NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: gryphon1911 on March 14, 2017, 15:33:14
-
It's a good blame, mind you.
Even back in the film days when I started, I was lucky that AF was very good and I was able to use them for all my work succesfully.
Into this day and age, the AF systems being what they are (Nikon D500 is crazy good).....I often wondered why I would even want to consider a manual focus lens.
Well, I was reading posts here and seeing the images from the results from lenses like Nikon AI and AIs lens 105mm, 135mm.
I had opportunity to snag a well used version of the 105mm f/2.5 AIs for cheap. While the outside looks like it has seen quite a bit of hell, the focus and aperture ring feel great and the glass is in immaculate shape.
I put it on the Nikon Df and also adapted it to the Olympus PEN-F. So easy to get focus, such a joy to work with and given the age of them, such a great IQ even wide open.
So, now, I've fallen down the rabbit hole of manual focus Nikkor lenses.
One of my local camera shops has a used Nikkor 55mm f/1.2 for $400.....I'm going to do some research on that lens and see if it is worth the price to me.
-
Me too ;)
Now I am working out which of my MF lenses works best on my different bodies (D700,D500,D800), even the much talk about the Df is tempting, but the prices are to high :o
-
MF for fun and studio stuff, AF for work.
The way to go! ;)
-
this 105/2.8!? :o :o :o
http://richardhaw.com/2017/02/19/repair-micro-nikkor-105mm-f2-8-ai-s/
-
this 105/2.8!? :o :o :o
http://richardhaw.com/2017/02/19/repair-micro-nikkor-105mm-f2-8-ai-s/
I'm so sorry, but no. I mistyped. It is a 105mm f/2.5
I'll correct the original post.
-
The 105/2.5 Nikkor is synergetic with the Df. The designers planned the lens for that [future] camera, or at least had pre-cog capability :D
The rabbit-hole is deep indeed, and there might be a Wonderland at its end.
-
The 105/2.5 Nikkor is synergetic with the Df. The designers planned the lens for that [future] camera, or at least had pre-cog capability :D
The rabbit-hole is deep indeed, and there might be a Wonderland at its end.
Indeed....you are absolutely correct. I was a little taken aback by just how well the Df and 105mm worked together. The IQ even wide open was not something I expected. I figured I'd need to shoot it at f/4 or 5.6 to get something usable. Imagine my surprise when I tested it in the store and was getting excellent images wide open.
Given the rock bottom prices some of these lenses can be found for....I definitely see a few more in my future.
-
It's a good blame, mind you.
Even back in the film days when I started, I was lucky that AF was very good and I was able to use them for all my work succesfully.
Into this day and age, the AF systems being what they are (Nikon D500 is crazy good).....I often wondered why I would even want to consider a manual focus lens.
Well, I was reading posts here and seeing the images from the results from lenses like Nikon AI and AIs lens 105mm, 135mm.
I had opportunity to snag a well used version of the 105mm f/2.5 AIs for cheap. While the outside looks like it has seen quite a bit of hell, the focus and aperture ring feel great and the glass is in immaculate shape.
I put it on the Nikon Df and also adapted it to the Olympus PEN-F. So easy to get focus, such a joy to work with and given the age of them, such a great IQ even wide open.
So, now, I've fallen down the rabbit hole of manual focus Nikkor lenses.
One of my local camera shops has a used Nikkor 55mm f/1.2 for $400.....I'm going to do some research on that lens and see if it is worth the price to me.
I fell for MF Nikkors a long time ago and hardly touch my zooms. In fact even with my non-Nikon gear I'm using primes or MF primes (Loxias specifically).
-
Another good thing about the "properly assembled" MF lens is that its infinity stop is trusty, which is a great help to
shoot distant scenes.
As for 105/2.5, I prefer non-Ais versions because of their longer focus throw.
-
105/2.5 AI also has curved aperture blades to give a more rounded and nice bokeh.
-
105/2.5 AI also has curved aperture blades to give a more rounded and nice bokeh.
If only they'd made it with the built-in hood like the AI-S has . . . still one of my favorite lenses for sure. Made some great images of my girls with my 105/2.5 AIS over the years, even with having to guess the critical focus using the AF-confirm dot on my D800. On my A7RII this is a great lens to use.
-
The hood of the AIS 105/2.5 is short and wobbly. I prefer to use a more solid screw-in hood, or no hood at all and shade the front lens with my hand if necessary.
I use manual lenses almost exclusively with my D600. *IF* I can focus correctly, most will give good results even at 24MP. I do miss a lot of shots due to focusing errors though, which is a little frustrating. I might have to try live view more often, but that usually calls for tripod work which is not often practical.
I have noticed that most manual lenses are not well corrected for LoCA so in areas of high contrast you have to live with green edges around background blurs, and purple in the foreground.
-
I love mine a lot. I think I have 5 of these. :o :o :o
-
I love 105 mm lenses - must have every model Nikon ever made of this focal length. Well, not the 105/2.8 AFS VR Micro, I got rid of that one quickly in favour of the 125/2.5 APO-Lanthar. But I do have every version of the 105/2.5 from the '50s onwards. My favourite of the f/2.5 lenses is the AI, but the P.C and K versions just prior to the AI are nice too. The sharpest of them is the UV-Nikkor 105/4.5, but this lens isn't really suited as an all-round lens even when its steep price is ignored.
-
I don't bother with the built-in hoods with the 105/2.5 AIS or the 135/2.8 AIS. They reduce illumination in the corners a touch and if they droop too much they may cause a black corner.
The Nikon HS-8 and 14 are snap on hoods that work great on the 105/2.5 AIS. I'm not sure about the HS-8 but the HS-14 works on the 135/2.8:AIS and is the designated hood for the 105/2.8 AIS Micro-Nikkor and can be reversed.
The snap on Nikon hoods with chrome buttons are good for collectors but my experience is they fall of easily. The later snap on hoods can be screwed a bit tighter and stay put. The later ones have a black plastic slide.
There is an HN-7 hood that a bit short for the 105/2.5(s) but it's a screw in only hood. I know there are pure screw in hoods for 105mm and 135mm Nikkor lenses. I'm not sure of the designation.
Dave Hartman
-
Yeah, a droopy hood can be a pain - never had the 105/2.5 AIS hood be a problem through. And yes you can get a nice reversible snap in hood, but I hate having extra stuff to keep track of, especially when up in the mountains. Built-ins never get lost, are more compact, and stay out of the way when I don't want them.
I actually use a Nikon snap-in hood for my 180/4 Voigt and it fits like a glove when reversed - and looks right at home with the chrome and black.
-
I leave the HN-7, HS-8 and HS-14 hoods in place in the shooting possition at all times and cap them with Tupperware #G Tumbler caps. There is one exception and that's the 105/2.8 AIS Micro when the hood might interfer with light on the subject. I don't like to mess with hoods and I don't like to shoot without them. I don't even reverse the hood on my AF-S 105/2.8G ED-IF VR Micro. My secret fear is Nikon will release a replacement for that lens that is both smaller and apochromatic and I won't be able to afford it.
Dave Hartman
-
Perfect Match. ;) I prefer the older Ai or eben better the P-Auto-Version. Slightly other colors due to other Coating?
-
That specimen was the last of the non-multicoated versions of the 105/2.5. Yet it had the modern optical formula. Before the AI, there was a lens like yours labelled P.C to indicate it had received multi-coating.
These intermediary lenses can be differentiated by help of their black barrels, hill-and-dale focusing rings, and an f/32 setting.
-
I remember the first time I looked through a 105mm lens (105/2.5 Nikkor-P Sonar) it just looked right. It was at Gayson's Camera in Glendale, California. That was about 1971 I guess. I traded a 135/2.8 Nikkor-Q I'd only owned over night. I traded straight across, lens for lens and was very pleased.
A very versatile set of lenses for me is 50~55mm, 105mm and 24mm. Today my only AF-S lenses are 20/1.8G, 50/1.8G and 105/2.8G ED-IF VR Micro. I can without much loss crop the 20/1.8 back to an angle of view of a 24mm lens with my D800.
Can anyone compare a 24/2.8 AI and 24/2.8 AIS with the latest Super IC coatings for worst case sun in the upper right or left corner of the frame? Preferably without a filter. My current 24/2.8 AI Nikkor gives 12 small, harsh ghosts under this condition. I wonder if Super IC coating makes a meaningful improvement.
Dave
-
I take the blame partly although my triggers were Bjørn and Fons clearly.
-
While the outside looks like it might have been used to hammer nails, the glass was in almost perfect shape.
Then 2 sample images from a walk around my neighborhood. Nothing special photographically, but just a test as adapted on the Olympus PEN-F.
-
That was an almost pristine 105 compared to some of mine :D
They really stand up to hard use.
-
Indeed they must. Other than cosmetics, the focus ring is still buttery smooth and the aperture ring has good, positive clicks. It just feels "right' and "good" while in use. Not something I tend to feel as much using modern glass.
-
Nikon Df and friends ... All CPU-modified of course for maximum compatibility and ease of use.
-
Wow. Bjørn CPU modified a Lenovo (friend of Df) ... just gorgeous!
-
Nah, that was incidental - it only had SSD and RAM upgrade ...
-
Can anyone compare a 24/2.8 AI and 24/2.8 AIS with the latest Super IC coatings for worst case sun in the upper right or left corner of the frame? Preferably without a filter. My current 24/2.8 AI Nikkor gives 12 small, harsh ghosts under this condition. I wonder if Super IC coating makes a meaningful improvement.
Is your 24/2.8 AI a native AI lens or an AI converted lens? I use the older K 24/2.8 with AI conversion - a very nice lens but don't point it into the sun as you get a lot of green ghosts. The AI/AIS versions have a different optical formula. I think Bjørn's old reviews state the newer suffers less from ghosts, but more from general flare.
Anyway, I think I have the lenses required to make the exact comparison, if I have time this weekend I'll post some results. It will be interesting to see how much of a difference the newer coating makes.
-
Is your 24/2.8 AI a native AI lens or an AI converted lens?
My 24/2.8 AI is a native AI not converted with a serial number in the 55311X range. I bought it new 1979-03-15 at a price of $296.80 in 1979 US dollars. The price would include sales tax.
I get 12 ghost without a filter and 13 with. It's not a lens to turn into the sun.
Dave
-
I have a 24/2.8 of similar vintage. Green coatings. Ghosts in the same way. It was my favorite for two decades.
-
My collection of MF 105/2.5's
From left to right:
10.5 Nippon Kogaku Nikkor-P (Sonar)
105 Nippon Kogaku Nikkor-P (Gauss)
105 Nikkor-PC AI-d and chipped
Taken with the new king 105/1.4E ;D
-
Coatings/reflections are always nice to look at,,, shot by JA! Thanks ;D
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8522/29441770242_d74c666dac_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LRELyj)26822992335_c22743d8db_o (https://flic.kr/p/LRELyj) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
The Big Eye - Again captured by JA ;D
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8843/29441770702_3196a97e43_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LRELGf)26728876092_1e78dcbfe4_o (https://flic.kr/p/LRELGf) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
Unrivalled Fisheye,,,
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/2/1490/26309688940_12ead1bd47_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/G5U2Uy)Nikkor Fisheye 6mm Vertical base (https://flic.kr/p/G5U2Uy) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
Small Fish,,,
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/393/18621570100_828004c29e_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/unwq2s)Untitled (https://flic.kr/p/unwq2s) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
Fisky
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/296/18621730970_a4dfe410e2_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/unxeR5)Untitled (https://flic.kr/p/unxeR5) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
Agree - after seeing and handling the 6 mm f/2.8 Fisheye, the 8 mm f/2.8 suddenly appears "tiny". Very tiny.
Still a pity Erik had to let that one go.
-
At 50,000 € I had to let it pass,,,
-
Could have bought myself a share, you know. However, surely not a low-priced product :(
The price appears to have soared from the first time I heard about that particular specimen?
-
Erik, you still have the 8mm? I thought you sold it???
-
I still have the old 8/8 and the "newer" 8/2.8 Fisheye-Nikkors - no danger Jakov ...
-
Bjørn that was also the price the 6mm Ai f/2.8 was listed at on EBay - I still have the price tag that was on the lens cap; 375.000,- DK
Story was it was 'sold' before I could bring it to Scotland, however the shop honoured that they had promised to rent it to me, so the sale could not be fulfilled and then the buyer retracted.
Then they raised the price even more in their own store to 'avoid' selling it while I was using it, they couldn't raise the EBay price for some reason,,,
I needed the 'low' 50,000 € price value for my insurance for it to be full coverage, 10% of the insurance maximum of 4.000.000,- DK Kroner
The lens was sold to another gentleman while I was traveling with it anyway. so I had to bring it back,,, He also bourght the 'Low ground tripod' and custom flight case
Yes -Sold the 8mm years ago,,,
-
My collection of MF 105/2.5's
From left to right:
10.5 Nippon Kogaku Nikkor-P (Sonar)
105 Nippon Kogaku Nikkor-P (Gauss)
105 Nikkor-PC AI-d and chipped
Should be:
10.5 Nippon Kogaku Nikkor-P (Sonnar)
105 Nippon Kogaku Nikkor-P (Sonnar)
105 Nikkor-PC AI-d and chipped (Gauss or more accurately Xenotar)
All the chrome barrel 105s are the older Sonnar design. The Xenotar lenses have a slightly longer barrel are found in the black barrel Nikkor-P, P.C, K, AI and AIS versions.
-
Fisky
Awesome image Erik!!
The first two amazing 6mm images look rather familiar btw ;)
-
Ahh yes of course you shot them, sorry I forgot the credit! ;D
-
Fisky
What's the mounting surface you're using in the shots of the 8mm Erik.
I really like the reflection it's producing :)
-
Thanks! Yes they really go well with the fisheye, I can post a few more, I believe it was part of a kitchen appliance,,,
-
Thanks! Yes they really go well with the fisheye, I can post a few more, I believe it was part of a kitchen appliance,,,
Do you mean a kitchen appliance as in a bench top of some kind, or an electrical appliance?
-
Should be:
10.5 Nippon Kogaku Nikkor-P (Sonnar)
105 Nippon Kogaku Nikkor-P (Sonnar)
105 Nikkor-PC AI-d and chipped (Gauss or more accurately Xenotar)
All the chrome barrel 105s are the older Sonnar design. The Xenotar lenses have a slightly longer barrel are found in the black barrel Nikkor-P, P.C, K, AI and AIS versions.
Ah.. never too old to learn. :)
-
Yes I think it was a heat shield from a electrical stove or something like that,,, :o
-
I just cannot get enough of this lens. Bolted onto the PEN-F today and visited a living historical farm.
-
I leave the HN-7, HS-8 and HS-14 hoods in place in the shooting possition at all times and cap them with Tupperware #G Tumbler caps. There is one exception and that's the 105/2.8 AIS Micro when the hood might interfer with light on the subject. I don't like to mess with hoods and I don't like to shoot without them. I don't even reverse the hood on my AF-S 105/2.8G ED-IF VR Micro. My secret fear is Nikon will release a replacement for that lens that is both smaller and apochromatic and I won't be able to afford it.
Dave Hartman
Regarding shades for 105's: Nikon offered a screw-in lens shade for 105 2.5/135 3.5/105 4.0 lenses, referred to as HN-8. The appearance of the HN-8 shade is virtually identical to the HS-8 snap-in shade. Though somewhat difficult to find, the HN-8 resolves the issue of wobble/insecurity. I've acquired 3-4 over the years, and they work well shades.
-
The HS-4 does not seem to wobble though.
-
The HS-4 does not seem to wobble though.
The HS-4 didn't wobble. What I remember is one could bump the hood with your hand or one of the chrome buttons and of it would come. Also if a pretty girls walked by it would jump off of its own volition just to make me look like a fool.
I would remove a screw and increase the tension on the threaded spring part and that helped some but that wasn't a fix. The only reason I'd have one of those old snap on hoods was as a collectable. I would not use one for photography.
Dave
-
Ok....so I don't "need" any manual focus lenses....and I'm going to get probably both of these eventually. If you could get one of these right now which would you get first.
Nikon 55mm f/1.2 or the 180/2.8
There is a shop close to me and they have both on the shelf. I've done some research and have a good haggling price structure setup....just don't know which one to pull the trigger on first. kind of leaning toward the 55mm first.
-
I have both of those, and I use the 55mm much more. I just don't have many subjects around that 180mm is useful for. However, I've heard that the 50mm f/1.2 is a better lens than the 55mm, so sometimes I feel I should trade up. I don't feel that way about the 180/2.8 ED.
Buy both and sell the one you don't use!
-
That is kind of where I was leaning too...They also have some inexpensive 24/2.8 I might pick u pas well...see if I can make a bundle deal of some kind.
Thanks for the response.
-
Get the 180 if it is the ED version, maybe pass on it if it's the 'regular' 180/2.8. Extra bonus points for the 180 ED: It works really well on DX and mirrorless DX.
Get the 55/1.2 if you want to play with the dreamy look wide open.
-
I'm going to make it difficult on myself and muck about with both in store. :D
-
I'm enjoying this thread, but confused by one thing. The assertion has been made that the 105/2.5 is especially suited to the Df, which implies that it is not so well suited to everything else. If somewhere there is a Nikon camera that does not grab on to this lens like sulfuric acid to a drop of water, please let me know so I can avoid it.
-
The 105 is well suited to any F-mount camera but shines on the Df because of the synergetic effect it has on the overall handling of this particular combination. To illustrate, the 14-24/2.8 is still a glorious lens on the Df, but the handling isn't great. That lens better fits a heavier camera in my opinion. So it goes. One always must take the entire ecosystem into account.
-
I would rather use a small lens on a larger camera than a large lens on a small or light camera. The large lens on a small camera can be painfully unbalanced. The larger cameras will be balanced even without a lens.
Dave Hartman
If the small lens is a pancake lens one can think of it as a body cap and toss it in the back seat of the car when putting a real lens on the camera. :)
-
If the small lens is a pancake lens one can think of it as a body cap and toss it in the back seat of the car when putting a real lens on the camera. :)
That´s a good method to loose a 45P ;)
Agree with the 180ED.
The later versions of the 55/1.2 (K) and multicoated come very close to the 50/1.2 AI.
-
That´s a good method to loose a 45P ;)
I thought everyone who owned a 45P had already lossed theirs.
I used to buy use neverready cases cheap. Take the thumb screw thing out of the bottom and attach the neck strap to the camera. I really did toss the whole case in the back seat of my Corvair Spyder. It worked great if only carrying the camera with one lens. Alas the supply of cheap mint neverready cases has dried up.
Dave
-
No such case, but 105 on Df is a good match in terms of size, proportion, and balance.
The 105 is also pleasant on m4/3.
-
Yeah, the 45P is on my D800 the vast majority of time as it does double duty as a fine lens and a fine lens cap.
Losing it? Not yet, but occasionally I misplace it in my lens drawer among all the other much larger Nikkors.
For that reason I own two excellent copies just in case. :)
-
Ok....so I don't "need" any manual focus lenses....and I'm going to get probably both of these eventually. If you could get one of these right now which would you get first.
Nikon 55mm f/1.2 or the 180/2.8
There is a shop close to me and they have both on the shelf. I've done some research and have a good haggling price structure setup....just don't know which one to pull the trigger on first. kind of leaning toward the 55mm first.
Personally I would get the 180 first, make sure it is the ED version.
I would get a 50/1.2 ais and then the 55/2.8 micro, unless you are fine with two different 55s.
-
Moreover to reply to the name of the thread, getting excellent, near mint mf nikkors has become a search they are growing rare and less affordable, prices have risen significantly over the years.
We may hope and pray Nikon will continue to deliver cameras like the Df that will remain f-mount compatible.
In other words get these mf lenses if you can afford, at least the 35/1.4, 50/1.2, 85/1.4, 105/2.5, 180/2.8 etc..
-
Moreover to reply to the name of the thread, getting excellent, near mint mf nikkors has become a search they are growing rare and less affordable, prices have risen significantly over the years.
We may hope and pray Nikon will continue to deliver cameras like the Df that will remain f-mount compatible.
In other words get these mf lenses if you can afford, at least the 35/1.4, 50/1.2, 85/1.4,105/2.5, 180/2.8 etc..
Agreed. Unfortunately, not any local 50/1.2...only the one 55/1.2 that I know of.
I currently have the AF 20/2.8D...which works well, so I might wait on getting a 24mmfor a bit. Concentrate more on the 55 or a 180.
-
I'd go for the 180/2.8 ED over a 55/1.2.
Dave
-
Yesterday I went into the camera store and the 55/1.2 was gone....but there was a 50/1.2 in its place. They were asking $500USD, which I did not think was a bad price....but not exactly what I was wanting to spend right now.
I did take a minute to test drive the Nikon 180/2.8 AIS (Not sure if it was the ED...forgot to check)....but man is that one sharp lens! I can see me getting that one in the future as well. looked to be in like new condition.
I did however, walk out of there with three lenses for not a whole lot of money.
What came home:
Nikon 55/3.5 Micro-NIKKOR - I cannot believe the sharpness from this lens. So very awesome and the close focusing is a bonus. The zoom ring is very smooth and the aperture ring is solid as well. $75USD
Nikon 60mm f/2.8D - inexpensive and I was not sure which one to pick, this or the 55/3.5....so I got both. I kind of like the shorter focus throw of the 60 in some ways...but that 55 is great and small. I'll do some testing and see which one to keep...or I'll juts keep both. :D
Zhongyi Creator 85mm f/2 - this was one of those "what is that"...got intrigued and for under $100 I decided to take a chance on it. All metal build, smooth aperture ring. The focus ring turns the wrong way(no big deal for me). Initial impressions show a decent quality on the bokeh, a little dreamy at f/2 but comes together by f/2.8-4. The focus throw is enormous though.
I'll probably review all these at some point and share my thoughts.
I was able to get out nad do some street photography yesterday. It was a warm spring day here in OH, so I took my adapted PEN-F and the 55/3.5 Micro and Zhongyi out for a test drive. Actually yesterday was a "vintage" lens day all around as I also took the Df and the Nikon 28-105/3.5-4.5D and 80-200/4.5-5.6D out in the morning for some street shooting as well.
While "modern" lenses have faster focusing and give some benefits....I like something about the rendering D and older lenses.
-
The ED version has a distinctive gold ring on the front section just behind the area where the lens hood retracts into. It is marked as such on mine.
.....................................................................................
I did take a minute to test drive the Nikon 180/2.8 AIS (Not sure if it was the ED...forgot to check)....but man is that one sharp lens! I can see me getting that one in the future as well. looked to be in like new condition.
.....................................................................................
-
What came home:
Nikon 55/3.5 Micro-NIKKOR - I cannot believe the sharpness from this lens. So very awesome and the close focusing is a bonus. The zoom ring is very smooth and the aperture ring is solid as well. $75USD
Nikon 60mm f/2.8D - inexpensive and I was not sure which one to pick, this or the 55/3.5....so I got both. I kind of like the shorter focus throw of the 60 in some ways...but that 55 is great and small. I'll do some testing and see which one to keep...or I'll juts keep both. :D
The choice for me is pretty simple: I'll choose the 55/3.5 when I don't want or need auto focus and I'll choose the AF 60/2.8 when I do. My advice is keep both. My 60/2.8 is the non-D version. My first lens was a 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P back in 1970. My first AF lens was the AF 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor. My second lens in about 1970~71 was a 105/2.5 Nikkor-P. Today if starting from scratch my second manual focus lens might be a 105/2.8 AIS Micro-Nikkor as it can do double duty as a candid portrait lens and close-up to macro.
I remember using a 105/2.5 for a landscape detail and wondering about using a longer lens for landscape. My quick decision was screw any rules and I took the photograph of some mountain peaks. For landscape I figure any lens from 15mm to 400mm is valid as that's my widest and longest lens. :) I feel it's natural to survey a wide area (wide angle) and also to look at distant details more closely (normal to super telephoto).
I'll highly recommend the 105/4.0 AI or AIS Micro-Nikkor, 105/2.8 AIS Micro-Nikkor and 180/2.8 ED Nikkor. Very sharp f/5.6 to f/8 and good to f/11 except the 180/2.8 ED which is very sharp at f/2.8 to f/8.0. Good bokeh and I don't remember nasty habits for flare and ghost as I use deep hoods. Everyone (or almost every one) recommends the 105/2.5 Nikkor-P to AIS. The early ones are Sonar designs while the later ones are Xenotar designs. My favorite has been the 105/2.5 AIS but there are advantages to the longer focus throw on the AI version. I use the same HS-8 or 14 hoods on both. I used to own both AI and AIS but had to sell one to settle a debt. I should have found another way.
Dave Hartman
-
I too prefer the non-AiS versions of the 105mm f/2.5, but I have both.
My "Ai" version is in fact a K, which I bought new in the 1970s as an impoverished student, and it has subsequently been Ai converted with a factory Ai aperture ring and now sports one of Bjørn's metering chips. It is the same formulation as the Ai lens that succeeded it and it has the same 170 Deg. focus throw as the Ai (versus the 140 Degs. of the AiS). Its minimum aperture is f/32, whereas the Ai and the AiS have f/22 as their minumum apertures. So, if you cannot find a good copy of the Ai version and if you also want the longer focus throw, then see if you can locate a good K version of the lens. Not very hard to Ai convert.
The 180mm f/2.8 ED and the 55mm f/3.5 are excellent - I have both and both are favourites of mine. The 55mm f/3.5 lenses must be about the highest value for money Nikon lenses on the second hand market these days - almost a steal!
The choice for me is pretty simple: I'll choose the 55/3.5 when I don't want or need auto focus and I'll choose the AF 60/2.8 when I do. My advice is keep both. My 60/2.8 is the non-D version. My first lens was a 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P back in 1970. My first AF lens was the AF 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor. My second lens in about 1970~71 was a 105/2.5 Nikkor-P. Today if starting from scratch my second manual focus lens might be a 105/2.8 AIS Micro-Nikkor as it can do double duty as a candid portrait lens and close-up to macro.
I remember using a 105/2.5 for a landscape detail and wondering about using a longer lens for landscape. My quick decision was screw any rules and I took the photograph of some mountain peaks. For landscape I figure any lens from 15mm to 400mm is valid as that's my widest and longest lens. :) I feel it's natural to survey a wide area (wide angle) and also to look at distant details more closely (normal to super telephoto).
I'll highly recommend the 105/4.0 AI or AIS Micro-Nikkor, 105/2.8 AIS Micro-Nikkor and 180/2.8 ED Nikkor. Very sharp f/5.6 to f/8 and good to f/11 except the 180/2.8 ED which is very sharp at f/2.8 to f/8.0. Good bokeh and I don't remember nasty habits for flare and ghost as I use deep hoods. Everyone (or almost every one) recommends the 105/2.5 Nikkor-P to AIS. The early ones are Sonar designs while the later ones are Xenotar designs. My favorite has been the 105/2.5 AIS but there are advantages to the longer focus throw on the AI version. I use the same HS-8 or 14 hoods on both. I used to own both AI and AIS but had to sell one to settle a debt. I should have found another way.
Dave Hartman
-
The Zhongyi Creator 85/2
I know, I need to clean the glass again...street shooting Saturday got some dust on there. :D
-
Some samples - Zhongyi:
These were shot on the Oly PEN-F with Fotodiox Adapter
-
Same here. When I bought my first DSLR, I bought telephoto and normal autofocus zooms to go with it. Seemed like the thing to do. Two lenses to cover most of the range, and autofocus!! It didn't take long to get annoyed with 1) how slow they were (I couldn't afford the "pro" f/2.8 zooms), and 2) while the autofocus did a great job, it didn't always focus where I wanted.
Eight years later, I have 11 primes (only three are autofocus) and two zooms, both manual focus. More to the point, I've bought and then got rid of five other autofocus lenses, including a few with VR. I have, in fact, bought and sold many manual focus lenses. There's actually only one I regret selling. I had a Nikkor 50/1.4 SC that had been AI'd.
-
I'm so addicted to manual focus lenses, I've even given new models from brand new companies a try. I must say, I've been wanting to buy a brand new Nikkor 50/1.2 AIS and a new Nikkor 28/2.8 AIS, but I have trouble justifying the expense when I have no need for a 50/1.2, and I already have a Nikkor 28/2.0 AI.
I've been wanting a 14 to 15mm lens for a while, but never liked the level of distortion and chromatic aberration that is inherent in most, and I don't like the prices of the better ones. My last sub-20mm lens was a Tokina 17/3.5 SL, which left purple fringing everywhere there were contrasty edges. I considered a Samyang 14/2.8, but since my Samyang 85/1.4 started jamming its aperture with only about a year's use, I didn't have the confidence to buy another Samyang, no matter how cheap.
I ended up buying an Irix 15mm f/2.4. I haven't had a chance to test the Irix yet, but after I've spent some time with it, I'll post a few pictures.
My favorite manual focus lens is my Nikkor 20/3.5. It's tiny, light, has minimal CA, visible, but not terrible distortion, and it's very sharp for close up subjects and decent at at distance, too. I was in Borrego Springs last week, where there is an "art gallery" that covers a couple hundred acres with 130 metal sculptures scattered throughout. These are two pics using the trusty old 20/3.5. The first is a picture showing a bit of this year's "super bloom", followed by a picture the pair of rams.
-
I like those.
Any opportunity to run the 20/3.5 side by side with the newer 20/2.8D AF? Curious on the IQ differences if any. I have a 20/2.8, and find that it manual focus' ok.
-
I gave up on the 20/2.8 AFD (ugly plastic fantastic, poor handling) and took the alternative route with the 20/2.8 AIS instead. The new 20/1.8 AFS is very sharp, but like many of its contemporary siblings, in dire lack of charm and smooth handling.
The small 20/3.5 AI/AIS is excellent for close-ups but not my first choice for more distant subjects as the corners aren't very convincing before f/11 or so, at which point the entire image starts to fall apart. The 20/2.8 output has a nice overall feel to it, but once again, maybe not the candidate for distant landscapes.
-
The 20/2.8 AIS handles very well on the Df. The quite short focus throw more than makes up for the lack of AF. I literally can focus the lens with my left index finger as its focusing operation is so smooth.
-
The 20/2.8 AIS has some barrel distortion, but this is mainly caused by its CRC so much less visible for distant scenes. Thus it does architecture pretty well in my view.
Medieval church, Delft, The Netherlands (Df, 20/2.8 AIS)
-
The insider's tip for a lens shade for the 20/2.8 AIS: HK-16. Clamps on securely and does not vignette although the clearance is virtually nil. Thus don't make dents in that hood or they might cause blackened corners.
As usual for wide angles the hood is quite ineffective for stray light and strong point light immediately outside the angle of view. However, it does keep fingers and other objects from poking into the front of the lens. Thus worth its while to have on at all times.
-
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3933/32863276904_d57fbdb319_o.jpg)
nikkor-ud 20mm f/3.5 as portrayed by 35mm f/1.4ais
-
Good stuff. I don't really use the 20/2.8D that much anyway...might use it as trade toward some more proper MF lenses.
-
This weekend I remembered that my brother had Nikon lens. I snatched the little bugger from his camera bag when he wasnt looking and are currently testing it. It is the minute 50 mm f1,8 series E and so far it seem to be an excellent performer. It is so small and unobtrusive and fits the Df perfectly. Highly recomended!
-
In optical terms the almost pancake-flat 50/1.8 Nikon SE has little to be ashamed of, indeed. Simpler coatings mean lower contrast and a tad more propensity for flare, that's all. It is also a good performer for IR, if you are so inclined. Will even do a spot of UV if pushed to the task.
Several of the other members of the Nikon SE line in fact are pretty good. The 75-150/3.5 SE became famous from its use by the late Galen Rowell. The 35/2.5 SE is surprisingly sharp and capable, will do excellently in IR as well. The handy small SE zoom with the peculiar range 36-72 mm and a constant f/3.5 aperture is very enjoyable, its main drawback is the longish 1.2 m near limit. It can be reversed for impressive close-ups though. I have also experienced favourable impressions on the 100/2.8 SE, 135/2.8 SE, and 70-210/4 SE.
-
The series-E 35/2.5 gets praised here, but I tend to read disparaging remarks about the 5-elements AI and AIS 35/2.8, most preferring the 6-element K and AI versions instead.
I find this a little curious, since the Series-E 35/2.5 and 5-element AI/AIS 35/2.8 have very similar optical designs. The SE 35/2.5 uses simpler coatings than the NIC coating on the AI/AIS version. The AI/AIS version is slower and longer overall, so less compromised by the requirements for speed and compactness. Lastly, both lenses appeared more or less at the same time in 1979. Given the similarity in optical layout it wouldn't surprise me if the optics were designed by the same team. In theory, this would suggest the 5-element AI/AIS 35/2.8 Nikkor should perform better than the budget SE 35/2.5.
In my limited experience with the AIS 35/2.8, it performs very well. Compared to the older 6-element version it has some barrel distortion, but the background rendering may be a bit smoother, I haven't really tested this thoroughly though. Overall I think the AIS 35/2.8 is a useful lens. No idea how it does for IR.
I agree the SE 75-150 and 100/2.8 are good lenses, especially if you need high performing and compact telephotos. I expect the SE 135/2.8 is also good but the 1.5m focus limit is rather long, I'd sooner go for the AI 135/3.5 or AIS 135/2.8, they are hardly any bigger or heavier, they focus closer and have better coatings.
-
nikkor-ud 20mm f/3.5 as portrayed by 35mm f/1.4ais
I have a wonderful old 20/3.5 UD, which was upgraded with factory AI parts. It performs much like my 20/3.5 AIS, though it doesn't do as well close up. The UD is on my "sell" list.
-
I have a wonderful old 20/3.5 UD, which was upgraded with factory AI parts. It performs much like my 20/3.5 AIS, though it doesn't do as well close up. The UD is on my "sell" list.
Well, this is not the For Sale forum, but drop me a PM if you're selling ;)
-
Well, this is not the For Sale forum, but drop me a PM if you're selling ;)
Oops. Sorry. That wasn't the intention. I only meant to say that I have a UD and because I prefer the 20/3.5 AIS, I won't be using the UD anymore.
-
You should try the 20 UD for IR. It might be the best of all Nikkor 20 mm lenses for that purpose.
-
I was originally thinking that I couldn't do IR with my D700, without converting it. But my FE2 should work just fine. Do you have any particular IR film you recommend for an IR newbie?
-
Film? You mean the stuff stored in round canisters ?? :D
You might read this
http://filmphotographyproject.com/store/135-infrared-fpp-color-infrared
-
Excellent. Thank you. I'll be happy to give it a try.
-
Finally got around to getting the 55/3.5 on the Df. First 4 images are that combo, the last shot was with the 105/2.5.
Also, found out today that the ZhongYi 85mm f/2 I got in F-mount does not play well when metering in aperture priority mode with the Df. It is always way over exposed. If I use it in live view mode, it is OK...in normal shooting configuration(using the viewfinder) and in full manual mode, it is OK. No matter though as I'll be using it for video work and on the mirrorless cameras.
-
http://richardhaw.com/2017/01/18/repair-micro-nikkor-p-55mm-f3-5-auto/
here's my take on the 55/3.5, I love that lens family a lot :o :o :o
going back to your ZY optics and in general, the mainland chinese brands like Laowa. their finish doesn't even come close to Nikkors made in the 60s, always alittle rought here and there ::) in fact, some old Russian lenses felt better in a way.
one of my favourite manual lenses is the 35/1.4 Ai-S but I rarely use it outside of the BOKEH factor.
-
Here are a couple of samples from the 20/2.8 AIS on a Nikon D800...
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/8/7317/16303400499_cab1b827be_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qQFbY4)
D800_DSC2386_CNX2_1.01 (https://flic.kr/p/qQFbY4) by Dave Hartman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/mr_speedlight/), on Flickr
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/8/7423/16303407079_a13410207f_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qQFdVv)
D800_DSC2407_CNX2_Crop2_1 (https://flic.kr/p/qQFdVv) by Dave Hartman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/mr_speedlight/), on Flickr
These photos are inner space in a rehab hospital in Loma Linda, California. I had problems focusing and used live view to focus on my D800 then framed and shot with the optical finder. That helped though LV isn't that good on the D800. They were hand held. I'm not sure if I could have used a tripod or not. My new(ish) AF-S 20/1.8G ED would have helped with AF.
I might have sold my 20/3.5 AI after buying the 20/2.8 AIS but while thinking about this I checked Bjørn's review on his old site. I was taking for granted the fine low flare and no ghost performance of that lens. I also noted the close-up recommendation and the K1 ring note and bought a K-Ring set for the 20/3.5 AI.
Currently I own the 20/3.5 AI, 20/2.8 AIS and AF-S 20/1.8G ED and don't plan to sell any of them. I'd like a 20/3.5 UD for old time sake.
Dave Hartman
---
Any opportunity to run the 20/3.5 side by side with the newer 20/2.8D AF? Curious on the IQ differences if any. I have a 20/2.8, and find that it manual focus' ok.
I'll recommend the 20/3.5 AI for its ability to shoot into the sun and even include the sun in the frame. The 20/2.8 AIS and even the AF-S 20/1.8G ED can't equal the 20/3.5 AI for low flare and not ghost.
Dave
-
Andrew, the first one from the latest B&W series is just superb!
-
Andrew, the first one from the latest B&W series is just superb!
Thanks, my fav from the series as well.
-
I'd actually consider the 24/2.8 AIS. I have the optically similar non-D autofocus one, which was good with the right kind of film (i.e. Velvia), crushingly disappointing on the D200 and mediocre on the D7000, but, get this, really very impressive on the D800 as long as you navigate around the limitations in the corners at wider apertures. I think something about this lens disagrees with heavy anti-aliasing or thick emulsion. Also, with the floating elements, it's a complicated design so I can easily imagine some samples being off due to wear and tear.
-
Lots of 24mm lenses to take into consideration. Thanks all for weighing in on the pros/cons of the various models.
-
Andrew, you sure give credit to these opticals gems of the past :)
-
On this 2014 trip to Germany, I for the very first time was convinced that the 24/2 Nikkor AIS had a future on my Df.
-
Andrew, you sure give credit to these opticals gems of the past :)
Thanks. They are new to me, and I at one point in time dismissed them, all because of their lack of auto focus. That is truly a mistake on my part and one I am glad that I had the good fortune to rectify! :D
-
On this 2014 trip to Germany, I for the very first time was convinced that the 24/2 Nikkor AIS had a future on my Df.
That is a truly excellent image and definitely an image that speaks well to the gear as well as the photographer who took it. Thanks for sharing that.
-
My 24/2.8 AI had serious flare and ghost. If the sun is included in the frame and probably close to included I'll get twelve (12) small, hot ghosts. If I add a filter I'll get thirteen ghosts. The vignette is pretty strong wide open so stopping down is necessary for slide film. I don't remember when I used the 24/2.8 AI last. With a D800 I'll use a 20mm lens can crop.
Dave Hartman
-
Anyone: how is the flare and ghost with the 24/2.0 AI or AIS? For those who have used both is it better than the 24/2.8 AI or AIS?
Any other manual focus 24mm lens for Nikon F with at least average flare and ghost properties?
Dave
-
Yes : Zeiss 25/2, Sigma 24/1.4 and IIRC Samyang 24/1.4 perform well, even against bright light.
-
Funny story. I put the picture of the "umbrella girl" up on Facebook today....got a request for a 20x30 from a lady about 100 miles away from me. Wants to put it up on her wall.
Just another example that shows the people don't care about the gear, they care about the image! :D
-
Just another example that shows the people don't care about the gear, they care about the image! :D
Which proves photographers shouldn't care about gear either?
Dave
The 😈 made me type that!
-
Photographers should care about the gear as much as needed to satisfy their end goals, whatever that may be. I'm not one to judge what another person wants or needs. It is their money, their vision, their ideas to do with as they please.
If asked for guidance, I would surely give it willingly....but I've tried to give up my judgmental ways. :D
-
So I own three 135mm Nikkor lenses. I bought a 135/3.5 AI Nikkor. It was dirt cheap and it performs very nicely at f/5.6. Then a guy on another forum offered for free a couple of lenses: a 135/3.5 Nikkor-Q (factory AI) and a 50/1.4 Nikkor-S (also factory AI). Owning a many lenses I waited about a week and no one asked so I did and so then I owned two 135/3.5 Nikkors. Then one day the need for a Nikon D70 overwhelmed some person and they sold their totally mint 135/2.8 AIS (w/ SIC) and 28/2.0 AIS (also SIC). I think they also sold a Nikon FM3a (AKA Nikon FE-3m). Now I own three 135mm Nikkor lenses.
The 135/2.8 AIS Nikkor is a wonderful lens in a class with the 105/2.5 AIS and it's Xenotar siblings as well as the 180/2.8 ED AIS. I'm not going to sell the 135/2.8 AIS.
I'm not going to use eBay to sell. eBay is for me too seller unfriendly. I probably can only get about 50% of retail price if I sell to KEH.com and I'd have to package the lens or lenses if I sold a 135/3.5 or both. I might get $100.00 (USD) for both if I'm lucky. What should I do?
Dave Hartman
-
I bought a 135/3.5 AI Nikkor. It was dirt cheap. Then a guy on another forum offered for free a couple of lenses:
I might get $100.00 (USD) for both if I'm lucky. What should I do?
Find a young photographer (or two) who could use and appreciate them and send them along.
-
Photographers should care about the gear as much as needed to satisfy their end goals, whatever that may be. I'm not one to judge what another person wants or needs. It is their money, their vision, their ideas to do with as they please.
If asked for guidance, I would surely give it willingly....but I've tried to give up my judgmental ways. :D
Wise words indeed. No better guidelines for forum etiquette :-)
-
If asked for guidance, I would surely give it willingly....but I've tried to give up my judgmental ways. :D
Very wise words, if only this was the norm the internet and the world in general would be a much better place :)
-
I wasn't always this way. I once fell onto the trap...Could be a jerk sometimes...Then...I grew up. Lol. 😉
-
So I own three 135mm Nikkor lenses. I bought a 135/3.5 AI Nikkor [...] a 135/3.5 Nikkor-Q (factory AI) [...] totally mint 135/2.8 AIS.
What should I do?
Take pictures with them :)
They are all different optical designs so will have different characteristics. If you find that any are not to your liking or you simply don't use them, I'm sure you will find a willing buyer.
-
I have somehow ended up with 3 135's: a 135/2 AiS, a 135/2.8 AiS, and a 135/3.5 Ai. They all are different lenses, of course, but they have a remarkably similar rendering. or 'look'. The older Q designs should render more noticeably different from the later Ai/AiS units, but I haven't shot with the older designs on digital...yet.
-
pluton,
Thank you for your post. I've seen the light. Chiefly what I need is a fourth 135mm Nikkor, a 135/2.0 AIS!
Dave Hartman
...but then I only own four 105mm Nikkors so perhaps I should add to the 105mm stable. I do have a preference for 105mm over 135mm going back to about 1971.
This phone changes words without my consent!
-
Anyone: how is the flare and ghost with the 24/2.0 AI or AIS?
Hi Dave,
see below a quick test with the midnight sun in the frame with 4 versions: early 24/2.8 C N-C at f2.8, 24/2.8 AI-S early version with no SIC coating at F2.8, early AF24/2.8 at F2.8 and finally late 24/2.0 AI at F2.0 and F2.8.
Hope it helps.
-
My local shop had a decently priced 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS, so I snagged that a few days ago. Have not had a chance to properly run it through the mill yet, but initial tests say it is a winner. I have a little bit more money in the discretionary fund (~$300)...so I'm going to rummage through their stores and see what else I can snag.
They did have a 300/4.5 and a 200/4....so research will be needed there. I just wish they had a Voigtlander Ultron 40/2....I so want to try one of those for myself! :D
-
I warmly recommend the Voigt 40/2; make sure it comes with the close-up lens. A remarkable allrounder, excellently built. Only precaution is when using it at f/2 for night shots (strange atoll-like rendition of point lights and halos, probably linked to the aspherical lens).
-
I warmly recommend the Voigt 40/2; make sure it comes with the close-up lens. A remarkable allrounder, excellently built. Only precaution is when using it at f/2 for night shots (strange atoll-like rendition of point lights and halos, probably linked to the aspherical lens).
Thanks for the tip.
-
Hi Dave,
see below a quick test with the midnight sun in the frame with 4 versions: early 24/2.8 C N-C at f2.8, 24/2.8 AI-S early version with no SIC coating at F2.8, early AF24/2.8 at F2.8 and finally late 24/2.0 AI at F2.0 and F2.8.
Hope it helps.
Thank You! Somehow I missed this until yesterday while surfing on my phone.
Dave Hartman
-
Today, I was able to get the following for basically dirt cheap:
Nikon 200/4 Q
Nikon 300/4.5 (not sure which it is, but it does not have the AI notch in the aperture ring)
Nikon 135/3.5
I'll post images of all of them soon.
-
Also wanted to ask....am I the only one that brings lens cleaning stuff to the store to make sure that the lens elements are clean? I figure that I out to be able to if I'm purchasing. Got some puzzled looks today, but I figure its my money. I did ask the manager first, but some of the other employees gave me a double take. :D
I will admit that I have a limited knowledge of the bulk of these manual focus Nikon lenses, but I do feel confident that I can spot oily aperture blades, sticky focus or aperture rings and basic fit/finish that might affect the performance of the lenses.
-
Also wanted to ask....am I the only one that brings lens cleaning stuff to the store to make sure that the lens elements are clean?
In days of old I used the store's lens cleaning supplies so yes I wanted to make sure the lens elements were in good shape on the front and especially the rear. Cleaning the outside also helps one assess if the lens is fogged inside. I've seldom seen fungus here in So. California maybe never. I've seen it in a donated Leica G system or similar coming from the South. I used to clean up and sell things donated to a charity I worked for as a vendor. I'd send them surprises from time to time with the money like a 35/2.0 AI Nikkor. That 35/2.0 AI got a lot of service.
I don't understand why you would get puzzled looks. It's always good practice to clean a lens if needed when looking at used gear.
Dave
-
Also wanted to ask....am I the only one that brings lens cleaning stuff to the store to make sure that the lens elements are clean? I figure that I out to be able to if I'm purchasing. Got some puzzled looks today, but I figure its my money. I did ask the manager first, but some of the other employees gave me a double take. :D
I will admit that I have a limited knowledge of the bulk of these manual focus Nikon lenses, but I do feel confident that I can spot oily aperture blades, sticky focus or aperture rings and basic fit/finish that might affect the performance of the lenses.
I'd rather ask them for cleaning, and would be negatively impressed if lenses were dirty when taken off the shelf. Some dust is ok, but no more.
Also check :
- infinite focus : is it possible to focus to infinite, and does the helicoid go beyond infinite - easy adjustment, but not free, so trouble here means lesser value.
- correct working of diaph (oily blades is one possible problem among others) - shoot a series or two through the whole aperture range.
- centering : shoot flat subject and spot lack of symmetry in sharpness (four corners, or left vs. right and top vs. bottom, at full or wide apertures).
The last two defects are not fixed easily (if at all possible, in the case of lenses) ; I won't buy under such conditions.
-
- centering : shoot flat subject and spot lack of symmetry in sharpness (four corners, or left vs. right and top vs. bottom, at full or wide apertures).
I shoot soda cans in the center, then top center than all the way around to top center. I have an AF 35-70/2.8D Nikkor that shows smearing of the bright aluminum over the darker hole you drink from through the center horizontally and across the top but not across the bottom. This malady is almost going at f/5.6 and gone to my eye at f/6.3. This pretty much defeats the purpose of an f/2.8 lens. I haven't done anything with it yet. I don't know how this happened though I may have dropped the lens in a case that protected it from any sign of impact. I also wonder if something came loose inside.
I replaced the 35-70/2.8 with an AF 28-70/3.5-4.5D (aspheric). I bought three and returned one for centering or other alignment problems. The 28-70/3.5-4.5 I returned didn't show signs of abuse. The price I paid was about twice what a high quality filter for the lens would cost. I use an HN-3 hood for protection.
Anyway centering is something to rule out during the common 14 day return window.
Dave Hartman who is probably as eccentric as his lens. :D
-
I don't understand why you would get puzzled looks. It's always good practice to clean a lens if needed when looking at used gear.
Dave
A lot of the employees there are of the younger sort and I don't think they get a lot of people coming in to get the manual focus Nikkors anymore...then you've got me over there looking like I just walked out of the West Virginia Appalachia and cleaning lens elements....they probably think I'm a bit of a kook....especially over a less than $50 lens.
-
I'd rather ask them for cleaning, and would be negatively impressed if lenses were dirty when taken off the shelf. Some dust is ok, but no more.
Also check :
- infinite focus : is it possible to focus to infinite, and does the helicoid go beyond infinite - easy adjustment, but not free, so trouble here means lesser value.
- correct working of diaph (oily blades is one possible problem among others) - shoot a series or two through the whole aperture range.
- centering : shoot flat subject and spot lack of symmetry in sharpness (four corners, or left vs. right and top vs. bottom, at full or wide apertures).
The last two defects are not fixed easily (if at all possible, in the case of lenses) ; I won't buy under such conditions.
Thanks for the suggestions. I do bring my Nikon Df and my Oly PEN-F with me and use them on both. I do not do a full function check through the aperture range, but I do some. I check infinity focus and do shoot some flat objects within the store.
A bunch of these lenses are stored in a display, but most are devoid of front/rear caps. There is a some dust, but there is also quite a few with fingerprints on them, so as I go through the inspection process I also use the fact that I needed to clean the lenses and their condition as a haggling point. Sometimes it works, sometimes not - but I've built a relationship with them at the store that matter....so they tend to leave me alone and let me go through my thing.
Now, when I walk in, they just ask if I wan to see what they have in the manual focus case....unlock it and walk away.
I honestly, do not care what people think of me. their thoughts are still theirs to have as freely as I breathe air. :D
-
It is particularly important to clean the glass if it has fingerprints on it. If oily fingerprints are left for an extended period of time** on typical optical glass, the marks can become permanently etched into the glass and will add flare and lower contrast. I have seen a 1960's Nikkor 50/1.4 damaged this way.
** = a year or so.
-
So I was finally able to get pout today and use the Nikon 200mm f/4 QC. My usual go to location for lens testing was not as "hopping" as I had wished. So these are not great...but test shots really.
Fotodiox adapter on Olympus PEN-F, all shot wide open at f/4. On m43, the field of view is 400mm.
EXIF, is 1/160, f/4, ISO 200 for the 2 individual shots, the one shot with the girl in yellow has shutter speed of 1/400.
-
I'm glad ! This week I was able to find four Nikkors from the seventies : all of them in very good condition (lenses and lens bodies) for 219€ all together !
- S Auto 2,8/35 Ai'd 3rd type (50€)
- H-C Auto 2,0/50 Ai'd 4th model (40€)
- P Auto 2,5/105 ( 4th version, black barrel, Xenotar, not Sonnar) Ai'd (50€)
- Q-C Auto 4,0/200 (4th version, 79€, a bit too much, cause non Ai'd but very nice)
With my old 1,4/50 S Auto, my 2,0/35 O-C Ai'd and my two old 3,5/55 auto (compensating) and 3,5/55 P (Ai'd), my F and F2 are happy too use them...and my D700 and D300 also ! Not to forget the wonderful 5,6/400 P-C Ai'd found last spring and the Q 4,0/135 Bellows lens with BR1.
So i have actually 10 old Nikkors, dating from 69 to 75 (but also 7 Ais, 2 Voigt Ai-P, 3 AFD and 3 AFS). The good old 70's are for me the best finished...and perhaps the best looking !
-
Got out at lunch today and was able to run the Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS...FINALLY!! Such a pleasure of a lens to use. I had the Olympus PEN-F with me today, so the Nikon with a Fotodiox Nikon to m43 adapter. Shot between f/2.8 and f/8. Mostly with f/4 because of the bright sun today.
-
The ancient 200/F4 Q remains an ongoing mystery to me. I have this clunker of a lens, stiff focus, banged up, clumsily AI-ed with what looks like a hammer and chisel. Even with ridiculously long extensions, it remains one of the easiest lenses I've ever had to focus manually, easy to hand hold. It may not be state of the art sharp, but I think they coated the glass with some secret sauce. Here's a shot straight out of the camera, 68 mm. extension tubes, D7100, hand held at ISO 400 (EXIF says it's a 55/3.5 because I forgot to change) - no sharpening, no nothing, just downsized to JPG.
-
The ancient 200/F4 Q remains an ongoing mystery to me. I have this clunker of a lens, stiff focus, banged up, clumsily AI-ed with what looks like a hammer and chisel. Even with ridiculously long extensions, it remains one of the easiest lenses I've ever had to focus manually, easy to hand hold. It may not be state of the art sharp, but I think they coated the glass with some secret sauce. Here's a shot straight out of the camera, 68 mm. extension tubes, D7100, hand held at ISO 400 (EXIF says it's a 55/3.5 because I forgot to change) - no sharpening, no nothing, just downsized to JPG.
Amassing what those old designs do even today ;)
-
The 200/4 Q.C has almost identical optics as the original Nikkor-Q 20cm/4 from 1961. The optics were tweaked in 1967 for improved performance but the design is still essentially the same, the barrel was revised in 1969 (with possibly another minor revision of the optics) and multicoating was added in 1973. The original lens has a rather long focus limit of 3m, maybe because the designers felt it wasn't well optimised for close range, although the limit was reduced to a more useful 2m when the barrel barrel was updated. For a lens which originally only got to 3m, it is amazing how well it does at much closer distances.
-
The 200mm f4 Nikkor-Q and Q.C are indeed among the gems of the MF Nikkors.
Other gems, from short to long, and all just based on my personal experience with MF Nikkors:
16mm f3,5. Mine is a pre-Ai version. The Ai seems to be marginally better
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4364/37008319025_885eeeab67_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/YoiiTX)20170903-DSC_7248 (https://flic.kr/p/YoiiTX) by b j (https://www.flickr.com/photos/132836932@N03/), on Flickr
20mm f3,5 Nikkor-UD. I prefer this one over the later Ai and Ai-S versions, and over the f4 and f2,8 lenses Nikon made in this range
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4355/37168545231_cea0b7a023_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/YCsvyK)20170917-DSC_8172 (https://flic.kr/p/YCsvyK) by b j (https://www.flickr.com/photos/132836932@N03/), on Flickr
35mm f2 Nikkor-O. I wasn't ever pulled towards the 35mm range, until I found this little gem.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4360/36769744370_90f92932ba_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Y2dxXQ)20170910-DSC_7674 (https://flic.kr/p/Y2dxXQ) by b j (https://www.flickr.com/photos/132836932@N03/), on Flickr
55mm f1,2 Nikkor-S.C. Who cares about perfect, measurable sharpness if there is so much to discover in the areas of an image that are not in focus?
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4171/34445884690_697a0ea4f1_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/UtSarC)DSC_0132-Edit (https://flic.kr/p/UtSarC) by b j (https://www.flickr.com/photos/132836932@N03/), on Flickr
200mm f4 Nikkor-Q.C. Very usable wide open. So much so, that I hardly ever see the need to stop this baby down
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7790/26543412470_2e766c6a05_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GrxVLA)DSC_8207 (https://flic.kr/p/GrxVLA) by b j (https://www.flickr.com/photos/132836932@N03/), on Flickr
The only thing that made me use the above 200mm lens less then I did before is buying another copy of a lens I sold. The 80-200 f4 Ai-S zoom Nikkor. I owned one for 20+ years, and selling it was a big mistake. When I got another copy, I immediately knew why I had missed this lens more then any other lens I ever sold. Ease of use AND excellent results. And as a cherry on the cake, it focuses all the way down to 1,2 meters.
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2811/34210780282_0747591686_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/U86c6m)DSC_9571 (https://flic.kr/p/U86c6m) by b j (https://www.flickr.com/photos/132836932@N03/), on Flickr
With the above kit in my bag, what does that leave to be desired? The 300mm f2,8*ED Ai-S of course!
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4362/36482054203_19caedcdba_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/XzN4Gx)20170912-DSC_7912 (https://flic.kr/p/XzN4Gx) by b j (https://www.flickr.com/photos/132836932@N03/), on Flickr
I do own a few other manual Nikkor lenses, but these are the ones that come along when I go outdoors. Not all of them, but at least 2 or 3
-
20mm f3,5 Nikkor-UD. I prefer this one over the later Ai and Ai-S versions
Your photograph could have been greatly strengthened by stepping forward about 3 meters to the Buick Special or backward about 3 meters to the Chrysler 300. Sometimes life is unkind.
Dave Hartman
I remember the 20/3.5 UD Nikkor fondly.
-
David, you might have been right there, but I used different lenses to portrait the Buick and Chrysler because I thought the strengths in their designs were not made for the fish eye effect ;)
-
:) :D ;)
-
I gave up on the 20/2.8 AFD (ugly plastic fantastic, poor handling) and took the alternative route with the 20/2.8 AIS instead. The new 20/1.8 AFS is very sharp, but like many of its contemporary siblings, in dire lack of charm and smooth handling.
The small 20/3.5 AI/AIS is excellent for close-ups but not my first choice for more distant subjects as the corners aren't very convincing before f/11 or so, at which point the entire image starts to fall apart. The 20/2.8 output has a nice overall feel to it, but once again, maybe not the candidate for distant landscapes.
I have not tried the Nikkor 20mm 3.5 AI/AIS.
However, I have the Nikkor 20mm 2.8 AIS and the Nikkor 20mm 1.8G ED AF-S. The AF-S version is better in the periphery, otherwise these two are largely equal. The superiority of the AF-S version is visible but not dramatic, so on the whole I have found that the AIS version holds up very well.
If used on a digital body, I will recommend the 20mm 1.8 AF-S since it is optically better and has AF.
-
Coatings/reflections are always nice to look at,,, shot by JA! Thanks ;D
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8522/29441770242_d74c666dac_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LRELyj)26822992335_c22743d8db_o (https://flic.kr/p/LRELyj) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
I would be very careful not to drop that one onto the gravel.
-
Believe me - we where very careful,,, ;D Photo by Jan Anne 8)
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7281/26813872186_e6a806aee5_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GRs729)Erik02 (https://flic.kr/p/GRs729) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
Believe me - we where very careful,,, ;D Photo by Jan Anne 8)
Yes, we can see that :D
-
Was able to get out and use the Nikkor 135mm f/3.5 Q today. Wanted to get some test shots for a review I am working on:
Various apertures from f/3.5 - f/8. Performed well on the Df, but that will not be a surprise to most.
-
Performance looks decent as I interpret these results. Similar to other Nikon 135's, like my 135/3.5 Ai, 135/2.8 Ais, and 135/2 Ais. Don't ask why I have all of these! I still want the older 135/2.8 K/Ai, just because it looks so cool.
-
Performance looks decent as I interpret these results. Similar to other Nikon 135's, like my 135/3.5 Ai, 135/2.8 Ais, and 135/2 Ais. Don't ask why I have all of these! I still want the older 135/2.8 K/Ai, just because it looks so cool.
I own a 135/2.8 AIS NIKKOR with the latest Super IC coatings and consider it an exelent lens. I also own a 135/3.5 AI and it turns in a fine performance at f/5.6. I also own a 135/3.5 Nikkor-Q with single coating primarily for nostalgic reasons. I can recommend all of these, the Nikkor-Q would be for a vintage look.
Dave who is being paged by a cockatoo.
-
Performance looks decent as I interpret these results. Similar to other Nikon 135's, like my 135/3.5 Ai, 135/2.8 Ais, and 135/2 Ais. Don't ask why I have all of these! I still want the older 135/2.8 K/Ai, just because it looks so cool.
I own a 135/2.8 AIS NIKKOR- with the latest Super IC coatings and consider it an exelent lens. I also own a 135/3.5 AI and it turns in a fine performance at f/5.6. I also own a 135/3.5 Nikkor-Q with single coating primarily for nostalgic reasons. I can recommend all if these, the Nikkor-Q would be for a vintage performance.
Dave who is being paged by a cockatoo
-
135mm /2.8 very nice lens for some inexplicable reason i have not mounted it for some time now, the images are encouraging to pick it up once again
-
Was able to get out and use the Nikkor 135mm f/3.5 Q today.
Be aware there are two optical versions of this lens. The original began life as the rangefinder version, the same optics were ported over to the F-mount lens. Early samples have 9 aperture blades, later reducing to 6 blades. Serial nos from 720101 to at least 847365.
In 1969 the optics were updated, although it remains a 4 element sonnar design. This one has a scalloped aperture ring and 7 aperture blades which are curved (not fully rounded though), so background highlights have a pleasant organic shape. Serial nos from 865101 to 981870. Multicoated version from no 111111 and late pre-AI version with modern barrely style from 158101. I've used this version a little, rendition is similar to the 105/2.5, with good sharpness and nicely rounded bokeh.
-
Be aware there are two optical versions of this lens. The original began life as the rangefinder version, the same optics were ported over to the F-mount lens. Early samples have 9 aperture blades, later reducing to 6 blades. Serial nos from 720101 to at least 847365.
In 1969 the optics were updated, although it remains a 4 element sonnar design. This one has a scalloped aperture ring and 7 aperture blades which are curved (not fully rounded though), so background highlights have a pleasant organic shape. Serial nos from 865101 to 981870. Multicoated version from no 111111 and late pre-AI version with modern barrely style from 158101. I've used this version a little, rendition is similar to the 105/2.5, with good sharpness and nicely rounded bokeh.
I have both (13.5cm f/3.5 Q 9 blades and 135mm f/3.5 QC) and unless there aren't bright areas in the frame they behave about the same (in a very good way) in my opinion.
Here
https://www.nikonclub.it/forum/uploads/ori/201612/8b3cd2eeca561c6d4b0c20ae39c759d7.jpg
the 13.5cm on Sony A7RII @ f/5.6 or f/8, full resolution (just cropped a little), sharpness is up to 42MP.
-
I have both (13.5cm f/3.5 Q 9 blades and 135mm f/3.5 QC) and unless there aren't bright areas in the frame they behave about the same (in a very good way) in my opinion.
Here
https://www.nikonclub.it/forum/uploads/ori/201612/8b3cd2eeca561c6d4b0c20ae39c759d7.jpg
the 13.5cm on Sony A7RII @ f/5.6 or f/8, full resolution (just cropped a little), sharpness is up to 42MP.
Cute pup! :D
-
Got the 200mm f/4 QC out today on the Df:
-
Then I swapped it out for the 300mm f/4.5 AI:
-
Got the 200mm f/4 QC out today on the Df:
wow, the look you got from the woman carrying the mac
-
wow, the look you got from the woman carrying the mac
I know...lol
-
wow, the look you got from the woman carrying the mac
Yes, great !!
That 200 Q C is a real gem.
-
wow, the look you got from the woman carrying the mac
Yes, and a striking resemblance to the character in the last image!
-
A few thoughts on the 135/2.8 AI & AIS. They are opticaly the same. They're not frozen smoke like some modern AF lenses but they aren't too heavy. The f/2.8 aperture extends their usefulness a little earlier and later in the day. Bokeh is nice and smooth at large aperture. They make a great tight head shoot portrait lens. The focus throw on the AIS is a reasonable 180* while the AI is quite long at 270* which makes the lens more difficult to focus on a fast moving subject but more precise for other subjects. They both have a built-in hood. If the one on the AI is as bad as the AIS I'd consider it useless and use a Nikon HS-14 hood instead. The built-ins are very wobbly.
All in all my picks for AI & AIS short to medium telephotos are 105/2.5, 180/2.8 ED and 135/2.8. I have a lube contaminated 85/1.4 AIS and don't know where to place it. It was to me a fabulous lens but I prefer the 105mm and 180mm focal lengths.
Given the performance and price of the 135/2.8 AI & AIS I can't think of a reason not to own one.
Dave Hartman
-
Yes, and a striking resemblance to the character in the last image!
I had to look again: it's true!
Dave
-
The AIS 135/2.8 was one of the first lenses I bought. At the time I figured it offered a bit more bang for buck than the 105/2.5, being the same price, with more reach and only marginally bigger. It was my "poor mans 80-200/2.8", with a focal length mid-way of the zoom I could cover pretty much the same as the zoom with a bit of foot work, it has the same aperture, focuses closer, much smaller and much cheaper, and probably sharper too.
A modern version with better correction of colours for digital imaging would be welcome ...
-
Be aware there are two optical versions of this lens. The original began life as the rangefinder version, the same optics were ported over to the F-mount lens. Early samples have 9 aperture blades, later reducing to 6 blades. Serial nos from 720101 to at least 847365.
In 1969 the optics were updated, although it remains a 4 element sonnar design. This one has a scalloped aperture ring and 7 aperture blades which are curved (not fully rounded though), so background highlights have a pleasant organic shape. Serial nos from 865101 to 981870. Multicoated version from no 111111 and late pre-AI version with modern barrely style from 158101. I've used this version a little, rendition is similar to the 105/2.5, with good sharpness and nicely rounded bokeh.
Good info, thanks for that.
-
So, I go to a Chinese Lantern Festival here in OH. I took the D500 and my Tokina 11-16/2.8, having shoot this event before, this is an appropriate focal length for how I like to shoot it.
Not wanting to be completely unprepared, I also brought the Nikon 35mm f/2D and just because, I brought the Nikon 105mm f/2.5 AI lens. Didn't think I would need it, but there was room in the bag and I like to be prepared whenever possible.
There was a packed stage show and I was pretty much stuck in the seat I was in. 11-16 and 35 were way too wide, the 105 was sometimes too tight, but sometimes you just have to get what you can given the situation. Thought there might be some struggles with manually focusing, but the D500 did quite well. Not like using it on the Df...but manual focus lenses on the Df are just , well awesome to use.
Shot at either f/2.5 or f/4, I got these three shots. Using manual focus lenses more and more, practice - is the only reason I got these shots. Even a few months ago, i would have quit in frustration on these moving subjects. Not too shabby what the "ancient" manual focus lenses can do.
-
Well done, nice shots.
-
Thanks
-
Nice job Andrew. I've not been shooting as much lately but started using MF much more when I bought the Df and then the Sony a7ii. I use the Samyang 135 f2 (makes for interesting FL) on the D500 reasonably often but have not tried it for moving targets. Must give it a try. The 105 f2.5 Ai and DC105 f2D are favourites along with the 200 f4 Ai. Just picked up a 35 f1.4 Ais (as partial trade for the D3S) but have not even had a chance to use it :(
Many thanks for posting.
Tom
-
Great results, Andrew. nice colours. If you'r used to manual focus, it is actually very quick, as you can decide where the focus will be.
-
Nice job Andrew. I've not been shooting as much lately but started using MF much more when I bought the Df and then the Sony a7ii. I use the Samyang 135 f2 (makes for interesting FL) on the D500 reasonably often but have not tried it for moving targets. Must give it a try. The 105 f2.5 Ai and DC105 f2D are favourites along with the 200 f4 Ai. Just picked up a 35 f1.4 Ais (as partial trade for the D3S) but have not even had a chance to use it :(
Many thanks for posting.
Tom
Would be interested to see what you do with that Samyang 135mm.
-
You put the venerable 105/2.5 to good use, Andrew!
I'm kind of relieved to know that the purple spotlight is really tough to handle for anyone.
-
Andrew:
Such a varied collection of photographs, all shot in very different environments and under very different conditions.
Each image shows so much virtuosity and is also evidence of a highly-tuned "Seeing-eye".
-
You put the venerable 105/2.5 to good use, Andrew!
I'm kind of relieved to know that the purple spotlight is really tough to handle for anyone.
You are not kidding. Those theatrical LED lights are intense! They are a tough hue to fight!!
-
Andrew:
Such a varied collection of photographs, all shot in very different environments and under very different conditions.
Each image shows so much virtuosity and is also evidence of a highly-tuned "Seeing-eye".
Thank you!! I treasure my "fun" shooting days.... No deadline, no expectation other than that which I impose upon myself. I find that I tend to be very creative in those times and can use those experiences to enhance other aspects.
-
Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS
Nikon Df
Head a movie while I was waiting on my wife at the coffee shop.
-
Shot with Ai200/4.0 with GH5. Both were cropped to some extent.
-
...and this is the 100% crop of the jet. Notice the the exhaust air?
-
...and this is the 100% crop of the jet. Notice the the exhaust air?
That's pretty good for an ancient lens. Lol
-
That's pretty good for an ancient lens. Lol
Indeed, yes! I suppose that older Nikkor works more nicely with m4/3 for two reasons: m4/3 uses the sweetest spot of the full frame for which they were designed, and the older Nikkors were designed for the resolution rather than the contrast.
I had good results with the even older Nikkor-QC 200/4.0.
-
Akira, very nice. Airplane holds up very well . I use the 200 f4 Ai quite a bit and love the way it renders. Unfortunately the Df doesn't have the legs of your GH5 but the D500 is closer :)
Yom
-
Akira, very nice. Airplane holds up very well . I use the 200 f4 Ai quite a bit and love the way it renders. Unfortunately the Df doesn't have the legs of your GH5 but the D500 is closer :)
Yom
Thank you, Tom, for kind words.
This image was also shot with the same Ai200/4.0 on GH5 handheld a few days ago and posted in another thread started by me. Hope my double post is tolerated under this circumstance.
Above the Mt. Fuji, there is a jet (apparently C-130), and, to the left of it, there is a small dot which turned out to be not a dust speck but...
-
So, since I last posted, I've also picked up a couple other lenses.
I believe I may have mentioned the 20/3.5 AIS, 28/2.8 AIS and the 35/2.8 nikkor-s q.
I also got the 135/3.5 AIS.
today, my mother in law wanted to get me something for Christmas. Went to the camera store and walked out with Nikon 85/2 AIS.
I know it doesn't have the best of reputations, but for the size and the fact that I didn't pay for it... It's all good. On to of it, in starting to run it of focal lengths to get, as most of them I already have covered. :-)
-
Andrew, you are as bad an influence as everyone else 8)
-
Andrew, you are as bad an influence as everyone else 8)
I don't mean to be!! Lol ;)
I came from a time where I did start out shooting film, but AF was the norm. I quickly transitioned to digital where manual focus was almost unheard of.
Once I got myself past the desire to only shoot fast paced, "get the shot, get it out the door", I realized that not only do I love creating photographs, but I also am in love with the process of taking them.
Like anything you love, there should be time to reflect in it, show down, enjoy, appreciate.
Manual focus lenses do that for me. They have their time and place.
I've also found that the older lenses have a more organic quality to them that I find pleasing. The modern lenses are fantastic. So fantastic that they can be extremely sharp and at times almost clinically perfect.
I've often been drawn to the concept that true perfection does not really exist here in our existence and we are to strive to always try and get there. It is the imperfect that I love to show, especially when you can show the uniqueness and beauty in it.
These gems of lenses are so inexpensive now, and I'm fortunate to have a local camera store that still deals on them and gets refreshed stock from time to time. My only real regret is that my photographic maturity took so long to get here that I missed YEARS of shooting manual focus. Maybe now, I'm trying to play catch up!
-
Went to the camera store and walked out with Nikon 85/2 AIS.
I know it doesn't have the best of reputations, but for the size and the fact that I didn't pay for it... It's all good.
My old battered 85mm AIS is still one of my favorite on the Df, just the good size, efficient and I never understood it's bad rap ? I like it as it is 8)
You'll like it :)
-
I've also found that the older lenses have a more organic quality to them that I find pleasing. The modern lenses are fantastic. So fantastic that they can be extremely sharp and at times almost clinically perfect.
I'm hoping that using these older MF lenses will bring back some of the "character" of the film days.
I have a small pile of older non-Ai lenses that I will be sending to Mr. White to be converted so I can use them on my D750...
50mm f/2
105mm f/2.5 (early Sonnar type)
105mm f/2.5 (later version)
135mm f/2.8
200mm f/4
From the film days, I have:
24mm f/2.8 AiS
28mm f/3.5 Ai
55mm f/2.8 Micro Ais
Series E 100mm f/2.8 AiS
200mm f/4 Micro Ai
What might I look for next? See any affordable "must haves" that are missing?
Stay sharp,
Bob
-
Is Mr White still doing these lens conversions?
I have heard good things said about his work.
-
Desmobob, I see you already have several of my favorites. Among mine are the very early pre-AI 200/4 and the also very early 28/3.5. Both these are the old type without easily removable flanges, and I've never converted the 28. The 200 was hacked before I bought it but works. I also have the later pre-AI 105/2.5 which is grand, and a late pre-AI version of the 55/3.5 which is just as good as it should be.
You might want to look for the old 85/1.8, which is not spectacularly sharp but gives lovely results, and perhaps the 35/2.8K. That latter is also not killer sharp, at least in the example I have, but it was very cheap, is very compact, and must be about the easiest lens I've ever seen to repair, making it a good candidate if you find one with haze or fungus at a giveaway price.
By the way, judging by your handle, can we assume you are or have been a fan of a certain Italian motorcycle? I'm off the road now, but once had a Desmo 350 - a pocket rocket with a unique sound, like a houri tearing silk while dancing on a kettle drum (on the rare occasions when it started at all!).
-
The 85/1.8 K (a real gem) is not really affordable any more. I think a good sample (and Ai converted) will cost 300E or more. The same applies for the 180/2.8 ED and also the 20/4 or 20/3.5 UD.
The 28/2 is also not a cheap lens.
Perhaps you can get lucky with a 28/2.8 Ai-S or 35/2.8 K - early Ai version.
-
I have the 35mm f/2, 85mm f/1.8 and 180mm f/2.8 in AF versions, so I'm not compelled to look for the older versions of those. I guess a 20mm prime is a lens missing from my collection. That will likely be my next target... non-Ai, Ai, Ai-S for AF; whatever I stumble upon that fits my frugal budget.
John White does still does the conversions; I've e-mailed him a few weeks ago. He has a great reputation for his work. I'm tempted to do it myself but I'd be heartbroken if I messed up one of those fine old lenses. I do have a pre-Ai 43-86 f/3.5 with an oily diaphragm that I guess would be a prime candidate for a DIY practice attempt. ;-) (I have a later Ai-S version of that infamous lens, which is actually a decent performer. It's a lens I used a lot as an enlisted Navy journalist in the '80s.)
And yes, I am a Ducati owner. I have a 900SS SP that I bought new in 1995 (my avatar image). I love it.
Stay sharp,
Bob
-
I got to inspect the 85mm f/2 AIS a little closer. The front lens element does have some scratches on it. I've seen worse, to be honest.
Some preliminary testing shows a little bit of haze at f/2, but that goes away quickly once you hit f/2.8.
The thing that strikes me about it the most is the size. I am so used to thinking that the 85mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 have to be these huge things and this is anything but huge. A nice small prime, as you'd want it to be. I appreciate it and the small size of even the AIS 105/2.5 and 135/3.5 lenses.
I saw a newer 200/4 AIS at the camera store. I am going to do some research and if it is the same or better IQ than the QC that I have, I might snag that one just for the smaller size and the proper EXIF registering on the Df.
Anyway, some images of the 85/2 AIS.
-
I'm hoping that using these older MF lenses will bring back some of the "character" of the film days.
I have a small pile of older non-Ai lenses that I will be sending to Mr. White to be converted so I can use them on my D750...
50mm f/2
105mm f/2.5 (early Sonnar type)
105mm f/2.5 (later version)
135mm f/2.8
200mm f/4
From the film days, I have:
24mm f/2.8 AiS
28mm f/3.5 Ai
55mm f/2.8 Micro Ais
Series E 100mm f/2.8 AiS
200mm f/4 Micro Ai
What might I look for next? See any affordable "must haves" that are missing?
I'd be tempted to add an AI 20/3.5 for a super-wide lens (the AIS is the same optically but has a shorter focus throw)
Also the AI 50/1.8, I think it is a little better than the 50/2 and has nicer bokeh.
AI 135/3.5 is also a nice lens, will nicely bridge the gap between your 100mm series-E and 200/4, and focuses closer than the pre-Ai 135mm lenses.
A lens with 35mm focal length could also be useful...
-
I'd be tempted to add an AI 20/3.5 for a super-wide lens (the AIS is the same optically but has a shorter focus throw)
Also the AI 50/1.8, I think it is a little better than the 50/2 and has nicer bokeh.
AI 135/3.5 is also a nice lens, will nicely bridge the gap between your 100mm series-E and 200/4, and focuses closer than the pre-Ai 135mm lenses.
A lens with 35mm focal length could also be useful...
Thanks for your recommendations, Mr. Vink.
I have started poking around a bit, looking for a 20mm Nikkor of some sort. I'll target the Ai 3.5 if that's the best price/performance option.
I do have a 50mm f/1.8 in the AF series but I've read the earlier metal Ai-S version is the superior version. I have the AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D. I get the impression it isn't that well liked, but I've been happy with my copy. I've read that the Ai-S version is considered a better performer. I'll start to look for these MF lenses when I've recovered from my holiday spending. :-)
I was interested that you mentioned the 135mm f/3.5 Ai. Do you feel this lens is superior/different enough compared to my pre-Ai f/2.8 version that it's worth finding one to replace my f/2.8 or duplicating the focal length in my collection?
My pre-Ai lenses will go out to Mr. White this coming week. In the mean time, I'll be experimenting with my latest AF acquisition: an AF ED Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 one-touch zoom. So far, I'm impressed by its performance and depressed by its weight!
Thanks again for your suggestions,
Bob
-
Thanks for your recommendations, Mr. Vink.
I have started poking around a bit, looking for a 20mm Nikkor of some sort. I'll target the Ai 3.5 if that's the best price/performance option.
That 20mm is a nice small lens as well. The UD is much larger and heavier.
-
I have started poking around a bit, looking for a 20mm Nikkor of some sort. I'll target the Ai 3.5 if that's the best price/performance option.
I do have a 50mm f/1.8 in the AF series but I've read the earlier metal Ai-S version is the superior version. I have the AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D. I get the impression it isn't that well liked, but I've been happy with my copy. I've read that the Ai-S version is considered a better performer. I'll start to look for these MF lenses when I've recovered from my holiday spending. :-)
I was interested that you mentioned the 135mm f/3.5 Ai. Do you feel this lens is superior/different enough compared to my pre-Ai f/2.8 version that it's worth finding one to replace my f/2.8 or duplicating the focal length in my collection?
My pre-Ai lenses will go out to Mr. White this coming week. In the mean time, I'll be experimenting with my latest AF acquisition: an AF ED Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 one-touch zoom. So far, I'm impressed by its performance and depressed by its weight!
I had both the AI-S 20/2.8 and AI 20/3.5 at one point. I kept the 20/3.5 because was a better fit in my lens kit - it is more compact and the 52mm filter size is the same as my other lenses. It is a little soft in the corners at infinity (the 20/2.8 is sharper) but is fine for landscapes by f/8 or f/11, and is excellent at medium - close distances. It is also quite resistant to flare when shooting into the sun. There is a noticeable barrel distortion which flattens out towards the edges so take care when shooting straight lines near the edge of the frame.
The "long nose" AI and AI-S 50/1.8 has a different optical design from the AF 50/1.8, which is based on the series-E and AI-S "pancake" versions. I think sharpness is about the same, but the AI/AI-S version renders backgrounds smoother.
My impression of the the AI 135/3.5 is that it has better sharpness and contrast than the Nikkor-Q 135/3.5, but the older lens is still a good lens and it has smoother rendition. I haven't had a chance to shoot the pre-AI 135/2.8 versions yet, but the older multicoated versions do have a good reputation. The AI 135/3.5 is also much more compact, and it focuses closer (1.3m vs 1.5m) which is useful.
-
At one time, I had the 135/2.8 Ai (the later, small one that was offered as K/Ai/AiS), the 135/3.5 Ai, and the 135/2 AiS on hand.
All gave extremely similar image quality at the same stops.
I kept the 135/3.5 Ai. I'd like a smallish 135/2.8 that has better axial CA correction than any of these Nikkors, but the only such lens in the current market is the gigantic Zeiss 135/2.
-
Mf is still alive.
All these old MF lenses are made with character and are able to give such joy and satisfaction when shooting. Just came back from Japan. I travelled with only 3 old mf lenses which was a gamble.
Now looking back I am so happy I did. (20mm UD, 50mm, 135mm Q)
For those in Europe/UK I provide modification service slightly more in keeping aka you do not see that a modification was performed once mounted. Suitable specially for Df and others high end Nikon's.
See also: http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,2650.msg114644.html#msg114644
For those interested send me a message. More than willing to help out.
-
wow, the look you got from the woman carrying the mac
yes she looks like having a bad day and you just made it worse 😂🤣😂🤣😂😁
-
Mf is still alive.
All these old MF lenses are made with character and are able to give such joy and satisfaction when shooting. Just came back from Japan. I travelled with only 3 old mf lenses which was a gamble.
Now looking back I am so happy I did. (20mm UD, 50mm, 135mm Q)
For those in Europe/UK I provide modification service slightly more in keeping aka you do not see that a modification was performed once mounted. Suitable specially for Df and others high end Nikon's.
See also: http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,2650.msg114644.html#msg114644
For those interested send me a message. More than willing to help out.
very beautiful cat in window. sensitive shot
-
An example of the 85mm f/2 AI ! An old frame stuck on the wall in Paris... With the Df ;)
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7886/44675778070_c3cbc3e3fb_b.jpg)
-
And another example of the 135mm f/2.8 Q on the DF... This time converted in B&W. It's the "Observatoire de Paris" were our scientists mingle to chat about Astronomy... ::)
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3869/14808033260_90e78a0104_b.jpg)
-
The 135/2.8 QC on the Nikon D850 (Had all 135 versions of the 2.8 and 3.5 but found the 2.8 QC the best and kept it)
Posted earlier in http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,8049.240.html (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,8049.240.html)
(http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8049.0;attach=36141;image)
-
Great shot of the cyclist in the mist... ;)
-
I seem to be having posting problems suddenly. I was going to mention that though I like the 135/2.8Q, I find it for some reason harder to hand hold and focus than either the 105/2.5 or the 200/4. That latter seems to snap into focus easily, and with a bunch of extension tubes, it makes a surprisingly good lens for chasing bugs. Anyway, the 135 works ok when there's enough light and a tripod, but it seems difficult to get sharply focused, at least on a DX format camera.
I do, however, like the way it does muted colors like browns and grays. BAck when I was shooting a lot of film, I may have been one of the very few people who really liked Velvia 100F film, because it did those earth tones so well. I didn't have the 135 then, but I imagine it would have been just right with that. If it loads properly, here's a quickie backyard shot which may not show what I mean exactly in JPG and web form, but I really like those earth tones, and I can imagine that this lens would work very well in proper black and white, too.
still won't load. I have downsized it to 1000/666.....third try coming up.....
-
Failure to post images usually is caused by illegal characters in file name, or file size being bigger than the current upper limit (2MB).
Try saving a file with a slightly lower jpg quality next time. That solves most issues. We also recommend keeping pixel dimensions well within say 2000 x 1300 pix. Any bigger is a waste of everything including screen rendition.
-
At a chance to play a little bit with the 85/2. Bitter cold, so wasnt out long.
-
Also got a Helios 44-2. 58mm was recently introduced to me via the Nikon 58mm f/1.4. I really liked the focal length.
Still trying to find the "swirly bokeh" on this thing, though. Again to cold to be out long, hope to have more time to experiment.
-
Helios is looking nice rendering although a bit uderexosed
-
Helios is looking nice rendering although a bit uderexosed
True. Still trying to get used to it. Although the light was much more like the Helios image than the Nikon 85/1.8. that one was a bit brighter than the actual light.
The Df metered and exposed as I expected it to with the 85mm, but with the Helios, it frequently exposed weirdly.
-
Metering depends on a number of parameters, position of exit pupil and lens contrast transfer being some of these. Thus setting individual corrections for particular lenses is not unheard of.
-
At a chance to play a little bit with the 85/2. Bitter cold, so wasnt out long.
What stop was this shot at? Have you played with the Nikkor 85/2 wide open vs. slightly stopped down?
-
What stop was this shot at? Have you played with the Nikkor 85/2 wide open vs. slightly stopped down?
Used at f/2 thought f/4. The sample 85mm shot was f/2.8.