shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted leads me to these questions
I got offered a nikon 105 F2.5 AI-S in mint condition for £100 (I think it has a built in hood?)
Can`t find any info with regards any clearance problems?
I`m thinking back many years now when my nikon gear was stolen and i had this lens and from memory it was a superb performer. Am I going to regret a hasty decision?
I just checked on photodo ratings and it gets 97 out of 100 stopped down and 89 wide open so I`m keeping my fingers crossed.
To my knowledge, very few Nikon lenses except for the very exotic have any problems adapting to Canon. That lens is no problem, spoken from firsthand experience. It's a very good lens, I just don't like the focal length.
Thanks you guys. Seems like a bargain then(provided it`s OK)
I`ve been using a Contax 100 3.5 (superb lens) but have recently fitted the Eg-S screen to my 5D2 which is darker and the difference between the 3.5 and a 2.8 is quite noticeable so I`m hoping the 2.5 will be even better.
Whats the difference between 3.5 and 2.5? is it around half a stop or more?
dave chilvers wrote:
Thanks you guys. Seems like a bargain then(provided it`s OK)
I`ve been using a Contax 100 3.5 (superb lens) but have recently fitted the Eg-S screen to my 5D2 which is darker and the difference between the 3.5 and a 2.8 is quite noticeable so I`m hoping the 2.5 will be even better.
Whats the difference between 3.5 and 2.5? is it around half a stop or more?
I have an older Ai-d Nikkor P-Auto 105 f/2.5 than clears on my 5D.
I have heard stories that this is indeed one Nikkor that can have clearance issues but I believe it's not the rear element that causes problems but the rear protector doodad that sticks off the rear to prevent damage if the lens is sat upright on a table etc.
brucemuir wrote:
I have an older Ai-d Nikkor P-Auto 105 f/2.5 than clears on my 5D.
I have heard stories that this is indeed one Nikkor that can have clearance issues but I believe it's not the rear element that causes problems but the rear protector doodad that sticks off the rear to prevent damage if the lens is sat upright on a table etc.
Just be aware the first time you test fire it.
That's generally only an issue with older pre-AI examples of the lens like your Nikkor-P, not an AI-S version.
I had a brief affair with a D200 a couple of years back and one of the lenses I purchased new was the 105 2.8 micro VR and what a cracker of a lens that was. The Canon 100 2.8 macro could be as good maybe if they added IS.
dave chilvers wrote:
I had a brief affair with a D200 a couple of years back and one of the lenses I purchased new was the 105 2.8 micro VR and what a cracker of a lens that was. The Canon 100 2.8 macro could be as good maybe if they added IS.
The 105VR's pretty good, but the other Nikon 105's are better IMHO.
mawz wrote:
The 105VR's pretty good, but the other Nikon 105's are better IMHO.
You`re probably right but walking hand held through a wild life park when I had the lens provided some really great wild flower shots hand held, I was impressed.
I tell my students that you probably cannot beat the Nikon PC (or AI-S) 105/2.5 as a classic portrait lens. At least bang for buck wise. I have a P.C. and also the 105/2 DC which is a whole 'nother story.
dave chilvers wrote:
You`re probably right but walking hand held through a wild life park when I had the lens provided some really great wild flower shots hand held, I was impressed.
That's the sort of use the 105VR's at its best for. A close-focusing stabilized lens for general short tele use. The other 105's tend to be better at specialized things (the older 105 Micro's for pure macro work, the f1.8 as a low light/action lens, the f2 and f2.5 for portraiture)
mawz wrote:
That's the sort of use the 105VR's at its best for. A close-focusing stabilized lens for general short tele use. The other 105's tend to be better at specialized things (the older 105 Micro's for pure macro work, the f1.8 as a low light/action lens, the f2 and f2.5 for portraiture)
I would want it as a short tele lens for general photography which I gather it will be OK for?
At least it will have a smaller lens hood rather than the trumpet on the front of the Contax 100 3.5
I`ve committed to buy the lens without seeing it so ask:
Does it have( like I`m told by the present owner) a built in hood? and does anyone know the closest focus distance?
dave chilvers wrote:
I would want it as a short tele lens for general photography which I gather it will be OK for?
At least it will have a smaller lens hood rather than the trumpet on the front of the Contax 100 3.5
I`ve committed to buy the lens without seeing it so ask:
Does it have( like I`m told by the present owner) a built in hood? and does anyone know the closest focus distance?
Dave
If its the AI-S version, there's a built-in hood, earlier versions lack the built-in hood (my copy is the AI version). Close focus distance is 3'. It's an excellent general-use short telephoto, one of Nikon's truly legendary designs.
2.5*1.4 = 3.5