24 mm and 135 mm MF AI-S lens where to look for

[jhinkey]

The suggestion is made the 135/2.8 is a bad lens, which it isn't.  It is a great lens, and very compact !  Of course it is a little bit less sharper (if that is the only goal) than a brilliant lens like the 105/2.5  but it has it's own merits, what Bjørn also indicated.   I like the lens for back up, because it is easy to take with you if you need some tele-work.

At f/4 onwards it's is pretty sharp, and the bokeh is actually very good at f/2.8. The bit of 'softness' wide open works great for portraits.

I made no suggestion the 135/2.8 is a bad lens.  It's just not as good as the other lenses mentioned for sharpness, especially off-center.

[David H. Hartman]

I own both the 105/2.5 AIS and 135/2.8. I find nothing to complain about with either. Nikkor - The Thousand and One Nights, Tale No.5 said regarding the 105/2.5 AI...

The lens also has characteristics of spherical aberration and coma. Basically close-range aberration variation is small, but at portrait distances the correction for aberration seems to be slightly insufficient. The insufficiency as far as spherical aberration in particular is what makes defocus background appeared beautiful. The aberration balance has been calculated carefully for use in portraits. When the aperture is open contrast is good, and delineation is soft.

In my tests of three of the Xenotar (modified Gauss) the three lenses achieved their sweet spot a little later than other Nikkor primes. Judging mostly on the center I called it at f/5.6. This agrees with 1001 and 1, Tale 5 and also with David Ruether who says of both the 105/2.5 Xenotar and 135/2.8 (Compact, AI, AIS, Maybe K), "performance declines at wide stops near minimum focus (both conditions together), otherwise this lens is excellent even wide open"

Since the 135/2.8 is a natural lens to use for portraits, tight head shots, it's quite possible that the same design philosophy of slightly soft at wide apertures and portrait distance informed the design of the 135/2.8. I've meant to test this once I got a D800 but I just shoot with the 135/2.8 and like it.

I prefer the 105/2.5 as I like the perspective I get better with 105 than 135. When the framing is the same I'll be standing a little closer and the closer distance produces the perspective. I like to say a lens "suggests" a perspective.

I don't find any bad habits with either my 105/2.5 AIS and 135/2.8 AIS. For focusing with live view I wish I hadn't give my 105/2.5 AI to pay a debt. After testing three 105/2.5 Xenotar types, N-C, AI and AIS I intended to keep both the AI and AIS. The N-C was sold but not delivered.   

I'll throw one more lens in the discussion: the 105/2.8 AIS Micro-Nikkor. In my tests years ago my 105/2.8 AIS was right there with my 105/2.5(s) and it focuses down to 1:2 (half life size)  so it can do double duty as a portrait and micro lens. With the PN-11 it achieves 1:1. With its CRC design it's probably wise to use a PK-12 and then PK-13 to achieve magnification ratio above 1:2 and until near 1:1 keeping the focus ring as near to minimum focus distance as possible.

Regarding the built in lens hoods on the 105/2.5 AIS and 135/2.8 AIS I've never had a problem with them. They are so wobbly, so bad that I've always used an HS-8 or HS-14 lens hood which offers better protection from stray light anyway.

I remember the first time I looked through a 105/2.5 Nikkor-P at Gayson's Camera. It just looked right. I immediately traded a 135/2.8 Nikkor-Q. The owner took the trade, 1 for 1. I'd owned the 135 for less than 24 hours. My preference for focal length is 105mm over 135mm.

That's my 2 cents on the subject...

Dave Hartman

[John Geerts]

Thanks for your analysis, David.  I agree with your findings.

I recently was able to get a copy of the 105/2.8 Ai-S  Micro (they are not very often on Ebay and always pretty expensive)  and am amazed by it's results, but I need some further work-out with the lens.

I love the rendering of this daisy:

D600 -  105/2.8   at 2.8

[John Geerts]

Posted in Spring 2017

But also 105/2.8 at 2.8

[Tri-x]

This one I didn't think about. Very interesting because one of the subjects is macro.
The bokeh  looks very nice.
1:2 ratio is a good enough for me.
 One more lens to think about 

[Roland Vink]

Posted in Spring 2017

But also 105/2.8 at 2.8

Beautiful image John. I'm especially impressed you shot this at 2.8, you did an excellent job at lining up the focus plane with the subject - the DoF must have been very thin!
And I agree, the AIS 105/2.8 micro is a good lens.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

The 105/2.8 AIS Micro also has the distinction of probably being at least as good, if not better, at long distances than up close.

The lens is less easy to do maintenance on (internal cleaning, lubrication, alignment) than its predecessor 105/4 due to a more complex optical design and much more vulnerable to external impact. Some samples I have examined have had very stiff focusing others are literally 'sweating' grease; thus ensure you try it before the final purchase decision is taken.

As this was the first 105 Micro with CRC, it has some quirks once you combine it with the recommended PN-11 extension tube to go further than the 1:2 offered by the naked lens. With extension added CRC is no longer effective in the near range and Nikon recommends you stop down quite a bit extra to overcome this problem. In fact, the lens has additional engravings to indicate the apertures one ought to stop down to with the PN-11. As the lens + PN-11 goes toward the new limit of 1:0.88, you can open up more though.

[John Geerts]

Beautiful image John. I'm especially impressed you shot this at 2.8, you did an excellent job at lining up the focus plane with the subject - the DoF must have been very thin!
And I agree, the AIS 105/2.8 micro is a good lens.

Thanks Roland.  DoF is a not as thin as many other 'macro' lenses. To my surprise it  has a very good handling wide open despite being a 'fast' macro lens. 

Thanks for extra information, Bjørn.  I think the use of 3T of 4T is also a possibility.  Do you have  experience with that combination?

[Tri-x]

Made some progress already, yesterday picked up a Micro-nikkor 105mm 2.8 with lens shade.
Is in really very good condition and focussing moves smooth all over the track.
I made some pictures with it but my film is not yet full so to share them will take a few days at least.

Now only a wide angle lens.
I found a 28mm 2.8 AI lens in nearly mint condition.
what is a reasonable price for this?

[pluton]

EDIT: Oops, just saw your location of The Netherlands. FYI only...
28/2.8 Ai, in the USA in $USD:  Too much: $150+, OK price: $125, Good price: $90, a 'steal': $50.
(The 28/2.8 AiS is a very different lens that sells for more, because it has higher optical performance).

[Tri-x]

Thanks Keith :-)

[the solitaire]

Made some progress already, yesterday picked up a Micro-nikkor 105mm 2.8 with lens shade.
Is in really very good condition and focussing moves smooth all over the track.
I made some pictures with it but my film is not yet full so to share them will take a few days at least.

Now only a wide angle lens.
I found a 28mm 2.8 AI lens in nearly mint condition.
what is a reasonable price for this?

I owned the 28mm f2,8 Ai, and even though it's not a bad lens as such (low distortion, not much vignetting, good sharpness) it is not a spectacular lens in any regard either. (picked mine up for EUR 100)

The 28mm f2,8 Ai-S focuses to 0,2m instead of 0,3m which is significant in that it makes the Ai-S lens a potential lens to shoot close ups with, creating a very interesting perspective and nice OoF rendering. (normally costs around EUR 200)

I also bought a 28mm f2 Nikkor-N.C which I liked a lot better then the 28mm f2,8 Ai because of it's sharpness and rendering. The extra stop makes more of a difference then suggested. (paid EUR 100 for a seriously beaten up version)

Next I picked up a 24mm f2,8 Nikkor-N.C (EUR 150) and, after taking it out for photos, sold all the 28mm lenses. Personally I liked the 24mm perspective far better then 28. Ideally I would own a 35mm as well, but I kidn of skip that bit and move from wide straight to standard lenses) The 24mm f2,8 Nikkor-N.C is as Bjorn describes. I find mine best at f5,6 or f8