Show your 105mm images

[Petr sheepeck Jůza]

To Gil:
I like that sax player photo. :-)

[Bob Foster]

Birna, you should say "On an 8x10" camera, 105mm is an ultra-ultra wide angle lens !"

I don't know any 105mm that covers 8x10", only Nikon Nikkor 120 SW or equivalent older Schneider or Rodenstock lenses cover (just) 8x10"... and these lenses are already 20mm or 18mm (35mm equivalent) !

So I think a 105mm for 8x10" is a dream lens but not yet (and probably never) available in real world !

I happened to visit https://www.glennview.com/index.htm in searching for a Cambo part. I noted this photo on the top of  the home page and thought of this thread. The 90mm Goerz Hypergon will cover 8X10 (and according to the link 11X14). I've done business with Glenn Evans in the past and have no reason to doubt that the photo was made as he states.

Bob

[F2F3F6]

You're right, Bob, didn't know that the old Hypergon was such a unique, modern lens !

I had a look and found even a 75mm Goerz Hypergon and the author says: "One of the greatest and coolest lenses ever made, It’s the widest angle lens ever made that covers 8×10 with movements." !

source: Goerz Hypergon 75mm Extreme Wide Angle Lenshttps://accessaerospace.com › product (3950 US $ !)

My apologies, Birna !

[Birna Rørslett]

Accepted

[Fons Baerken]

December 22

Amaryllis

D850, Zf 100mm f/2

[Imagelover]

Picture taken this autumn in my hometown. Nikon Df with the AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5, f/11 on a tripod.

[David H. Hartman]

In case it wasn't posted before here is a link to the NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights, No. 5, Best-selling mid-range telescopic lens...

https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0005/index.htm

I did some very careful test on three 105/2.5 Nikkors, an AI(ed) Nikkor P*C, AI and AIS. The sharpest image at 2 meters was at f/5.6. The creamiest bokeh and greatest blur would be at a portrait distance and naturally at f/2.8. The lens was purpose designed this way according to the article linked above. For the sharpest images at any distance I would avoid stopping down blow f/8.0.

Dave

[Hugh_3170]

Dave, did you see much difference between the three versions?  (Sample variation not withstanding.)

In case it wasn't posted before here is a link to the NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights, No. 5, Best-selling mid-range telescopic lens...

https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0005/index.htm

I did some very careful test on three 105/2.5 Nikkors, an AI(ed) Nikkor P*C, AI and AIS. The sharpest image at 2 meters was at f/5.6. The creamiest bokeh and greatest blur would be at a portrait distance and naturally at f/2.8. The lens was purpose designed this way according to the article linked above. For the sharpest images at any distance I would avoid stopping down blow f/8.0.

Dave

[David H. Hartman]

Dave, did you see much difference between the three versions?  (Sample variation not withstanding.)

It turned out that the AIS was the best and the AI(ed) N*P was least but the difference was not pronounced. I focused with a DW-2 (6x)finder. The exposure was made with flash with the camera set to B and locked up. I allowed the tripod to settle for a full minute. The film was Kodak Tech Pan developed as a continuous tone film. I viewed the results at 80x (an early form of pixel peeping). I viewed both center and edge. I did everything I knew to test only the lens and not the camera also.

If I had to guess why the AIS was best it might be better contrast due to the newest coating. Anyway sample variation was not pronounced. I kept the AIS and sold the others. I didn't want to sell the AI but needed to pay a debt. I should have paid over a period of months since I knew the performance of the AI.

I recommend using a Nikon HS-8 or HS-14 (late versions) rather than the built in hoods for both the 105/2.5(s) and later 135/2.8(s). If the sun is included in the extreme corner of the image I got a single small green ghost. This might have been with the 105/2.5 AIS or 135/2.8 AIS or both.

My sharpest lenses were a 50/1.8 AI and 55/2.8 AIS.

Dave

[Hugh_3170]

Thanks.

It turned out that the AIS was the best and the AI(ed) N*P was least but the difference was not pronounced. I focused with a DW-2 (6x)finder. The exposure was made with flash with the camera set to B and locked up. I allowed the tripod to settle for a full minute. The film was Kodak Tech Pan developed as a continuous tone film. I viewed the results at 80x (an early form of pixel peeping). I viewed both center and edge. I did everything I knew to test only the lens and not the camera also.

If I had to guess why the AIS was best it might be better contrast due to the newest coating. Anyway sample variation was not pronounced. I kept the AIS and sold the others. I didn't want to sell the AI but needed to pay a debt. I should have paid over a period of months since I knew the performance of the AI.

I recommend using a Nikon HS-8 or HS-14 (late versions) rather than the built in hoods for both the 105/2.5(s) and later 135/2.8(s). If the sun is included in the extreme corner of the image I got a single small green ghost. This might have been with the 105/2.5 AIS or 135/2.8 AIS or both.

My sharpest lenses were a 50/1.8 AI and 55/2.8 AIS.

Dave

[Michael Erlewine]

APO El Nikkor 105mm f/5.6 lens

[Gil Aegerter]

To Gil:
I like that sax player photo. :-)

Thank you very much!

[Airy]

APO El Nikkor 105mm f/5.6 lens

Quite impressive. So is its price level, by the way.

[Michael Erlewine]

Quite impressive. So is its price level, by the way.

Yes, but in this case, we get what we pay for, IMO.

[Airy]

Indeed, and thanks for sharing.