Dismantling the 135mm f/3.5 Nikkor!!!

[richardHaw]

https://richardhaw.com/2016/08/21/repair-nikkor-q-135mm-f3-5/

 

next one will be a PC lens. what do you guys think?

[richardHaw]

looks like im polluting this board everyweek. maybe i should consolidate every thing into 1 single post

[Jacques Pochoy]

I wouldn't call that "polluting"... :-) Even if I won't work on lenses (having an expert at a Nikon shop doing it for me), I'm fascinated by the way they are build and work, specially our good old Pre-AI and AI lenses.
So I'm quite happy each time you post here your "teardowns"...

[David H. Hartman]

Keep it up, please. I've got a 200/4.0 AI which you may have covered and an 85/1.4 AIS that have lube contaminated apertures. I hope get [time] to cleaning these. Even if I don't own a particular lens I find these thread and you website very interesting.

Best,

Dave

[elsa hoffmann]

noooo please post separately - easier to follow new stuff

[Hugh_3170]

Richard, as Elsa, David, and Jacques have said "Keep up the Good Work". 

I personally have no problem at all with your multiple postings, and it is good to see inside the various lenses without having to pull them apart for myself!

The advantage of single postings, is that one can concentrate on a particular lens of interest, as Nikon do not seem to build any two lenses quite the same.

[Akira]

Rick, although I don't follow or comment on all of your posts, your "Dismantling" series is now one of more interesting features of NG.  Just stay this way!

[richardHaw]

Thank you everybody for the support! this gives me fighting spirit

[dslater]

Hi Richard,
  On your site, you state:

The lens is overshadowed by it’s faster f/2.8 sibling, the Nikkor-Q 135mm f/2.8 Auto lens for obvious reasons but I will tell you now that this lens is even sharper than it’s f/2.8 sibling wide-open.

When you say wide open, do you mean the f/3.5 is wide open while the f/2.8 is stopped down to f/3.5, or are you comparing the f/3.5 @ f/3.5 to the F/2.8 @ 2.8?

[richardHaw]

Hi! what I meant to say is when both lenses were shot with their maximum aperture

the Q 135mm f/3.5 @ 3.5:
sharp
contrasty
good bokeh/transition

the Q 135mm f/2.8 @ 2.8:
sharp where it's in focus
contrast is so-so but pretty good and gels with the overall image
very beautiful bokeh/transition

this is just my observation. check my Hawaiian girls pictures, they show how good this lens is wide-open. I just overhauled the Ai version (4 in 4) which has a new optical design and I can say that the Ai version is just as good as this one! 

[dslater]

Thanks Richard.
  DO you take requests?  I'd love to see the dismantling of a 28mm f/2.0 AiS and a 20mm f/3.5 UD.

[richardHaw]

Thanks Richard.
  DO you take requests?  I'd love to see the dismantling of a 28mm f/2.0 AiS and a 20mm f/3.5 UD.

yes, i take requests! only on lenses that I own hahaha

i cannot afford those lenses yet, maybe i should think of a way to make my blog generate money so i can buy junks more.

[FGAng]

Keep it up!  Your site is my constant source of reference, and your trips to the camera shops my constant supply of junks to work on (although I must wait a few months to see them... a case of famine then feast!).

I am also becoming OCD (obsessive compulsive disassembler)! And I think you infected me!

Truly inspirational! 

[richardHaw]

are you coming here alone? if not then you would want to spread the lens to your family or else you will have to pay over carry

[FGAng]

Ha ha I am on a work trip, so yes I am alone. But no I have 40 kg baggage allowance as I fly sufficiently to get that "privilege".  Can buy buy buy... just need to bring big big big bags...