I was looking at a couple of reviews of Nikon lenses and wondered if these reviews are available for the older AI and AIS lenses. If not at Photozone, are they available elsewhere?
John listed Bjorn Rorslett's lens review site, which I used as a reference for a long time before he stopped updating it. I still use his site as a reference on occasion. The reviews are great.
You might also like the Nikkor lens info at this link, which provides pages and pages of history and reviews of both Nikon bodies and Nikkor lenses (you have to hunt around to find links to the pages of interest):
momentcorp.com and naturfotograf.com (Fredrik Rasmussen and Rørslett, respectively) are personal experiential snippets rather than formal reviews. As noted above, they are both moribund blogs that haven't been updated for years due to the former's illness and the latter's apparent loss of interest (he's now the co-owner of nikongear.com where he spends his dotage going by the handle 'Fierce Bear of the North'', schmoozing with a dozen recurring commenters/friends and often being unpleasant to others).
The "Mir" site is Malaysian and in the main, a compilation of specifications, written in tortured English syntax. The dread Ken Rockwell also does reviews on older lenses and believe it or not, contains a surprising amount of meaningful test data and (gasp!) aren't half bad.
Since Nikon's assortment of manual focus lenses goes back many decades, there is probably some value in reading what folks like Bjorn Rorslett have to say. And I've found Ken Rockwell's comments useful as well. But except for the rare lens, the very wide lens and the very long lens, it is relatively inexpensive to do your own testing, as many folks on the Manual Focus Nikon Glass thread have done and continue to do. You can learn a great deal from folks hanging out there and see for yourself what these lenses are capable of doing. You can always ask a question about a particular lens and in all likelihood you'll get a prompt response from someone shooting with that lens.
AF lenses certainly have their uses, but many of us prefer to shoot with manual focus. I'm certainly among them. I still own three AF lenses, but I now own 34 MF Nikon lenses. I love them.
I would like to see numeric tests of older lenses because seeing how my 20mm f/3.5 AIS or 28mm f/2 AIS compares by the numbers to my newer lenses will help me understand the relationship between test numbers and the images I get.
Vox Sciurorum wrote:
I would like to see numeric tests of older lenses because seeing how my 20mm f/3.5 AIS or 28mm f/2 AIS compares by the numbers to my newer lenses will help me understand the relationship between test numbers and the images I get.
We have two participants on the Manual Focus Nikon Glass thread who are very much into evaluating lenses in great detail though neither is using scientific instruments to get there. But they do rather extensive comparisons of lenses, though we only address MF lenses on the thread. I understand that such analysis is heart warming for some folks and it appears to be the case for you. My only criteria is whether I like the results of what I'm shooting. I don't need a chart to tell me that. I shot for a number of years with Canon's most expensive lenses and I have to say the switch to manual focus with these great old Nikkors has changed my photography dramatically. I won't be shooting AF any time soon regardless of what Nikon does to improve their lenses. I might take a shot at Zeiss but then I'm too busy enjoying the lenses I already own for which I didn't have to mortgage my home...
Vox Sciurorum wrote:
I would like to see numeric tests of older lenses because seeing how my 20mm f/3.5 AIS or 28mm f/2 AIS compares by the numbers to my newer lenses will help me understand the relationship between test numbers and the images I get.
neither of these lenses will measure up against similar modern lenses, however, they are close and in most cases, cheap! I bought my 20mm f3.5 for $99 and like it more than anything I can get from my other wide angles, even though it has issues with sharpness at long range and focusing seems rather touchy for a lens that should produce massive depth of field at almost all apertures.
The 28/f2.0 gets good reviews, but all these old lenses are really weak wide open - if you want to shoot stars or something similar with fast glass, you'll have the bite the bullet and buy a modern f1.4mm from at least Samyang/Rokinon, and if money is no object, there's that Nikkor AF 24,, f1.4.
In the end, if you're a pixel peeper and think your photos are ruined if you didn't get the highest resolution or contrast available from any lens, you're not going to like glass from the 1980s. However, they do pretty amazing things for the money:
20mm f3.5 on D600, not bad for a $99 lens. I think the polarizer I used costs more... and no, I never looked into the corners at 100% magnification.
These lenses, for the most part, date prior to 1980 and on a one-to-one basis cannot compete with newer lenses, designed on computers and freely incorporating moulded aspherical elements and anomalous dispersion glass. Even consumer grade zooms have these today.
There are a few exceptions among the manual focus Nikkors as some have no modern-day equivalents or successors as yet (8/2.8 & 16/3.5 Fisheyes, 50/1.2, the NOCT, 105/4 UV), render with endearing character still thought of as desirable (50/1.2, NOCT), remain notable high-performers (very long FL AIS ED fast glass) or 'all of the above', like the 300/2.
You acquire them for other qualities altogether. The caveat is the appearance of ultra-high MP sensors that will make the vast majority of these truly obsolete. For myself and others here, a 12 MP D700/D3S or 16-24 MP NEX and Fuji X will do.
asiostygius wrote:
Well, the "obsolete" 50 years old Nikkor-S 5 cm f/2 is not beaten by the relatively newer 50/1.8 af-d, according to this test on a D3X (24Mp)
The same cannot be said of the new G-version. With 30-year old NOCTs still commanding >$3000 and the 50/1.2 in continuous production since 1978, it tells you that Nikon's "head" is elsewhere when 50's are concerned.
CGrindahl wrote:
We have two participants on the Manual Focus Nikon Glass thread who are very much into evaluating lenses in great detail though neither is using scientific instruments to get there. But they do rather extensive comparisons of lenses, though we only address MF lenses on the thread. I understand that such analysis is heart warming for some folks and it appears to be the case for you. My only criteria is whether I like the results of what I'm shooting. I don't need a chart to tell me that. I shot for a number of years with Canon's most expensive lenses and I have to say the switch to manual focus with these great old Nikkors has changed my photography dramatically. I won't be shooting AF any time soon regardless of what Nikon does to improve their lenses. I might take a shot at Zeiss but then I'm too busy enjoying the lenses I already own for which I didn't have to mortgage my home...
I am wondering what camera bodies you are comfortable using with the manual focus lenses. So much has been said about the dslr screens not working well with them
j.liam wrote:
momentcorp.com and naturfotograf.com (Fredrik Rasmussen and Rørslett, respectively) are personal experiential snippets rather than formal reviews. As noted above, they are both moribund blogs that haven't been updated for years due to the former's illness and the latter's apparent loss of interest (he's now the co-owner of nikongear.com where he spends his dotage going by the handle 'Fierce Bear of the North'', schmoozing with a dozen recurring commenters/friends and often being unpleasant to others).
The "Mir" site is Malaysian and in the main, a compilation of specifications, written in tortured English syntax. The dread Ken Rockwell also does reviews on older lenses and believe it or not, contains a surprising amount of meaningful test data and (gasp!) aren't half bad. ...Show more →
I shoot with the D700 and my 71 year old eyes have no difficulty finding focus. Occasionally, I'll rely on the focus confirmation light but with close shooting using extension tubes I'm more likely to rely on what I see in the viewfinder. I've not had a problem with any of the lenses in my kit in this regard.
Quite a few folks were concerned that these older lenses wouldn't hold up well when used on the D800 and its sibling the D800E. From what I'm hearing from participants on the Manual Focus Nikon Glass thread who are using those cameras, most lenses hold up very well. I had a friend's D800 for a week and used only MF glass. I saw nothing to suggest there is a problem, but then I love to shoot wide open, so corner to corner sharpness for me is unimportant. When I stopped down to f/8, I was happy with the results but I'm not a pixel peeper. Frankly, I don't think these lenses are at the end of their useful life. I certainly have no intention of selling any of mine... Shooting with manual focus completely changes the experience of photography for me. The few times I used AF since beginning my Nikon MF adventure I found the experience remarkably boring, but that is a very personal thing. I make no judgments of those who prefer shooting with the latest and greatest, regardless of weight or price. That's not for me...
williamkazak wrote:
WOW. What personal attacks you do serve.
No.
Here's the context: several years ago, the site, nikongear.com, which he now co-owns became highly politicized insofar as threads were permitted to take on polarizing political themes so long as they resonated with one world view and those participating refrained from criticizing this view. Rørslett, a moderator, would join in "with both feet" instead of defuse these distractions from the photographic subject at hand. Some of his moderator cronies would follow his lead. And his attacks (even on mundane topics) were vicious, ad hominem and sweeping in their generalization of both individuals & countries were unjustified and uncalled for. Many at the time departed the blog en masse. He now presides over a familiar echo chamber.
williamkazak wrote:
I am wondering what camera bodies you are comfortable using with the manual focus lenses. So much has been said about the dslr screens not working well with them
Personally, have found the Katz Eye screens great for exactly this sort of work but none are now made for the latest FF DSLR's; the D700 (split circle) was the last. They do however still make then for the D7xxx. When they install it, they carefully calibrate the focus. My 'keeper rate' with very fast MF lenses has risen dramatically because of the modification.
www.brightscreens.com, that most recently made screens for the D800, closed after the death of its owner and appears not to have re-opened.
