It's Not Supposed To Be An AI Version, But It Is

[jhinkey]

According to the original owner, he bought it new from Nikon with an AI aperture ring already on it, although Roland V's serial number page says otherwise.  I suspect that in the 35+ years that the original owner possesd it they forgot they had it AI-converted via a conversion kit.

It just came tonight all the way from the UK.  We'll now put it through its paces on the D800 and A7RII (when it shows up sometime in the next month or so) and I'll report on how it goes.

- John

[pluton]

You don't see many of those.  I'll really interested to see how much lateral color it shows, compared to it's replacement, the 300/4.5 ED-IF.

[jhinkey]

For Roland - here's some terrible cell phone images of the rear of the lens.  I just noticed that the aperture tab appears to have been filed to be less wide than what it looks like it should be.  Could this be part of the "conversion" this lens underwent?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Congratulations - a rare lens and hopefully you'll find a fine performer too !

Lateral colour shouldn't be a problem. It is parfocal in visible and IR.

[jhinkey]

Congratulations - a rare lens and hopefully you'll find a fine performer too !

Thanks Bjorn - I've been looking for 2 or 3 years for one.  Had the ED-IF version, but was not impressed with the sharpness (at 12MP) which was pretty comparable to my 70-300AFS VR (i.e., not all that great), hopefully this lens will be better.  It hopefully will make a nice companion to my 400/5.6 ED AI which sometime is too big and too long.  Not concerned with CA for the most part.

I was told it was just fully serviced - whatever that means and by whom I don't know -  but the focus ring is pretty firm (just a tad on the too firm side), aperture ring feels brand new, sliding hood is tight and has a reasonable amount of dust internally for an lens of such an age.  A few super minor marks (maybe smudges) on the front element - normal for an older lens.

It will be a few days before I can really take it out for a spin.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

My 300/4.5 ED non-IF has a pretty firm focusing feel to it as well so might be typical for the design. Tripod collar is OK I'd guess but the mounting plate is rather small and I'd like it to be much bigger.

[jhinkey]

OK - now to get it out into action!

[Roland Vink]

For Roland - here's some terrible cell phone images of the rear of the lens.  I just noticed that the aperture tab appears to have been filed to be less wide than what it looks like it should be.  Could this be part of the "conversion" this lens underwent?

Thanks John, I can confirm your lens is a K lens with an AI conversion, not an original AI lens (answering a question first asked privately).
I'm not sure what you mean by the aperture tab being filed, everything looks normal to me. Do you mean the aperture coupling prong screwed to the aperture ring (for pre-Ai cameras)? During Ai production they changed from being carved from a block of solid metal to being pressed from sheet metal - cheaper and easier to manufacture. The newer type is thinner, this is what you have.

Look forwards to seeing some images with this lens. BTW, if you ever come across another with serial no 173813 let me know - it's the one I bought on ebay two years ago which went missing in transit.

[Erik Lund]

Looks like pretty heavy wear on the aperture lever, from the camera stopping it down and up again many times...

[jhinkey]

Looks like pretty heavy wear on the aperture lever, from the camera stopping it down and up again many times...

I'll take a closer image, but it looks to me that it's been filed down. 

[Roland Vink]

I see what you mean now, the aperture stop-down lever at the rear has a chunk missing from the lower side. I have seen other lenses like this. I'm not sure it is due to wear since your lens does not appear to be heavily used, neither were other lenses I have seen. It is not part of the AI conversion process either since I have seen native AI lenses like this (including my AI 105/2.5). I can only guess that the tab was milled in the factory to calibrate it. With pre-AI and AI lenses the precise position of the tab is not critical, it's basically set to open (for full aperture viewing) or stopped down (as set via the aperture ring at the moment the picture is taken), but maybe some adjustment is needed so it properly engages with the lever in the camera.

[jhinkey]

I see what you mean now, the aperture stop-down lever at the rear has a chunk missing from the lower side. I have seen other lenses like this. I'm not sure it is due to wear since your lens does not appear to be heavily used, neither were other lenses I have seen. It is not part of the AI conversion process either since I have seen native AI lenses like this (including my AI 105/2.5). I can only guess that the tab was milled in the factory to calibrate it. With pre-AI and AI lenses the precise position of the tab is not critical, it's basically set to open (for full aperture viewing) or stopped down (as set via the aperture ring at the moment the picture is taken), but maybe some adjustment is needed so it properly engages with the lever in the camera.

Yes, it doesn't look like a hack job - definitely done on a mill as you can see the surfaces that have no wear have tooling marks.  It could be that the lever didn't play well with certain camera bodies of that day.  I've not mounted it yet.  I did however confirm that a TC14EII (tab removed) will easily mount on it - another user of this lens had indicated he could not mount a TC (?) on his 300/4.5 ED AI.

[jhinkey]

Here's a much better picture of the aperture lever and the amount of material taken off of it.  Shouldn't make a difference - should it?

[Roland Vink]

Shouldn't make a difference. As I mentioned, I also have lenses like this, but not filed back as much. The real test is to take some pictures: if they come out exposed correctly, the lens is fine.

[jhinkey]

Shouldn't make a difference. As I mentioned, I also have lenses like this, but not filed back as much. The real test is to take some pictures: if they come out exposed correctly, the lens is fine.

Just tested it in A mode (via the aperture ring) and a very gray evening sky seems to expose right at the middle of the histogram with not much change as the aperture is stopped down other than the exposure curve getting more narrow (as the vignetting is reduced).

So, it looks like it's working fine with the cut back aperture lever.