PN11 with Nikon 135mm f/3.5 AI

[elsid]

Some close ups with a "cheap" lens

[Roland Vink]

Lovely work. Might be a cheap lens, but not cheap results!

[Akira]

Gorgeous images from a cheap lens!

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Agree. These are surprisingly good and better than might be expected form this not-so-sophisticated optic. Flattering light as well brings out the colours.

[elsid]

Roland, Akira, Bjorn, thank you all very much for your comments.

[David H. Hartman]

Although the 135/3.5 AI & AIS were Nikon's most humble telephoto lens they are amazingly sharp at f/5.6 and infinity. When building my first and again my second Nikon system I bought a 135/3.5 as it was the only telephoto lens I could afford that was longer than 105mm. Both times I started with a 55/3.5 Micro and filled 20mm to 105mm then bought a 135/3.5 and stopped buying to recover. I paid $135.00 for a pre-AI and $270.00 for an AI, one and two dollars per millimeter.

I bought the 135/3.5 AI late on a winter afternoon. It was night before I could take a few shots so I setup a test and exposed for 5 minutes at f/5.6 on Tri-X. The complete lack of camera vibrations showed what the lens could do and surprisingly what Tri-X could do. It was a good lesson. f/5.6 was the sweet spot for the lens. I must have nailed the focus. My secrete soup for Tri-X was D-76 1:2. I had a similar wake up with a 50/1.8 AI where I thought I was shooting at a 1/250 at f/11 but was shooting at 1/1000 at f/5.6. The 50/1.8 was hand held but at maximum shutter speed for the Nikon EL2.

I don't remember using the lens with extension tubes. On a real stringent budget one could use a single PK-13 or even a single M2 tube. The latter can be had for around $3.00 (USD) and will fit Nikon cameras with a non-retractable meter coupling levers. The PK-13 or M2 tube will get one to 1:3 (0.33x). The PN-11 will get one just a tick past 1:2 (0.5x).

Don't noise this about too much or the price for 135/3.5 Nikkors will skyrocket.

Dave

[Akira]

Don't noise this about too much or the price for 135/3.5 Nikkors will skyrocket.

Dave

Too late!  With the release of Df, the prices of MF Nikkors have been VTOL'ed, albeit not skyrocketed.   

[Bjørn Rørslett]

True enough, but the price hike influences prestige items the most. Gems such as the 135 f/3.5 and f/2.8 Nikkors and the 100/2.8 SE haven't attracted attention from the mainstream buyers - yet.

One can still buy say a 105/2.5 for < 200 $ and given its legendary quality that is a steal as well.

[Matthew Currie]

Prices on minty stuff have gone up but for those of us willing to use items that are a bit more beat up, things have stayed pretty sane. I've gotten several nice old classic lenses in the range of $20.  All are the sort of thing collectors would spurn, but for me that just means I can AI convert them and use them without thinking twice.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

That's the proper spirit and attitude in my book. Lenses were originally made for the purpose of being used, weren't they? As long as the glass is clean,  the focusing collar turns smoothly, and the lens mount isn't warped, not much can go wrong.

[pluton]

My 135/3.5 Ais is amazingly sharp close up, including as close as 1:4 and the like.

[Hugh_3170]

ElSid's "Magnificent Seven" images (I just had to say it that way  )  proves that there is absolutely nothing cheap at at all about the Nikkor 135mm f/3.5 lens.  It too is magnificient - and I have one of my own that has enabled me to make my own call on it.

I concede that whilst this lens may be inexpensive, it certainly is anything but cheap in my experience.

(I also concede that English can be a most confusing language where a word can have more than one meaning - in this instance one meaning is a desireable one and the other has a somewhat tarnished meaning IMHO.  Please forgive me, but I hate the word because of this.)

[elsid]

Hello Hugh,
Thank you for the "magnificent". I thought a bit about the word you hate and I think you are right. Would "inexpensive" or "underestimated"
be fitting?

[Frank Fremerey]

I love 2313! stands out from the set in my eyes.

Cheap? Dunno. I feel the 135mm Nikors all tend to be very sharp over the whole frame. Some of the older versions might be undervalued though.

[Hugh_3170]

Inexpensive, underestimated, and undervalued are all apt descriptors of this very desireable lens.