Ross Martin wrote:
From a past fall shoot in Utah, with the 180mm f/2.8 AI-S. This lens was legendary among photojournalists back in the film days when I was a newspaper photographer. I was one of the few Canon users at that time but all my fellow shooters packed the 180/2.8 in their Domke canvas shoulder bag.
Nice fall scene Ross. The 180 2.8 AIS has been a fan fave on this thread too. I have had a green Domke F-6 for over ten years, its gone all over the world. The shoulder strap finally was so tattered I just recently replaced it with the same exact model. The bag looks very non-descript, that's what I like about it.
mp356 wrote:
Looking Up. Taken with the 25-50 f4 Ais, f4, 25 sec, iso 3200, D750. This old lens did a respectable job except for some "batwing" coma on the corners. Thanks for looking.
Scott
The Milky Way looks bright up north Scott!
saph wrote:
Nice fall scene Ross. The 180 2.8 AIS has been a fan fave on this thread too. I have had a green Domke F-6 for over ten years, its gone all over the world. The shoulder strap finally was so tattered I just recently replaced it with the same exact model. The bag looks very non-descript, that's what I like about it.
Thanks Samy. Nice to have another Domke user here. I like your shot of the storks!
____________________________________
I’ve been going back through RAW files from a 2012 trip in Utah where I carried several manual focus Nikkors. Here’s one with with the AI-S 85mm f/2 on the D800, autumn in Zion Canyon. End of the day and there wasn’t much light left, so exposure was 30 seconds at f/8, ISO 250 (thankfully no wind).
I just returned from a trip where I took a couple hundred photos. Most were taken with AF lenses, but I have a handful that were taken with MF lenses. As I sort through them, I'll post the MF photos. Here's a couple to get started. These were both taken just beside Wilson Dam near Muscle Shoals, Alabama. We decided to take my wife's car at the last minute rather than my truck, where I always keep a tripod. So, as you might guess, I forgot my tripod. I managed to get some long shutter speeds by bracing the camera on rocks. I'm thinking a small tripod may find a permanent home in my wife's car. Both taken on Nikon Z50II, Lens Turbo II, 25-50/4.
I went chasing waterfalls again this weekend. This one was a little difficult to reach. No "official" trail, no blaze and a lot of tree fall to overcome from the hurricane in late September to get to this spot. But was worth the effort. Still working on some images and thought I would do a lunchtime post to move the thread along.
Hey y’all, am I crazy for considering dropping $650 on a new in box (old stock) never used AI-S 105mm f/2.5?? Used copies in mint condition are going for $400-450. It’s tempting to me to go all in and have the new one. This focal length would fit nicely for me in a 28/55/105 AI-S trio.
Ross Martin wrote:
Hey y’all, am I crazy for considering dropping $650 on a new in box (old stock) never used AI-S 105mm f/2.5?? Used copies in mint condition are going for $400-450. It’s tempting to me to go all in and have the new one. This focal length would fit nicely for me in a 28/55/105 AI-S trio.
Eh, I paid that for basically the same thing with the 35 f/1.4 Ai-S and I dinged it today, getting through an unreasonably aggressive screen door. Nice reminder of why I don't normally pay more for external condition
That said, it's pretty sweet having a manual Nikon lens where the rubber ring is actually still rubbery. If it's actually a late model and you don't mind the premium, go for it. You only live once. Just watch out for screen doors...
Ross Martin wrote:
Hey y’all, am I crazy for considering dropping $650 on a new in box (old stock) never used AI-S 105mm f/2.5?? Used copies in mint condition are going for $400-450. It’s tempting to me to go all in and have the new one. This focal length would fit nicely for me in a 28/55/105 AI-S trio.
Personally I would seriously consider it. The only Nikkor I bought new was my AiS 24/2, and if there's another one I wish I'd had NIB it would be the 105/2.5: It would be totally worth it if it's a late-serial number SIC-coated version (higher than 1043xxx) as they go for a premium to begin with.
Ross Martin wrote:
Hey y’all, am I crazy for considering dropping $650 on a new in box (old stock) never used AI-S 105mm f/2.5?? Used copies in mint condition are going for $400-450. It’s tempting to me to go all in and have the new one. This focal length would fit nicely for me in a 28/55/105 AI-S trio.
Ross, if it is the one on ebay with a serial number starting 884xxx - that is a mis-listed ai not an ai-s
Jim
grantgoodes wrote:
Personally I would seriously consider it. The only Nikkor I bought new was my AiS 24/2, and if there's another one I wish I'd had NIB it would be the 105/2.5: It would be totally worth it if it's a late-serial number SIC-coated version (higher than 1043xxx) as they go for a premium to begin with.
Thanks for that info. I’m also looking at a mint copy for about $450 taxed/delivered, s/n 1048602. The new old stock is s/n 998774.
OffTrail wrote:
Eh, I paid that for basically the same thing with the 35 f/1.4 Ai-S and I dinged it today, getting through an unreasonably aggressive screen door. Nice reminder of why I don't normally pay more for external condition
That said, it's pretty sweet having a manual Nikon lens where the rubber ring is actually still rubbery. If it's actually a late model and you don't mind the premium, go for it. You only live once. Just watch out for screen doors...
Ah! I know that feeling when the new thing gets its first ding!
Ross Martin wrote:
The new old stock is s/n 998774.
I’m also looking at s/n 1048602 for almost $200 less, in minty condition.
Looked at that 2nd one, and it's clearly an SIC (newest generation) coating version, and seems to be really nice condition.
When I got my Df, I realized I was really missing my old 105/2.5 (which I'd sold to purchase a Micro-Nikkor 105.2.8) and so picked up a minty copy for a good price. Sadly, I hadn't heard about the SIC vs. NIC coating change, and now I'm regretting that I didn't hold out for the "ultimate" 105/2.5 with a later serial number. I've seen some discussion threads where the two versions were carefully compared, and there IS an improvement in flare-resistance/contrast with the SIC coating, but it's not earth-shattering. Still, I have to resist buying yet ANOTHER Nikkor 105 (I have 4, including the 105/1,8 and 105/2 DC)!
Ross Martin wrote:
Thanks for that info. I’m also looking at a mint copy for about $450 taxed/delivered, s/n 1048602. The new old stock is s/n 998774.
The 1048xxx version should have the latest coatings, where 998xxx likely wouldn't. At least according to Roland Vink's site, SIC coatings started at 1043xxx. For the later S/N to be cheaper, have the latest coating, and still look mint, I think that makes a bit more sense.
That said, I can't tell you what difference SIC coatings really make for the 105's as both of mine are pre-Ai Sonnar versions.
Ross Martin wrote:
Ah! I know that feeling when the new thing gets its first ding!
My only purchased-new Nikkor, the 24/2 AiS, had two major incidents, both of which just about broke my heart. The first time I was using it to take a group-portrait, and my tripod wasn't high enough to get the shot, so I put it on a piano-stool. Just as I set the self-timer in motion to join in the group, the tripod fell off the stool and the camera did a face-plant onto the hardwood floor. Trashed the HK-2 lens hood and the filter, but camera and lens were fine. Second time the camera was in my backpack with the ever-ready case, and I ended up going over the handle-bars of my bicycle and somersaulted onto my back, sliding down the road for a goodly distance. Wore right through the fabric of the backpack and the nose of the leather case, and again trashed the HK-2 and filter, but the lens was STILL fine. The 24/2 is of course not minty anymore, but has no slop or loose bits, so they really built those MF Nikkors.
