Author Topic: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF  (Read 5380 times)

David H. Hartman

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2746
  • I Doctor Photographs... :)
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #60 on: March 01, 2021, 00:07:31 »

But I have also had cases where the free working distance was perfectly adequate but the longer overall focus distance of the 105/4 gave me more freedom in placing my tripod. Sometimes it simply isn't possible to move the tripod any closer to the subject without falling off the edge of a bank, or it's not possible to get the tripod any higher up a tree...

OK, I got it now.  :)
Beatniks are out to make it rich
Oh no, must be the season of the witch!

Øivind Tøien

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1535
  • Fairbanks, Alaska
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #61 on: March 01, 2021, 01:48:30 »
The 105/4 has seven aperture blades to the blurs are heptagonal.
Almost all AI and AIS lenses are the same...

Oops, you are of course correct, confirmed on lens. I should not have relied on memory and what I thought was the outline of the aperture in image #2 above, might have been some parallell vertical elements in the background. Part of the confusion might be that the 55mm f/3.5 micro (AI) has 6 (slightly curved) aperture blades.
Øivind Tøien

Toby

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 168
  • You ARE NikonGear
    • Toby Marshall
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #62 on: March 01, 2021, 04:47:34 »
The 200mm f4 Ai is known to have a fair amount of chromatic aberration. I have one and checked and it does.

Steven Paulsen

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 171
  • Cumpulsive Tinkerer
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #63 on: March 03, 2021, 04:39:24 »
I keep thinking when they make a 200/Af-S/VR/micro, I can afford the old D version. I have been using the Ai 200 micro since back into the film only days. I will sometimes get a bit of ghosting, (Reflections from the internal elements.)
I carry it in my MF sack and my copy makes a decent distance shot. I have also noticed....


I followed The Bear's advise on a reversed 4T for 1:1 on the Ai version. I unscrewed the 4T retaining ring and mounted the glass backward, allowing for "Normal" filter use.

The distance on reversed T is closer to the lens front element & the flattening effect is not quite as profound, but I'm not 100% on that.

John Geerts

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8191
  • Photojournalist in Tilburg, Netherlands
    • Tilburgers
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #64 on: March 03, 2021, 07:57:04 »
With the AF-D Micro 200/4

earlier posted in March 2021




Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 6205
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #65 on: March 03, 2021, 10:43:52 »
Just stumbled over this site again;
http://www.pierretoscani.com/focale.html#focale37Animation of how the Micro Nikkor 105mm AF-S VR looses it's focal length as it focuses,,,
One of those lenses that I returned shortly after testing it out - and newer looking back!
Erik Lund

aerobat

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 302
  • Daniel Diggelmann, Switzerland
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #66 on: March 03, 2021, 22:52:23 »
John I really like your cactus photo - thank you
Daniel Diggelmann

John Geerts

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8191
  • Photojournalist in Tilburg, Netherlands
    • Tilburgers
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #67 on: March 03, 2021, 23:06:34 »
Thank you, Daniel.

Roland Vink

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1417
  • Nikon Nerd from New Zealand
    • Nikon Database
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #68 on: March 04, 2021, 00:36:32 »
Just stumbled over this site again;
http://www.pierretoscani.com/focale.html#focale37Animation of how the Micro Nikkor 105mm AF-S VR looses it's focal length as it focuses,,,
One of those lenses that I returned shortly after testing it out - and newer looking back!
The older AF 105/2.8 micro also looses focal length at close range - even more than the AF-S VR version, but for some reason this is more often mentioned as a disadvantage for the AF-S model. Maybe this can be explained as the AF 105 micro has a gentle loss of focal length across the entire focus range, while the focal length of the AF-S version remains constant at medium-far distances but then drops more rapidly at close range.

One thing not mentioned is the rear 1.4x converter of the AF 105 micro is not a fixed unit. From Nikon 1001 nights article: https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0072/index.htm

"Gauss-type structure comprised of six elements in five groups with a three-element teleconverter behind this main structure. Three elements in front of the aperture, three elements behind the aperture, and the front two elements in the teleconverter structure combine to form a total of three groups that each moves independently to focus from close-up to infinity."

Observing my lens I can see that as the lens is focused closer, the front two elements of the rear converter move rearwards, then stop and move forward as the lens approaches 1:1, finally arriving at more or less the same position as it started. This complex design must give a high degree of correction across the focus range providing very good optical quality. Perhaps over-corrected as the background bokeh at medium-far distances is rough. And lack of ED and other special glasses means it is not colour-corrected as well as more recent lenses, so some CA is observed.

David H. Hartman

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2746
  • I Doctor Photographs... :)
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #69 on: March 04, 2021, 06:45:47 »
Just stumbled over this site again;
http://www.pierretoscani.com/focale.html#focale37Animation of how the Micro Nikkor 105mm AF-S VR looses it's focal length as it focuses,,,
One of those lenses that I returned shortly after testing it out - and newer looking back!

Is this work available in an English languish site?

I probably should have bought an AF-S 70-200/4.0G ED-IF VR rather than the AF-S 105/2.8G ED VR Micro-Nikkor. Again it's a honker with too many aberrations.

Dave
Beatniks are out to make it rich
Oh no, must be the season of the witch!

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 6205
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #70 on: March 04, 2021, 15:50:48 »
I use Google translate for these page, only a few of them are available in English and they have sometimes been completely missing, I believe due to copyright issues,,,
Here is Ricks excellent article fresh from the press just in  :o https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=9886.new#new
Erik Lund

richardHaw

  • Cute Panda from the East...
  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3032
  • Your lens loverboy
    • Classic Nikkor Maintenance and DIY
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #71 on: May 03, 2021, 16:02:51 »
i just overhauled a severly fungus damaged 200/4 ai (wide grip) :o :o :o

despite all the bad rap it appears to be a decent performer even with a chipped front element and bad fungus trauma ::)
from what i see it seems to lack resolving power for a micro-nikkor and what people perceive as softness is compounded by thin dof even at f/8, apart from that it appears to be quite fine but it doesnt have that wow factor that many shorter micro nikkor in the 50-60mm range have

hmallat

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • You ARE NikonGear
    • Personal website
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #72 on: September 22, 2022, 20:09:09 »
Digging up this old thread ... as I recently sold my MF version and just acquired a second hand copy of the AF lens.

It's in rather good shape otherwise but suffers from the common problem of a broken A/M ring. I expect to mostly use the lens in manual focus mode so probably don't need to fiddle with the ring much, and could maybe just put some black electrician's tape over the break, but it's still a bit annoying. Is it a laborous (i.e. costly) repair if I take it to a shop? Likely wouldn't attempt it myself.

Birna Rørslett

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 4103
  • A lesser fierce bear of the North
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #73 on: September 22, 2022, 21:04:19 »
Don't bother -- just seal the broken A/M ring in place with sturdy tape. The AF is glacial and who would want that for close-ups?

By the way, the makeshift tape fix is required to prevent further damage to the lens in the future. Like its shorter relative AF 105 f/2 DC, the 200 Micro ED can split into two when the A/M ring is broken.

hmallat

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • You ARE NikonGear
    • Personal website
Re: Micro Nikkor 200mm AIs vs AF
« Reply #74 on: September 23, 2022, 17:52:29 »
Good grief. Such a robust looking design otherwise, let down by a cheap piece of plastic... well, it's taped up now. Thanks for the heads up!