Nikon 135mm 2.8Q ai (Non Q.C.) vs Nikon 105mm 2.5 ai-s (Comparison)

[Disturbed]

Not a scientific, simple comparison. I wasn't taking these pictures for comparison, but while post processing i noticed very similar pictures with different lenses and thought it is a chance to compare them. They are pictured with in 10 minutes time difference.

Both images has some small crops and white balance adjusted to make them compare easier.

i removed the ca's in lightroom and they both have some noise reduction. both images have same degree of post processing.

Both image is shot @ f/2.8 and around 1.5 meters distance.

Body is Z7.

The 135mm q is not multicoated version (pre K version 4/4 lens formation), and the 105mm is a late ai-s (serial number is high, just before the sic versions)

I've compressed the images to fit to 2.5mb limit of the forum but the full versions are not different at all.

There might be differences in difficult light conditions but i see virtually no differences between these images.
The 135mm has even better CA's to an extend. (for this picture)

My conclusion is (apart from hars light conditions) there arent any big differences puting these lenses apart from each other.
Sharpness contrast etc are all compareable to each other.
Some minor tint and color cast differences are negitable since they can be adjusted in post processing.

Very impressive for a lens that is designed in 1964s.

[Gerhard2006]

Thanks for sharing these pictures for comparison. I always wondered about the 135Q lens, which I used on a Nikon F many years ago and here  compared with the 105 2.5 which I own. The 105 seems to have a little smoother background blur with less outlining Than the 135. It’s subtle as best though, eventually I bought the 135 F2 which has a very dreamy background even at F2. But the 2.8 looks very good as well. I always liked that focal length for portraits because it really isolated the subject from the background.  Regards, Gerry

[Erik Lund]

Very nice images both.
Very similar, but by stopping down the 105mm f/2.5 you give it a penalty in regards to out of focus rendering, Bokeh. Since the aperture is no longer round - The 135mm f/2.8 is shot wide open so aperture round.
105mm seems sharper on screen viewing or a larger area is sharper.

[Disturbed]

Thanks for sharing these pictures for comparison. I always wondered about the 135Q lens, which I used on a Nikon F many years ago and here  compared with the 105 2.5 which I own. The 105 seems to have a little smoother background blur with less outlining Than the 135. It’s subtle as best though, eventually I bought the 135 F2 which has a very dreamy background even at F2. But the 2.8 looks very good as well. I always liked that focal length for portraits because it really isolated the subject from the background.  Regards, Gerry

It's quiet good considering it's age and price. I just wanted the non q.c. version to have more vintage look.

The q.c. and the new ai, ai-s versions have no use for me, since the 105 f2.5 is the better lens overal.

[Disturbed]

Very nice images both.
Very similar, but by stopping down the 105mm f/2.5 you give it a penalty in regards to out of focus rendering, Bokeh. Since the aperture is no longer round - The 135mm f/2.8 is shot wide open so aperture round.
105mm seems sharper on screen viewing or a larger area is sharper.

Yes that is correct about the penalty and it is very obvious in the pictures.

Both lenses are very good in the portrait range. (Between 2-5 meters)

But when you start focusing further away, the 135 decreasing in sharpness and the snappines. 105mm too  isn't great in this area either but it is better than the 135mm.

[armando_m]

Your cat is very patient, he stayed in almost the same position even when you have  to change lenses, my dog would never be still when I pointed a camera, unless she was sleeping

[Disturbed]

Your cat is very patient, he stayed in almost the same position even when you have  to change lenses, my dog would never be still when I pointed a camera, unless she was sleeping

he doesn't like moving a lot.

[Roland Vink]

Very nice images both.
Very similar, but by stopping down the 105mm f/2.5 you give it a penalty in regards to out of focus rendering, Bokeh. Since the aperture is no longer round - The 135mm f/2.8 is shot wide open so aperture round.

Using the AI instead of the AI-S version of the 105/2.5 will give better out of focus rendering. The aperture blades of the AI (and earlier versions with the Xenotar-type optics) are curved, so when stopped down to f/2.8 the opening is nearly round. By f/4 the aperture starting to become polygonal (7-sided) but is still rounded, giving the bokeh a pleasant organic appearance. In contrast, the aperture blades of the AI-S version are nearly straight, so the bokeh is distinctly polygonal as soon as you start stopping down. The AI-S also has a shorter focus throw which can make accurate focusing difficult, especially near infinity. The built-in hood is also rather short and wobbly. I prefer the AI version of this lens.

[Disturbed]

Using the AI instead of the AI-S version of the 105/2.5 will give better out of focus rendering. The aperture blades of the AI (and earlier versions with the Xenotar-type optics) are curved, so when stopped down to f/2.8 the opening is nearly round. By f/4 the aperture starting to become polygonal (7-sided) but is still rounded, giving the bokeh a pleasant organic appearance. In contrast, the aperture blades of the AI-S version are nearly straight, so the bokeh is distinctly polygonal as soon as you start stopping down. The AI-S also has a shorter focus throw which can make accurate focusing difficult, especially near infinity. The built-in hood is also rather short and wobbly. I prefer the AI version of this lens.

i have always liked the ai version of the 105mm more than the ai-s. but i could not find the reason. it's hard to tell by words but something is in there. Maybe curved blades are the reason but i am not sure if it is or not.