The Nikkor-Q 200mm f/4!

[Roland Vink]

Don't you also have the F3-AF 200/3.5 IF-ED?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Oops. Yes, of course. Forgot that one. Not that easy to remember all of them....

I take opportunity to remind that the CPU of the original 200/3.5 AF is NOT compatible with modern Nikons. AF will not work nor any other functionality requiring a CPU, and you may short-circuit the camera's  battery to complete the misery.

Either snip off the flatcable from the contact block, or better, put a compatible CPU in it, and you have a very capable medium long lens at your disposal.

[null]

 The Nikkor-Q (and QC) 200/4 F-Mount is a 4 in 4, "not a Sonnar". The 25cm F4 is like a giant 13.5cm F4- a true Sonnar formula like the 1930s Carl Zeiss Jena lens. Does that make the 135/3.5 the longest Sonnar formula lens in F-Mount?

I know we've veered off. I need to find 1965 Neblette "Photographic lenses" to see what else is like the 4/4 Nikkor 200/4.

[null]

Oops. Yes, of course. Forgot that one. Not that easy to remember all of them....

I take opportunity to remind that the CPU of the original 200/3.5 AF is NOT compatible with modern Nikons. AF will not work nor any other functionality requiring a CPU, and you may short-circuit the camera's  battery to complete the misery.

Either snip off the flatcable from the contact block, or better, put a compatible CPU in it, and you have a very capable medium long lens at your disposal.

Do you have the F3AF to go with it? I picked up one very cheap years (and years) ago- but only got the TC-16AF for it. Someday will fall into a 200/3.5 AF.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

No. I've seen the F3AF, but never been tempted. Actually I disliked all versions of the F3 in their time.

I do have both F3AF-dedicated lenses though, the 80/2.8 and 200/3.5 Ed-IF. They both are fine performers. I replaced their CPUs so they could communicate with all modern Nikons.

[Chip Chipowski]

Bjorn and Brian, I could listen to you two talk camera collections for hours

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I obviously need to refresh my memory cells. Can no longer remember what lenses I have in my possession ...

[Akira]

Yet the 55/1.2 is the only lens I know of which was partially multi-coated. Starting with the 35/1.4 and 28/2 the new coating was applied to all air-glass surfaces, and within a few years all other existing lenses were upgraded.

The Series E 28/2.8 and 35/2.5 also were multi-coated only partially, though they are not really "Nikkors" per se.

[Akira]

No. I've seen the F3AF, but never been tempted. Actually I disliked all versions of the F3 in their time.

I do have both F3AF-dedicated lenses though, the 80/2.8 and 200/3.5 Ed-IF. They both are fine performers. I replaced their CPUs so they could communicate with all modern Nikons.

Bjørn, are the contact blocks of F3AF lenses completely the same as that of the modern AF Nikkors in terms of the dimention and the position of the screws?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Unfortunately, not entirely equally positioned regarding the retaining screws I'm afraid. One can usually come around this by using the old block if the pins still are pliable and sufficiently spring-loaded. Otherwise, all old stuff must go and a new block installed by drilling new holes. I used both approaches on these lenses myself. New CPUs are mandatory though.

The problem with these lenses and their original CPU block is that Nikon redefined what pin should be the grounding one. Meaning that these old lenses will zap the camera battery by making a short circuit.

[John Geerts]

I never noticed anything with my F3AF lenses on the D700,  Df and the D800E. They just worked like any AiS lens.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Maybe Nikon incorporated logic in their newer models to prevent the power drain? I fried the battery of my D2H when I put the 80/2.8 AF on it.

As you won't have AF functionality anyway, just replace the CPU and enjoy all features of a "P"-enabled lens. The 80/2.8 and 200/3.5 are AIS by design as well.

[Akira]

Thanks, Bjørn, for the detail.  Apparently Nikon redesigned its AF system virtually from scratch when they moved to the AF as standard system.

[richardHaw]

the F3AF always looked funny to me. like it fell from a chair and bumped it's head 

In case anybody missed, go to my Nikon Museum post ( http://richardhaw.com/2015/12/20/at-the-nikon-museum/ ) and go all the way down to 1971, you can see Nikon's first attempt at AF. it is so bizarre but i got to give it to Nikon for at least trying. it is said to be the 1st commercially available AF module for a camera. growing up, I always remembered that MAXXUM from minolta was the word in AF. those were fine cameras but i was too poor to own one.

[null]

I put the DX-1 for the F3AF in the same category as using a DS-1 on the F2Sb and F2S. I have them, powered them up to watch them work- then put a DE-3 on the F3AF. All of it works.  I ended up with two DS-1's, found a battery for a cordless phone that could be used for it. Paid $100 for the DS-1 and charger, these used to cost as much as a Motor Drive. Nikon made the CH-11 for the body with DS-1 attached, and the CF-24 for the F3AF. Both much more rare than the hardware.

The DS-1, I've used with the 200/4. Back on track...