NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: John Geerts on September 06, 2015, 22:41:27
-
Has anyone experience with the Nikkor 50-135mm F/3.5 on the Nikon camera's?
-
This is useless, but I bought a used copy once. It was defective...no infinity focus. I disliked the push-pull, so returned it instead of getting it fixed. The zoom range is very attractive.
-
Has anyone experience with the Nikkor 50-135mm F/3.5 on the Nikon camera's?
i have one
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3711/12219393266_f06fb70f09_b.jpg)
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7332/12218987103_bfa9292d2e_b.jpg)
-
I picked one up last year for a good deal - it had been on my "watch list." However, I haven't used it very much. It is a little larger than the 75-150. It seems nice, I just haven't bonded with it yet. Please let me know if you have any specific questions.
-
Thank you Pluton, Fons and Chip. Found one on ebay too and was curious about its practical use and optical performance especially on the latest Nikon camera's.
-
I have used it a few times on my D300. For landscape it handles nicely, but I had trouble with MF when I tried to take photos of my 3 year old. That is a difficult task - but I have an easier time using the 75-150 on people. Maybe the 50-135 focus throw is longer?
Here are some shots using the D300 and 50-135 in central Oregon.
-
Nice photo's Chip. According to Roland Vink's Nikon- encyclopedia ( http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html#50-xx (http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html#50-xx) ) focus-throw is only 150 compared to the 190 of the E 75-150. Perhaps the close-focus of 1,30m is a factor?
-
The 50-135 has a quite useful feature of close focusing when zoom is set to 50 mm. Then the focusing continues well beyond the 1.3m limit elsewhere.
I used the 50-135 a lot in the film days, plus with the D2X. Not used it much of late, but the few occasions of shooting it with the Df indicate the performance should be very good to excellent.
Insider's tip: The lens performs very well with the Nikon 6T close-up lens.
Lastly, the 50-135 is beautifully built and handles perfectly on say the Df.
-
I used this lens a lot with my film Nikons and loved it. When I got a D70 it was my main lens for quite a while, until I got a 70-200VR. I loved the zoom range on this lens. On the film cameras it performed very well. On the D70 it also performed very well, and with the DX format was basically a 70-200. The only thing I disliked was the push - pull zoom, which got loose and would zoom by itself when I pointed the camera up or down.
After I built up my collection of AF lenses I put the lens aside for awhile. Unfortunately both this lens and my 105/2.5 were exposed to humidity and developed a fungus problem.
-
Nice photo's Chip. According to Roland Vink's Nikon- encyclopedia ( http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html#50-xx (http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html#50-xx) ) focus-throw is only 150 compared to the 190 of the E 75-150. Perhaps the close-focus of 1,30m is a factor?
Yes, when comparing the focus throw you also need to consider the close focus limit: the 75-150 has focus throw of 190° to 1m, the 50-135 has 150° focus throw to 1.3m (190° with macro mode at 50mm setting). It turns out the focusing "speed' is pretty similar between the two lenses - just look at the focus scale starting from infinity and you will see the the distance scales are spread out a similar amount.
I have both lenses but used the 75-150 more often: it has slightly more reach, it's smaller and lighter, takes the same 52mm filters as my other AI primes, and it focuses to 1m through the entire zoom range - no special macro mode - and being able to focus to 1m at 150mm is more useful than 1.3m at 135mm or 0.6m at 50mm.
The 50-135 on the other hand is built to higher standards, has a greater zoom ratio (quite useful on DX) and the filter does not rotate when focusing which is handy when using a polarizer.
-
I like the 50-135mm - unlike my 75-150, it remains sharp with nice contrasts and details with smooth transitions on the D800E. My 75-150 doesn't have the same crispness on that camera. Both are really good on the Df.
The 50-135 is pretty cheap on eBay - I bought it to go traveling with the 28-50mm zoom (see Sten's nice series on another thread) and they make a nice pair with the Df.
My only issue (and it may be my Df - is that both sometimes underexpose by up to 1.5EV even at wide open apertures- happens also with 25-50). Doesn't occur on my D800E.
-
Thank you all for the information. I think the the T6 Close Up lens is hard to find, Bjørn. Could not find a single hit, but perhaps I didn't use the perfect search-criteria.
I got the lens this morning, in a perfect shape, and my first findings are very positive. I tend to agree with JJChan on the crispness of the lens.
D700 F/8
(https://mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/max_1200/831d1229418675.55f1cf07b5938.jpg)
-
The correct designation is '6T'. 62 mm achromatic close-up lens with +2.9 dioptre strength if memory serves.
-
Ha, thank you. That will help.
Some samples of the lens.
The Theater (1960) built in unique brick-construction is a national architectural monument.
Both at F/5.6
(https://mir-cdn.behance.net/v1/rendition/project_modules/max_1200/64650729418675.55f2aae52c725.jpg)
The dutch 'Irene Brigade' was one of the liberators of Tilburg in 1944. This statue of Eduard-Speyart-van-Woerden was sculptured in 1955.
(https://mir-cdn.behance.net/v1/rendition/project_modules/max_1200/00ec1d29418675.55f2aae5304bf.jpg)
-
Super stuff John.
-
Thanks Mike.
The first two photo's in the Incubate topic are also shot with this lens: http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=1457.msg14865;topicseen#msg14865 (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=1457.msg14865;topicseen#msg14865)
-
The lens is very practical between 50mm and 135 and easy to focus. I really like the colors and also the sharpness. Two shots at F/5.6 with the D700.
-
It's a lovely walk around lens. My Df is running into issues with underexposure - now even with Ai-P lenses :-\
I just can't trust local Perth service agent....
Architecture from Singapore:
-
Street from Singapore:
-
Will do macro at a push - 50mm with macro setting at maximum
-
Colours and crispness very good even with defective Df
-
it can do some light marvel
(exif manually set to 100 mm)
(http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5895.0;attach=25613;image)
-
late afternoon light on landscape @ f11
(exif manually set to 100 mm)
(http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5895.0;attach=25612;image)
-
Nice examples JJ.
Very subtle, Thomas. Nice light on the last one.
-
Thank you all for the information. I think the the T6 Close Up lens is hard to find, Bjørn. Could not find a single hit, but perhaps I didn't use the perfect search-criteria.
Here's one (https://www.keh.com/shop/nikon-manual-focus-62-close-up-6t-703149.html)that I just happened to see by accident.
-
If the Nikon 5T is hard to come by, then don't forget the Canon 500D, IF, the diameter of the Canon 500D suits the Nikon lens in question.
Unfortunately not all of the diameters available for the Canon 500D series of supplementary lenses will suit all Nikon lenses unless a stepup ring is used. The optical power of the Canon 500D is slightly weaker IIRC than for the Nikon 5T. The older Canon 250D is however stronger.
-
FYI: The 5T and 6T can be used with stepdown rings on tele lenses; I've used them on the Nikkor 85/1.4 AiS, 135/2 AiS, and 180ED AiS with a 72 to 62 stepdown ring. Beautiful sharp results.
-
There's a macro option on the wide end of the 50-135/3.5, but be warned to use it with cautious not to force the ring, it happened to me once and the main barrel came loose.
-
Here's one (https://www.keh.com/shop/nikon-manual-focus-62-close-up-6t-703149.html)that I just happened to see by accident.
Thanks for the link, Bill !
In the meantime (That was 2015) I have been able to acquire a 6T. They occasionally surface the ebay-community ;)
-
looking at the images I think I have this lens to put on my list. :)
-
looking at the images I think I have this lens to put on my list. :)
It is an easy lens to CPU-upgrade as well :D
-
It is an easy lens to CPU-upgrade as well :D
An other reason to get one. ;D
-
An example wide open.
Rainy.
-
Great lens for landscapes, in particular if one goes a little easier on the polariser ...
(a bad scan from slide film, so some posterisation is still present. ignore)
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4185/34654142515_136ec9196f_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/UNgxeM)
Painting with lenses (https://flic.kr/p/UNgxeM) by Harry M. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/granuba/), auf Flickr
-
I don't think this lens is for you Harald. I'll take it from you. :D
-
:) It is a wonderful lens. I will combine it in Summer with the 25-50 F4.... ;)
Harald
-
:) It is a wonderful lens. I will combine it in Summer with the 25-50 F4.... ;)
Harald
That's what I was thinking as well.
-
I had not seen this thread before, but I have seen a lot of pictures taken with this lens, and I have never been disappointed by what I saw. Seems to be a very versatile lens with well corrected optics.
Every time I think about picking up a standard zoom, this lens also comes to mind, and after a lot of consideration I end up not buying the 50135 f3,5 (after discarding all other options, including the 35-70 f2,8 and others)
-
:) It is a wonderful lens. I will combine it in Summer with the 25-50 F4.... ;)
Harald
I had this same thought: IF my recently ordered sample is OK, I see them as a pair of lenses that make a good antidote to the trap of the super-sharp, high acutance/high resolution style that I easily fall into.
-
There were 50-135/3.5 (or similar) lenses from several manufacturers during the mid 1980. The faster aperture and shorter focal length (compared to 80-200 zooms) made them useful for portraiture, reportage and landscapes. It's a shame they didn't remain in production as I think they cover a useful middle range, and would also be more suitable on DX cameras than 70-200 zooms. We are now stuck with a 24-70 and 70-200 divide for "pro" zooms with few choices outside this. I don't use the 50-135 but do shoot with the series-E 75-150/3.5 which covers a similar range.
-
If the 25-50/4 zoom had an f/2.8 aperture instead if f/4, it'd be an absolute go-to lens for me, even with the poor minimum focus distance. I have adapted to f/4 by using Auto-ISO and not worrying about image quality as much.
-
The 50-135 saw a lot of use on my D2X some years ago. Now, it has fallen out of the usual lens kit, but I'm ready to reinstate it. Does a great job on the Df for example.
-
:) It is a wonderful lens. I will combine it in Summer with the 25-50 F4.... ;)
Harald
I think the 28-50/3.5 is the more logical addition ;)
-
I think the 28-50/3.5 is the more logical addition ;)
Perhaps, but 28mm is not wide enough for me.
-
Based on my copy of 28-50mm, it doesn't have the same crispness of the 50-135mm - if anything, the lack of CA and pictorial quality of 25-50mm is actually a better match.
-
There were 50-135/3.5 (or similar) lenses from several manufacturers during the mid 1980. The faster aperture and shorter focal length (compared to 80-200 zooms) made them useful for portraiture, reportage and landscapes. It's a shame they didn't remain in production as I think they cover a useful middle range, and would also be more suitable on DX cameras than 70-200 zooms. We are now stuck with a 24-70 and 70-200 divide for "pro" zooms with few choices outside this. I don't use the 50-135 but do shoot with the series-E 75-150/3.5 which covers a similar range.
John Shaw used the 50-135mm f/3.5 quite a bit. Since I found the 75-150mm a bit too long for DX portraiture, I considered buying one but ended up with an even more obscure Tokina AT-X 60-120mm f/2.8 instead.
-
Don't know the 50-135 until yet... but I had a copy of this 2,8/60-120 Tokina ATX, interresting alas not up to the Nikon Serie E 3,5/75-150 quality.
Tokina: too long minimal distance (1,20m) solidly built, better than Nikon Serie E in this case.
But colors were not up to Nikon standards, cold, bluish, softness and not good against the light (halos).
For me, the 75-150 series E is a good allrounder, with an interesting short minimum distance (1m) and very good close-ups with 3T and 4T Nikon achromatic diopters (also with Leica Elpros VIa and VIb, but these are not multicoated...but easier to find than the Nikons).
Ended up solding my Tokina, I rather buy another Nikkor or Nikon Serie E !
-
Didier, I have a nice spare 75-150 - complete with CPU ... Contact me if you are interested.
-
Thanks, Bjørn I've sent a message to you !
-
Don't know the 50-135 until yet... but I had a copy of this 2,8/60-120 Tokina ATX, interresting alas not up to the Nikon Serie E 3,5/75-150 quality.
Tokina: too long minimal distance (1,20m) solidly built, better than Nikon Serie E in this case.
But colors were not up to Nikon standards, cold, bluish, softness and not good adainst the light (halos).
Here's a quick comparison of my copies of the 60-120mm and 75-150mm under controlled lighting conditions and at 100mm. Just for fun, I've also added the same subject from the Sigma 100-400mm, which I've rented for this weekend. Obviously, I can't speak to your copy, but I don't see a huge difference in colors.
-
I am in the middle of overhauling this thing :o :o :o
it's simple for a Nikkor zoom from the 80s ::)
-
Richard, your comment encourages me that a local repair shop can eventually be found that will competently service my copy. The recent record of the local facilities on much simpler Nikon lenses is not good.
-
it is NOT an easy lens to take apart but comparatively easier than other Nikkor zooms of the same era :o :o :o
I will write a guide for this one day ::)
the 2nd picture shows the front ring and how it couples with the focusing helicoid. it is there so that the front ring doesnt rotate when you focus.
other lenses have a secondary helicoid to achieve macro mode, this one doesnt
-
Great lens for landscapes, in particular if one goes a little easier on the polariser ...
(a bad scan from slide film, so some posterisation is still present. ignore)
A bit difficult to ignore,,, ;) But I get it ;)
-
A bit difficult to ignore,,, ;) But I get it ;)
i cant see the image :o :o :o
-
it is NOT an easy lens to take apart but comparatively easier than other Nikkor zooms of the same era :o :o :o
I will write a guide for this one day ::)
the 2nd picture shows the front ring and how it couples with the focusing helicoid. it is there so that the front ring doesnt rotate when you focus.
other lenses have a secondary helicoid to achieve macro mode, this one doesnt
I grabbed the service manual for this lens on ebay for $11. I learned that it has 115 parts. Richard, you must have high powers of concentration.
-
I grabbed the service manual for this lens on ebay for $11. I learned that it has 115 parts. Richard, you must have high powers of concentration.
this one is easy enough. I am currently working on a 50-300 and it's not as bad,too. the mid-range zooms from the 80s are the worst :o :o :o
i find that the handling of this lens sucks. the focus throw is too long and the minimum focus distance isn't useful at all. but it makes for a good journo lens.