AI superior to AI-S?

[pluton]

The MIR site is plagued with more historic Nikon photos, and information, than any site I know of.

There are some inaccuracies, including typos, but it is a colossal effort that I am grateful someone took all that time to do.

It is easier to "point out the cracks" in a tremendous skyscraper ... than it is to build a better skyscraper

True, true.  It is a resource. 

[crazycaper2000]

Hi all I recently purchased the ai-s 200mm f/4 nikon lens and love it. I use the nikon d7100 and would like a little more reach of course[everyone does right]. I have found a kenko teleplus pro 300 dgx 1.4 teleconverter and was wondering if this is a good fit with the lens. Is this teleconverter too new and could I spend less on an older teleconverter and get the same results?

[Roland Vink]

The 200/4 with a 1.4x TC gives you a 280mm f/5.6 lens. The Kenko will probably fit the lens but I doubt the resulting combination perform well at full resolution on the D7100.

At this focal length and aperture I suspect you would be better off using a 70-300VR lens, where you get the benefit of VR as well.

[crazycaper2000]

ok thanks for the help.

[Steven Paulsen]

I will add what BR mentioned about Ai/Ais metering on my D800. The only minor bug is that my D800 sees my 105.f2.5 as 2.8. My D700 does the true 2.5 metering using the camera's ring.

[Roland Vink]

If you set the D800 CPU lens aperture = f/2.5 it should report the correct aperture wide open (unless the lens has an "unofficial" AI conversion and the AI cam isn't in quite the right place)

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

a simple and broad generalisation from me from a teardown point of view.

Ai:
tougher construction
heavier
more screws
Nikon loves using glues in this generation but not as much as the New-Nikkors
tough,traditional construction with the lens barrel and optics separated

Ai-S:
lighter
clever tricks used to simplify complicated assemblies
cost-cutting on some parts (plastics, scotch tapes, plenty of brass shims)
optics casing sometimes incorporated in the lens barrel as cost-cutting and making things more compact/simplification

I personally like fixing the older Nikkors compared to Ai-S ones. it's like fixing a beetle compared to a ford focus 

Not to shoot the messenger, but since the above is very interesting it would be great if you can elaborate a little more.

- If scotch tapes and plenty of brass shims are used, in which Ai-S  lenses have you observed this and where?

- As for plastics, do you have examples of plastic being used in Ai-S lenses in such a way - or with such types of plastic - that the sturdiness or longevity of the construction would suffer as a result?

- What would be the downsides of incorporating the optics assembly in the lens barrel?

[pluton]

I'm not Richard, but I can offer 2 from my own personal observation: 85/1.4 AiS and 135/2 AiS:  Scotch tape for locking the infinity focus adjust.  Makes infinity adjustment very easy to do at home with camera zoomed-in on live view.  Not a downside IMO.  The tape is easily replaceable if it should disintegrate.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

I'm not Richard, but I can offer 2 from my own personal observation: 85/1.4 AiS and 135/2 AiS:  Scotch tape for locking the infinity focus adjust.  Makes infinity adjustment very easy to do at home with camera zoomed-in on live view.  Not a downside IMO.  The tape is easily replaceable if it should disintegrate.

It would be good if it can be elucidated whether the Ai-S versions are really mechanically inferior to the AI versions.

Just one comment on plastic.

The use of plastic is in itself not indicative of lower quality. It depends on what kind of plastic it is, and where it is used. Chap, recycled plastics which are not resistant to UV/oxygen and ageing is always bad if you want something to last. However, UV- and oxidation resistant plastics of premium quality does not reduce quality.

[Jack Dahlgren]

Simpler can be better. Plastic can be better. Tape can be better than glue. Rubber can be better than metal. But the converse can be true as well. The old lenses (AI and AIS) I’ve worked on are easier to actually repair as the entire thing can usually be disassembled, rebuilt and readjusted. Perhaps this does not make them more robust, but certainly makes them more satisfying to work on.

[Roland Vink]

The early AI-S lenses are mostly (all?) metal, I think the beauty ring of the AI-S 50/1.4 and AI-S 50/1.8 (long nose) are plastic but that's about as far as it goes. The series-E lenses from the same period did use plastic. By the mid 1980s the series-E line was discontinued, or rather, merged with the Ai-S line, and you start to see series-E features appearing in Ai-S lenses. The most obvious is the newer pancake 50/1.8 which has a mostly plastic exterior, and is really a remodeled series-E lens. Zooms from that period also have plastic parts, the Ai-S 35-70/3.3-4.5 has a mostly plastic exterior and the aperture ring of the 28-85/3.5-4.5 is also plastic.

AI-S lenses introduced in that period also tend to have a black anodized finish on the metal parts, like Series-E lenses, rather than the black enamel finish of earlier AI-S lenses. For example, the AI-S 100-300/5.6 at first glace seems like a longer version of the 80-200/4, but the design and finish is really closer to the Series-E 70-210/4.

Overall I would say there was a small decline in build quality which already started during AI production. Very early AI lenses were engraved LENS MADE IN JAPAN which was filled in white paint. This soon changed to unpainted MADE IN JAPAN. This is not really a reduction in build quality but it's less "luxurious" and shows Nikon was trying to reduce costs and simplify production. Early AI lenses also have 5 screws in the mount, but this dropped to 3 screws for most primes 85mm and shorter. Having 5 screw probably wasn't really needped for small lenses so this was a sensible simplification in production. With the transition to Ai-S most lenses up to 135mm have only 3 screws in the mount.

I can only guess there were similar internal changes to streamline the assembly process and reduce costs. I don't know much about the internal workings, but I know that early production of the Japanese AI-S 50/1.8 pancake lens used brass focus helix, but this later changed to aluminium, so it's possible the same occurred with some other AI-S models as well.

[pluton]

I can only guess there were similar internal changes to streamline the assembly process and reduce costs. I don't know much about the internal workings, but I know that early production of the Japanese AI-S 50/1.8 pancake lens used brass focus helix, but this later changed to aluminium, so it's possible the same occurred with some other AI-S models as well.

What other early N/K/Ai/AiS era lenses had dissimilar metal helicoids?  My impression is that very, very few of them did.
To be fair to Nikon, all of Nikon's direct competitors in the SLR market seemed to mostly use all-aluminium helicoids, so that was the market Nikon had to compete in.