NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Ian R on August 28, 2015, 22:40:56
-
This is an amazing lens - the one that probably changed peoples opinions of just how good a zoom lens could be. First introduced in 1969 and made up until the early 1980's it had a good run for a zoom lens. There was a few changes along the way - namely multicoating in 1973 and a revision of the optics at the end of the 70's. I picked up a very early 'C' variant from '73 - C meaning multicoated. It was not selling as it was non-Ai so an offer of £20 secured it. Seeing as the optics were clean and no zoom creep to spoil the fun I gave it a go. Now here is the thing, as zoom lenses go it has a level of performance that is still decent in 2015 - and that is no mean feat.
I have never tried one of the later Ai revision versions with less glass and the rectangular baffle at the rear but they are supposed to be better still. What aspects were improved over the early versions?
I attach two photos I have taken with my lens and I have had them printed - they look good to me. Old zoom lenses are not really a desirable item any more and I can understand why as they have improved in many ways, but even going back to these first attempts I am able to create some pleasing images.
So any input welcome - I have been doing some research but having not tried all the versions I am not able to see the improvements in lens handling or the end photo myself.
-
Lovely pictures from a classic lens.
A few comments: my impression is that the earlier 80-200/4.5 models suffer less from zoom creep. The later versions with the modern styling are looser, and the late AI version with the new optics is very loose. I think the new AI version is a bit better optically as you would expect from more modern design - slightly sharper, a little bit less vignetting (more even illumination) and better contrast (fewer glass-air surfaces). Apart from that the versions are all very similar in size, weight and handling. My only regret is that Nikon did not improve the close focus limit with the newer version, which is a little strange since the E 75-150/3.5 and AIS 80-200/4 belong to the same optical "family" (they have similar designs) and they focus much closer. Of the tele zooms in this group, the 75-150 is my favorite since it is faster and more compact. I don't mind the shorter zoom range, 150mm is about as long as I want to hand-hold anyway. The only real problem with these lenses is that they suffer from longitudinal CA. It would be awesome if Cosina of Zeiss introduced a modern version with better glass and coatings!
-
Zeiss has one, but it's $20,000.00
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/857787-REG/Zeiss_1984_159_70_200mm_T2_9_Compact_Zoom.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/857787-REG/Zeiss_1984_159_70_200mm_T2_9_Compact_Zoom.html)
-
Thank you Roland. I am always very interested in trying the older and less popular Nikkors - they have their own individual character traits and positive aspects like all lenses, but you are right about the CA - I noticed that myself, fortunately it was easily removed in one click via Lightroom.
-
Very pleasing rendition and humble color, which make the image rather natural.
I used Ai 400/5.6 ED on D610 and thought that an FX 24MP sensor was friendly to the vintage MF Nikkors. Your images supports my findings.
Keith, as you know, this Zeiss zoom is a specialized cine lens. On a DSLR, it should offer absolutely stunning images and well absorb the mirror slap thanks to it weight of 2.8kg!
-
got this from the junkbox :o :o :o
even with junk inside the lens, i can say that this lens performs just as great as the 80-200 f/4 (http://richardhaw.com/2016/01/30/project-zoom-nikkor-80-200mm-f4-ai-s/ (http://richardhaw.com/2016/01/30/project-zoom-nikkor-80-200mm-f4-ai-s/)) that i have ::) no wonder this version stayed in production for such a long time 8) to call this lens legendary is an understatement.
going to clean this over the weekend.
-
I have the original version of this lens, and still used it from the time I bought my D600 until a couple of months ago when I got a modern tele zoom. (I sent it off for the AI upgrade in the '70s.) Nice and sharp, but less contrast than you get today. Doesn't focus at all close. But hard to complain after I got 45 years of use out of it.
-
the lens that i got from the junk box is just 1 iteration from yours if you got the original one :o :o :o
i actually find this lens' sharpness to be very acceptable 8)
-
I too have an original version that I used for years on a Nikkormat FTn. When I later bought a FM2 I had a local shop modify it to AI for that camera.
I find it very satisfactory on a D600 today. It's light and handles well on that size cam body. Often for hikes in the woods with no specific photo targets in mind I'll carry that and a 24-70/2.8 with the D600 for a nice lightweight, compact kit.
As Akira noted it reacts well with the 24MP sensor of the D6XX cameras.
As the attached show it has very natural rendition even without any PP corrections and it can even be used on some tamer "wildlife".
Probably the only complaint I have with it today is really more with the screens in the DSLRs which make it difficult to focus well.
-
the contrast on the 80-200 f/4 Ai-S is superior :o :o :o
but this lens has it's charm ::)
i am not sure but i find this lens' bokeh to be superior in some ways. no tests done yet. maybe the low contrasts adds to the illusion of having better bokeh
-
I sold a 1971 Toyota Hi-Lux pickup to by an 80-200/4.5 Zoom-Nikkor non-AI and a 135mm f/5.6 Componon-S enlarging lens. I don't know which model of 80-200/4.5 it was. I can't remember if it was single or multi coated. I do remember the lens fondly.
Dave
-
I sold a 1971 Toyota Hi-Lux pickup to by an 80-200/4.5 Zoom-Nikkor non-AI and a 135mm f/5.6 Componon-S enlarging lens. I don't know which model of 80-200/4.5 it was. I can't remember if it was single or multi coated. I do remember the lens fondly.
Dave
the 80-200 f/4 Ai-S almost costs the same as the new entry level Toyota sedan when it came out (OK, maybe just a bit cheaper but you get the idea). :o :o :o
now these things sell for peanuts. i got these for $15-17 each
-
I'd like an 80-200/4.5 for old time sake but I'd want the latest AI version rather than the one I had which may have been single coated.
Dave
-
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7621/17201416855_e9b3f36604_o.jpg)
the pre-ai version on Df i was great surprised about the iq
-
I'd like an 80-200/4.5 for old time sake but I'd want the latest AI version rather than the one I had which may have been single coated.
Dave
here in japan that is the most commonly seen version in the junk boxes :o :o :o i skipped one and i regret it
-
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7621/17201416855_e9b3f36604_o.jpg)
the pre-ai version on Df i was great surprised about the iq
:o :o :o the C version?
-
Richard my copy is serial #238115 which according to
Roland Vink
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html (http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html)
makes it a K version
-
I picked up this 80~200/4.5 Ai new version for $50 or so.
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/776/21402909784_0be2eb24dd_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/yBivpW)Nikkor_80_200_new2 (https://flic.kr/p/yBivpW) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/573/21402910084_ceab9cd3fe_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/yBivv7)Fall 2015 (https://flic.kr/p/yBivv7) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
I relubed it, got rid of the zoom-creep. It was very loose, much better now.
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5672/22025710205_1b806a3f83_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/zykwhe)Fall 2015 (https://flic.kr/p/zykwhe) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5823/22035582911_ea5b5034a8_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/zzd86i)Fall 2015 (https://flic.kr/p/zzd86i) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/684/22013401642_364d382e3e_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/zxfrnC)Fall 2015 (https://flic.kr/p/zxfrnC) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5757/21837540760_554e5f7753_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/zgH74s)Fall 2015 (https://flic.kr/p/zgH74s) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5775/21404556473_98be75f9ff_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/yBrWV8)Fall 2015 (https://flic.kr/p/yBrWV8) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5703/21838788869_626d4766d8_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/zgPv5z)Fall 2015 (https://flic.kr/p/zgPv5z) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
shots at min and max range of zoom.
i also have the 80~200/4.5 "K" factory Ai converted. I found the Ai kit, took a few minutes.
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5477/12624450603_2fe3269bab_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/kezBkr)80~200/4.5 (https://flic.kr/p/kezBkr) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
I have not shot both side-by-side, honestly- both are great, don't see a lot of difference. I remember selling these for $800 when they were new.
-
wow! still looks fresh :o :o :o
-
I have one like new. The K Ai'd version.
-
The Bokeh is really remarkable, very pleasant performance ;)
Fons that car shot is amazing, the way the surface is rendered is very lifelike.
-
I picked up this 80~200/4.5 Ai new version for $50 or so.
Hello, Brian. this is the one with the square baffles? :o :o :o
-
Yes- the "n" version has the Baffle in the back and the SN is a new series, large break from the prior version.
Another, wide-open, max-zoom.
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/750/21999499226_4e0baf4a94_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/zw2bEN)Fall 2015 (https://flic.kr/p/zw2bEN) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
The 80~200/4.5 is Nikon's first zoom that really competed with the quality of the fixed-focal length lenses. I had a single-coated version as well, picked up for $20- sold to a friend for the same putting together a Nikkormat EL kit for him. The other high-quality zoom in this range is the Vivitar 70~210 Series 1 72mm version (and 1st 62mm version, but I don't have that one).
Weekend coming up- I will put some pictures up of the two lenses next to each other.
-
The Bokeh is really remarkable, very pleasant performance ;)
Fons that car shot is amazing, the way the surface is rendered is very lifelike.
was happily surprised on the image quality myself, well Df sensor and good light that day
-
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1630/25613066311_f7820a0117_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/F2kEgz)Nikkor 80~200/4.5n and 8-~200/4.5 (https://flic.kr/p/F2kEgz) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1707/25587084452_a2cd2045f8_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/EZ3uLu)Nikkor 80~200/4.5n and 8-~200/4.5 (https://flic.kr/p/EZ3uLu) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1459/25407373920_19799614bf_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/EHar63)Nikkor 80~200/4.5n and 8-~200/4.5 (https://flic.kr/p/EHar63) by fiftyonepointsix (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90768661@N02/), on Flickr
"new Version" on the left, Factory-Ai'd K version on the right. Both are great.
-
Some shots with the 80-200mm f/4.5 K today during the National Voluntair day with Belgian Workhorses ploughing the field of the Urban Agricultural garden.
-
Also a very good performance with the Close up Attachment lenses, here the 3T was used.
-
Throughout the years, the 80-200/4.5 (both versions) in combination with a 4T close-up lens was a great favourite for a versatile close-up system.
Fallen Alder Catkins
-
Great example. I didn't know, but I can imagine that. I am surprised how well it performs on the modern Nikon Camera's (D600 - Df D800E) From an ergonomic point of view it's nearly perfect. It's very well balanced in the hand and smooth to operate. And the zoom makes it very versatile indeed.
-
awesome shots, gentlemen :o :o :o
in case you guys are wondering, the differences between the square baffle and the round baffle is more than cosmetic (and optical). there were some important mechanical changes internally. i saw them when i overhauled my 80-200 f/4.5, this thing is super dirty. the caked grease needed to be removed mechanically with a dremel and a brush ::)
-
accidentally placed an element facing the wrong direction and now my 80-200 is an ART lens :o :o :o
somebody told me that people pay a lot just to get something like this (lomo petzval)
-
You could make a small cottage business out of this.
People send in their 80-200 for "ART" modification. $ 200 + shipping.
-
Yes :D The 'Famous' 80-200/4.5 Petzval...
-
lol
if i can remember which one i got wrong, maybe i can reproduce it haha
it actually looks interesting :o :o :o
-
I once got a nice looking 180-600 mm f/8 ED Nikkor as "junk" because it could not focus at all. The zoom ring was stuck and so was the focusing collar. (this is a slide zoom design). With the lens mounted to the camera, no image sharpness at all was found at any distance. Obviously the lens had been tampered with as witnessed by the damaged screw hole in the tripod foot and tell-tale marks from screwdrivers here and there However, at $100 incl. shipping for this elusive and huge lens, who should complain. It could be stood on a shelf as a trophy if nothing else.
Fixing the tripod mount was easy by drilling and tapping a hole for 3/8" instead of the tiny 1/4" stock screw mount. Had to go to this size because the damage was comprehensive, but the foot for once is a massive slab of metal so plenty estate to work with.
When the lens was opened, the reason for it being jammed was obvious: the 'repair tech' had matched the helicoid in error and it jammed against the end stop. Also an easy fix. The guides for the zoom control were tightened too much.
However, although these obstacles were resolved, the lens still was unable to provide a focused image. Patiently working by flipping element after element, the culprit was found to be a wrongly orientated element #8 (or was it #9) deep inside the lens assembly. Each 'flip-over' necessitated a lens tear-down then re-assembly, so getting there took 'some' time.
Then, all that remained was adding a CPU and I got a super zoom for next to nothing. Although the 180-600 is big and heavy, it is dwarfed by its bigger brother, the mighty 360-1200 Nikkor. Both share the same high degree of colour correction so they lack the IR focusing mark.
-
Thanks for sharing that experience. i have the objective's schematic as a guide as well as my own notes. i was really tired with our project now (thankfully it's done!) and i definitely got it wrong because of that. but this was quite interesting, the center was acceptably sharp...might be great for dream sequence shooting :o :o :o
we use Nikkors sometimes to shoot our footage so this might be a neat trick
-
OK, it's the 6th element :o :o :o
i got that one in reverse. i documented it wrong so my notes for that element was wrong ::)
now it's on the correct direction and the results are stunning despite having fungus damage on the surface of the 2nd doublet
-
Underestimated optical gems.
The three latest versions. Notice the difference in coating colour of the last one to the left.
-
Not 'underestimated' gems. The 80-200 was all the rage when it arrived on the scene in the '70s. More like forgotten amidst the raft of zoom optics flooding the market place later.
The 80-200/4.5 with a 3T or even better, 4T, makes for a very nice and versatile close-up weapon. Used that a lot for capturing bugs and butterflies before the 200/4 Micro came into my lens line. Still use the combination on occasion.
-
Okay, but that means that one must have experienced the '70's to know that. ;) Apart from Nikongear I hear seldom about this 'forgotten' zoom hence the word 'underestimated'.
-
Still remember the first one I got in early '70s, around '74 I think. Amazing quality of the Kodachromes. My brother brought it with him to Rome a little later and managed to drop it from the walls of a Roman ruin. Thus I got the next version ... Even better optically.
A few years ago, I purchased a near pristine 80-200/4.5 (first version) for $40 locally. It was even AI-modified by the factory kit.
Thus I now have both versions. Plus the 80-200/4.
-
Yes, the late Ai version was a 12 lens element / 9 element group arrangement versus 15 element / 10 group setup for the early Ai and its predecessors. Also it weighed in lighter at 750g versus 830g. Its diameter is 1.5mm smaller, but its length is the same. My copy has a serial number of 798716. Zoom is a bit sloppy and noisy now.
awesome shots, gentlemen :o :o :o
in case you guys are wondering, the differences between the square baffle and the round baffle is more than cosmetic (and optical). there were some important mechanical changes internally. i saw them when i overhauled my 80-200 f/4.5, this thing is super dirty. the caked grease needed to be removed mechanically with a dremel and a brush ::)
-
OK...if my junk of a lens is giving me great images despite being the first version and being picked up from the junk box it's remarkable how good the 2nd version should be :o :o :o
the 80-200 f/4 ai-s costs almost as much as the cheapest toyota for sale when i was younger, i can imagine that it is the same for this in the late 60s
by the way, not only did the optics changed but the mechanical stuff as well. the newer ones have better, more robust engineering and design. lots of differences inside. i can say that it is practically a different lens.
-
crazy. after fixing the reversed element, this lens is giving me really great results :o :o :o
it will not hold a candle against the 70-200s but i still say great because these were old with ancient coatings ::) add the fact that there were a few fungus damage inside the elements and that alone makes this lens a winner. ::)
The lens held up with the D7200's sensor. some of my older lenses will show flaws when mounted on the D7200 but looks fine on the D750, this one performed well on both high resolution bodies 8) also worth mentioning is how well the D7200's dynamic range is compared to the D750 but i should start another topic for that :-X
-
I still say great because these were old with ancient coatings ::)
Ancient? Can't really agree to this qualification, and if so give me the ancient coatings then ;)
On the D800E with 3-4T
A pretty nice combination which allows handheld work
(http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3290.0;attach=12128;image)
-
nice vivid yellow :o :o :o
-
I had per chance found 2 copies of this lens, both the last Ai version with square lens protector, both from junk boxes (one from Fujiya Tokyo, the other at Takachiho Fukuoka). Both during business travel.
My casual non-scientific non-AB comparison showed that this lens is sharper than the f/4 AiS version.
(http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=11209&d=1461317105)
Nikon Df, Ai 80-200mm f/4.5, 1/200 f/4.5, ISO 1100, LR saturation added, resized.
It was a rainy day, you can see the rain streak in the background.
-
hello, mr. Ang!
yes, that was also my observation :o :o :o
it might be because f/4.5 is smaller than f/4 ::) i personally find it difficult to judge this lens against the newer one because to my eyes, the output looks VERY similar. and i have the older one and not the one with the square baffles!!!
-
Ya it is kind of hard to compare the 80-200mm f/4.5 Ai vs 80-200mm f/4 AiS. But the f/4.5 is slightly easier to handle, being lighter, and kind of gives it an edge.
This was taken some time back with D800 while on business trip to Sydney, with an earlier copy but better condition f/4.5.
(http://gallery.clubsnap.com/data/500/120913_Australia_0148a_a.jpg)
Nikon D800 Ai 80-200mm f/4.5, 6s f/8, ISO 100.
(http://gallery.clubsnap.com/data/500/120913_Australia_0148c_a.jpg)
100% crop of above image - scary sharp! You can see the decoration in the rooms!
But this lens loses out in the race to fill my bag when I travel, to the E 75-150mm f/3.5, due to weight and larger maximum aperture. Neither the f/4.5 or the f/4 versions get to go out and play very often.
-
Ya it is kind of hard to compare the 80-200mm f/4.5 Ai vs 80-200mm f/4 AiS. But the f/4.5 is slightly easier to handle, being lighter, and kind of gives it an edge.
[...]
But this lens loses out in the race to fill my bag when I travel, to the E 75-150mm f/3.5, due to weight and larger maximum aperture. Neither the f/4.5 or the f/4 versions get to go out and play very often.
My experience is similar, the 75-150 wins due to the smaller size, faster speed and closer focusing.
When the original 80-200/4.5 was upgraded, Nikon took a very conservative approach - we got an improved optical design but otherwise the specifications are nearly the same - the overall size didn't change at all, the weight is slightly lower, focus throw is more or less the same, and the close focus limit of 1.8m is unchanged. That's a pity because the optical arrangement is very similar to the 75-150 and 80-200/4 which both focus much closer. If the newer 80-200/4.5 focused closer I would be tempted to take it out more often. I do note that Bjørn states it works well with the 3T or 4T closeup lens, so maybe I should give it a try.
The 80-200/4 seems to have a so-so reputation, even though it was the pro tele zoom of the period (until the AIS 80-200/2.8 ED came along...) It feels bigger, barrel has a thicker neck and larger 62mm filter size, but amazingly the overall dimensions and weight are hardly changed from the earlier models - an impressive feat given the 2/3 stop increase in speed. The filter size is also no longer standard with the majority of Nikon AIS primes. The close focus ability is very handy - even better than the 75-150 relative to the focal length. Sharpness is also good but correction for CA is not great and quickly becomes apparent on digital sensors. Not that the 80-200/4.5 or 75-150 are prefect either.
-
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7621/17201416855_e9b3f36604_o.jpg)
the pre-ai version on Df i was great surprised about the iq
Without any doubt whatsoever...that is pure Cadillac!
Picked up one of the square baffled one's cheap, got the front element cleaned up and patched up the creep with tape. Later on picked up a 300mm Ai that was actually a K that had been Ai'd, stole the baffle off the 80-200 and modified it to fit the 300 in order to get matrix metering. Both lenses work however I need to open up the 80-200 to deep clean the debris, the pic's are good but looking thru the glass is a bit dishearting.
-
I'm pleased to see that this lens is still being used as intended in 2016. I think the design team would be pleased with that.
I have been using mine a fair bit this year, however I do note occasional colour fringing in some shots which Adobe can clean right up - so no problem.
-
just got another one :o :o :o
-
Can I discuss the 80-200 f4 Ai-S here as well?
From what I can see the f4,5 lens looks incredibly sharp so it would certainly be interesting to test one of them.
I bought an 80-200 f4 Ai-S last week, mostly because I always like the lens on film.
On my D3 I am not quite convinced it is entirely sharp. I'm now playing around with it to see if that's because of veiling flare or if it really is a characteristic of the lens and if the 80-200 f4,5 Ai really is the sharpest of the bunch.
Here is a picture taken with the 80-200 f4 Ai-S. Not the best to judge critical sharpness, but one of the features I always liked in the lens is itr's close focus ability at 1,2m MfD
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/8/7298/27363924372_15994e38cf_b.jpg)
-
From what I've read the f/4 Ai-s version is just as sharp as the f/4.5 Ai, maybe even a tad sharper I've seen some photo's from the Ai-s that were very sharp.
A second look seems that focus might be just starting to hit on the left and right rims of the petals, but my eyes are 65 years old...maybe a re-shoot is in order for a double check?
-
:o :o :o
-
OK, i can now claim to have torn down the 2 versions. :o :o :o
they are very different mechanically ::)
1st pic is the original one.
2nd pic is the last version.
the 2nd version is greatly simplified and the parts are made a lot sturdier. The 2nd version is probably around 30% simpler. unessential things like the sleeve for the front barrel was omitted,etc.
-
You don't see them often, a factory Ai-'d version of the 'Nikkor-C auto' in a very pleasant state.
-
I am sure a few people here know...
Do these lenses have lose zoom issue since new or the is issue developed over time?
-
Is there a version of this lens without rotating front element? I really like it but I'd like to use filters on it.
Thanks
-
Is there a version of this lens without rotating front element? I really like it but I'd like to use filters on it.
Thanks
No, the front end rotates on all versions and on the 80-200/4.0 AIS as well.
Dave