiya said, it is interesting to see the glaring difference in the line of the 2k vs. all of the other Z model nibs.

[Intensity]

Very useful, thank you! My favorite Lamy nib in feel is Z55 gold, around fine or so. One I had had amazing pencil-like feedback and very pleasant dampened feel, not so much springy. Next favorite is Lamy 1.5mm steel nib. Everything else is a disappointment Don't like my modern/latest Lamy 2000 nib at all--only keeping the pen and sent it to a nibmeister because I like the rest of the pen. I would have preferred for my Lamy 2000 to somehow have the Z55 nib with a hood overhang.

[Bo Bo Olson]

I've read often that the 2000's nib is a tad wider than Lamy Steel. They are made upstairs in a separate room, with old fashioned machinery. (60's or so looking machinery)

(The ball point cartridge making machines, is defiantly '60's.I expected more up to date, but why, turns out enough, with long paid for equipment.)

 

When I visited the factory 5-6 years ago, the steel nib making machinery was down stairs and quite large, 4 yards by 10, with one man changing the diamond dust coated rubber cutting disks.

 

Goulet visited the factory with in the last year or so, and has a vid of the new smaller, lower and shorter steel nib making machine.

 

There is still tolerance be it man made or machine made. It looks like the 2000's nib is on the fat side of tolerance.

[Honeybadgers]

It's interesting how the Z5X gold nibs don't have that architect-like effect that's so common. Do you hold the pen at a 50+ degree angle? Because when I asked endlesspens, I was told that every lamy EF gold nib they had, had that little pseudo-architect effect of an F/M cross stroke at a 40-45 degree angle.

 

The 2000 nib doesn't look wider. it looks wetter.

Edited December 25, 2019 by Honeybadgers

[A Smug Dill]

Do you hold the pen at a 50+ degree angle?

Yes, as in steeper and closer to vertical when I write.

 

By the way, just to be clear, I held both the Lamy 200 and the cp1 at similar angles when I did the comparative samples above.

 

<EDIT>

I just filmed myself writing with my Lamy 2000 in both Chinese and English, and did some measurements in GIMP on a number of frames. I typically hold my pen at 62°±4° when writing to fit 5mm spacing. (Not that easy to hold the camera in my left hand so that the orientation of the lens is perpendicular to the slit on the nib when viewed from above!) On the steeper end of that range when writing in Chinese kaishu, and on the shallower side when writing in English cursive script.

 

That incidentally seems to match how Platinum gives its chart of line widths against different nib width grades, but I certainly wasn't trying deliberately to make it "fit".

 

Because when I asked endlesspens, I was told that every lamy EF gold nib they had, had that little pseudo-architect effect of an F/M cross stroke at a 40-45 degree angle.

 

Such a shallow angle is largely irrelevant to my applications that employ fountain pens, unless I'm pushing a Fude nib or Zoom nib (or something along those lines) to create "special effects". I can't even write properly (in English cursive script) for more than one or two short lines at a time when holding a pen like that.

 

The 2000 nib doesn't look wider. it looks wetter.

 

The lines put down by my Lamy 2000 blue Bauhaus certainly look broader to me. You're of course welcome to disagree.

Edited December 26, 2019 by A Smug Dill

[Bo Bo Olson]

Unless using an Italic nib where I hold it more vertical (& canted 45 degrees) and before my big index knuckle, I hold all my pens at 45 max just after the big index finger knuckle, more often at 40 degrees the start of the web of the thumb, unless the pen is very heavy/long, when it slips into the pit of the web of my thumb, held at 35 degrees.

The exact hold angle depends on the length, weight of a fountain pen for me.....I can control the angle by moving my thumb up or down the body of the fountain pen. I do use the 'forefinger up' hold.

I do post, in I seldom use Large pens. (Snorkel being thin is a great posting pen in it is thin and is a great balanced large pen.)

Even my Kugal nibs (Geha and Osmia KMs) I hold low...but can hold it vertical like a ball point or a pencil as an alternative, in such nibs were made for that.

 

In some like holding a fountain pen like a ball point pen is one of the reasons Pelikan makes double kugal/ball nibs today...as normal.

[Honeybadgers]

Yes, as in steeper and closer to vertical when I write.

 

By the way, just to be clear, I held both the Lamy 200 and the cp1 at similar angles when I did the comparative samples above.

 

<EDIT>

I just filmed myself writing with my Lamy 2000 in both Chinese and English, and did some measurements in GIMP on a number of frames. I typically hold my pen at 62°±4° when writing to fit 5mm spacing. (Not that easy to hold the camera in my left hand so that the orientation of the lens is perpendicular to the slit on the nib when viewed from above!) On the steeper end of that range when writing in Chinese kaishu, and on the shallower side when writing in English cursive script.

 

That incidentally seems to match how Platinum gives its chart of line widths against different nib width grades, but I certainly wasn't trying deliberately to make it "fit".

 

 

Such a shallow angle is largely irrelevant to my applications that employ fountain pens, unless I'm pushing a Fude nib or Zoom nib (or something along those lines) to create "special effects". I can't even write properly (in English cursive script) for more than one or two short lines at a time when holding a pen like that.

 

 

The lines put down by my Lamy 2000 blue Bauhaus certainly look broader to me. You're of course welcome to disagree.

 

That explains it. The Z5x would run a proper EF at the high angle you use. Lucky, you can actually take advantage of the nib that way to get the cool architect effect when you want it and normal EF when not. I have a much more traditional western pointed pen style of hand and it's right in the fattest spot on my dialog 3, so I am having to get it ground.

 

My 2000 EF is pretty close to my other lamy EF's. But it is wetter. And it's more square and definitely doesn't have that architect like foot that my dialog 3 has (which can give my cross strokes and cursive a flat out western medium overall line) But they're also hand ground and known to vary quite a bit, so who knows. I'm looking at it from a computer screen, you have it in person.

[A Smug Dill]

I just tested another Z50 EF nib, and it was as scratchy as the one used above. Alrighty then, micro-mesh it is.

I unboxed and inked up a new LAMY cp1 for my wife tonight, and its Z50 EF nib was also scratchy and wrote noisily, especially with cross-strokes (in both directions, but more so going right-to-left).

 

The Z50 EF nib on my LAMY Accent isn't quite as bad, although I can still definitely hear the cross-strokes made with it on a Rhodia Dotpad. I had it in mind for a while now to fit a Z53 EF nib on that pen anyway, so I swapped out its Z50 nib and put it on my wife's new pen while I was at it. The Z53 — designed to fit on a Aion — nib writes much more smoothly and less noisily, notwithstanding being slightly stubby in character (but still puts down acceptably narrow lines), and in my opinion looks a lot better on the Accent than the Z50 does.

 

By the way, I was pleasantly surprised that in spite of not having uncapped my Accent for seven weeks — since 12/11/2019, according to my log book — not only was the pen ready to write as soon as the cap came off, but the ink hasn't darkened at all. When I unscrewed the barrel to inspect the ink level in the converter, it's remains nearly full; I verified that is the case by moving the piston mechanism slowly until a bead (not bubble!) of ink emerged from the square hole on the underside of the feed, then back to full-fill position, and then repeating the exercise again to drive out all the air inside the converter. That is very impressive cap effectiveness for a LAMY pen; the cap of my beloved cp1 in black is acceptably good in that regard, but this is definitely better.

[Jamerelbe]

I unboxed and inked up a new LAMY cp1 for my wife tonight, and its Z50 EF nib was also scratchy and wrote noisily, especially with cross-strokes (in both directions, but more so going right-to-left).

 

The Z50 EF nib on my LAMY Accent isn't quite as bad, although I can still definitely hear the cross-strokes made with it on a Rhodia Dotpad. I had it in mind for a while now to fit a Z53 EF nib on that pen anyway, so I swapped out its Z50 nib and put it on my wife's new pen while I was at it. The Z53 — designed to fit on a Aion — nib writes much more smoothly and less noisily, notwithstanding being slightly stubby in character (but still puts down acceptably narrow lines), and in my opinion looks a lot better on the Accent than the Z50 does.

 

By the way, I was pleasantly surprised that in spite of not having uncapped my Accent for seven weeks — since 12/11/2019, according to my log book — not only was the pen ready to write as soon as the cap came off, but the ink hasn't darkened at all. When I unscrewed the barrel to inspect the ink level in the converter, it's remains nearly full; I verified that is the case by moving the piston mechanism slowly until a bead (not bubble!) of ink emerged from the square hole on the underside of the feed, then back to full-fill position, and then repeating the exercise again to drive out all the air inside the converter. That is very impressive cap effectiveness for a LAMY pen; the cap of my beloved cp1 in black is acceptably good in that regard, but this is definitely better.

 

I think you may have more Lamy EF nibs than I do, but my limited experience (and anecdotal reports from others) suggests these nibs are *more* likely to suffer from scratchiness than others - Lamy's QC leaves a bit to be desired! I did a bit of nib adjustment to mine (including a light 'polish' of the tip with micromesh), and it now writes quite smoothly.

[A Smug Dill]

I think you may have more Lamy EF nibs than I do,

 

 

Probably. I have maybe seven LAMY Z50 EF nibs all up, and as you can see above, one or two units of each of the other steel and gold EF nibs. It's only with the Z50 nibs that I have the problem of scratchiness, it seems; the Z52 and Z53 EF nibs are hard and smooth. Even after micro-meshing the Z50 nibs, the cross-strokes are still relatively noisy, but as long as they aren't tearing the surface of the paper and ripping up fibres, that's not a big deal.

[Intensity]

My 2 Lamy 2000 EF nibs -- both purchased in 2019 -- were quite different. Both were well-aligned and symmetrical, looking at them in high magnification. First had no sweet spot whatsoever, and I wasn't sure what the whole "sweet spot" discussion was even about. It wrote well at any angle with the vertical and rotation. My second one had a problem of skipping and running dry unless I rotated and tilted the pen just right, and even then it was difficult to maintain the pen in that position so it would start skipping quickly. It had the famous "sweet spot" and was very unpleasant to write with. I did try different vertical angles as well as different inks. It also wrote a bit wider than the first one, with more noticeable architect grind.

 

Moral of the story is: 2 nibs, few months apart, new batches, same user, very different experience.

[MuddyWaters]

for truly EF nib, get a Wing Sung 6359 replacement nib.

[Dusted]

On 12/22/2019 at 8:53 PM, A Smug Dill said:

These are writing samples using just a single unit of each model of LAMY EF nib I have, without any claim or implication that one unit of (say) Z55 EF nib will be identical or comparable with a different unit of such.

The first six nibs were all fitted in turn onto the same feed on the same pen drawing from the same reservoir (i.e. converter) of LAMY Benitoite ink. Each nib was cleaned in a dilute solution of ammonia and detergent and patted dry on a paper towel immediately before fitting on the LAMY cp1 pen used, then pressed against a paper towel until the ink being drawn through is dark enough, then written with on another sheet of Rhodia Dotpad 80g/m² paper until the colour and flow appear stabilised.

The last of the nibs listed is the EF nib that came fitted on my LAMY 2000 blue Bauhaus pen.



There are discernible but relatively minor differences between the ink flow and output of the first six nibs; the LAMY 2000's EF nib is what stood out as glaringly different, and incidentally I find its output the least pleasing.

The first nib is somewhat scratchy, to the point that it ripped and picked up fibres from the paper surface from time to time. I don't suppose every Z50 EF nib is equally as damaging, but I didn't feel like either going through my other Z50 EF nibs to find a better, smoother unit to test, or modifying the nib such that it is significantly different from factory condition (or at least as it was supplied to me by the retailer) by smoothing it with micro-mesh.

The Z52 and Z53 nibs are both harder than the Z50 nib, but can put down lines that are at least equally as broad when pressed.

The gold nibs feel softer than the steel nibs, and I can physically see more elastic deformation in the body when they are pressed, but their tines don't spread as far apart and thus the "maximum" line widths are not as broad.

Even though there has been several reports that the EF nibs on LAMY Dialog 3 pens — which use Z55 nibs — exhibit the characteristic of an architect's grind, in that lines left by downstrokes are narrow and cross-strokes wider, the one I tested proves not every Z55 EF nib is like that. (I have two Z55 EF nibs, but I haven't looked at the other one yet; it's on a new pen that only arrived on the weekend.)

The Z57 EF nib tested had more of the Sailor Zoom nib-like quality, in that the incident angle between nib and page changes the line widths of cross-strokes notably.

The Lamy 200 EF nib is wettest and broadest of them all, and has the least potential for delivering line variation through hand pressure moderation or fluctuation. Ugh.

 

<EDIT>

I just tested another Z50 EF nib, and it was as scratchy as the one used above. Alrighty then, micro-mesh it is.

 

All better now.

Thanks for the link to this. I’m still very new to this but the Lamy UF nib I got is way too broad for me. It seems like the European style is a larger bolder stroke than I use. Imagine rotund German guy writing with florid strokes.

 

Sorry to reactivate a necro thread

[OldTravelingShoe]

@A Smug Dill, the Lamy Z55/56/57 just came up in a discussion we have to prepare the next Netherlands Pen Club meetup, so one thing led to another and I found your excellent review. Many thanks! 

[Mercian]

On 12/25/2019 at 11:22 PM, A Smug Dill said:

The lines put down by my Lamy 2000 blue Bauhaus certainly look broader to me. You're of course welcome to disagree.

Lamy actually provide (on their website) a guide to their different nib grades’ nominal widths, and - crucially - the tolerances within which they are produced.

 

 

As far as I know (which is, admittedly, not very far) they are the only pen manufacturer that does this.

 

As one can see, the tolerance to which they machine their ‘EF’ nibs is one sixth of those nibs’ nominal width - so the potential difference in width between two of their ‘EF’ nibs that pass their QA process could be as much as one third of the nibs’ nominal width.

As such, it is no surprise that you have found such differences between their nibs.

 

The company will of course manufacture its nibs to conform to the expectations of what it perceives to be its primary market - Europeans writing Latin characters, whether in cursive or ‘print’.
Your own use-case - the writing of Chinese characters - requires much more precision than does the ‘average’ or ‘typical’ European hand writing Latin characters, so I am not surprised that Lamy’s ‘EF’ nibs have proved unsatisfactory for you.

 

That said, the difference in widths does not explain the ‘scratchiness’ that you (& I) have experienced from some Lamy ‘EF’ nibs.
That is something that I also attribute to the same factor - the lower minimal degree of manufacturing-precision that is required for the product to be deemed to be ‘acceptable’ when one is engaged in the mass-manufacture of nibs for Europeans writing Latin characters than the degree of precision that would be necessary to conform to the requirements of people writing Chinese characters -  but it is still irksome when one encounters it!

 

I do applaud Lamy for making the information about their nib grades/widths available, and would like to see the same information provided by other manufacturers.

[A Smug Dill]

1 minute ago, Mercian said:

As far as I know (which is, admittedly, not very far) they are the only pen manufacturer that does this.

 

Platinum Pen did that, from no later than 2011, until it refreshed its website design in (if I recall correctly) 2021.

[Mercian]

It’s interesting to note that the manufacturing tolerance that Platinum published for their narrowest nibs (±0.03mm) is twice as precise as Lamy’s published tolerance (±0.06mm).

For their next-narrowest nibs the tolerance is also more precise than Lamy, @±0.04mm.

And, even when their nibs have a nominal grade that is in the same range as Lamy’s EF, Platinum’s tolerance remains more-precise than Lamy’s, @±0.05mm.

I find the provision of this information - by both companies - to be very useful.

Sadly, I also recognise that I - a ‘hobbyist’ who is interested to know this information - am very much an ‘outlier’ within the group of potential customers of any pen company. But I still wish that more manufacturers would provide it!

Edited February 5, 2023 by Mercian
Changed two words, for disambiguation

[A Smug Dill]

1 hour ago, Mercian said:

Lamy actually provide (on their website) a guide to their different nib grades’ nominal widths, and - crucially - the tolerances within which they are produced.

 

1 hour ago, Mercian said:

It’s interesting to note that the manufacturing tolerance that Platinum published for their narrowest nibs (±0.03mm) is twice as precise as Lamy’s published tolerance (±0.06mm).

 

Wait…!

 

While it is a little unclear as to what Lamy meant by the figures given in that diagram you have copied from its nib guide page, you are most certainly misinterpreting the figures given by Platinum Pen in its chart of nib width grades.

 

Platinum's figures are expressly, as stated in the column heading in Japanese, for line width (on the page), not the physical width of any facet of the nib's tipping before or after finishing it in the manufacturing process. The finer details of the testing procedure, such as how many iterations were done and/or how many different nibs of each width grade were used, are unclear; but it is stated above the chart that the downward pressure applied is 50g, and the angle from the page is 60°.

 

Read in conjunction with the text against the other chart of published test results, for how long a line of ink each nib width grade can/has put down with a standard cartridge of ink, my conjecture is that the most likely scenario for each test iteration would be that the nib being tested was fitted onto a test pen and supported as usual by a feed (that is standard for that fountain pen model), and a fresh standard ink cartridge was inserted into the pen's grip section, then the pen was fixed into a rigid holder to ensure it was consistently held at 60° — either to the surface of a (long!) strip of paper being pulled across beneath the nib like a conveyor belt, or to the tangential plane of a rolling drum over which a strip of paper was pulled — and 50g of downward pressure was applied, while a sensor device then measured and recorded the line width continuously, as opposed to just selecting a single point on the several hundred metres long line of ink as the definitive line width figure. It would make sense that the line width is not uniform along the entire line of ink, even within a single test iteration for a particular nib.

 

Whereas the cursively rendered instances of the text string ”Lamy” in Lamy's diagram are, in all likelihood, the “artist's impression” version for illustration only; the line width variation in the uppercase L for the B nib is too great to match a description of “0.675mm ±0.075mm”, and the stem of the L too thin to have realistically been rendered by the typical B nib. So it's very unclear to me as to whether Lamy was referring to line width, or the edge-to-edge (or diagonal?) measurement of one facet of the nib tipping as observed or by design (specifications).