Thanks Jim. Mine is a very early PC version #502xxx.
It came with a retro-fitted factory AI ring since I needed it to use the lens on my D7100 & D610 DSLRs.
This is what it looks like https://www.destoutz.ch/lens_105mm_f2.5_526586.html
I paid £78 ($100) for mine a decade ago. I never bothered sourcing a hood.
You have the P3 (purchase permission pass) - go and use it.........
Colin
jimmuller wrote:
Well, now you've done it. My sweetie took one look at your pics and said get one. (Where is my wallet? It seems to have slipped away.)
I can't tell if that non-ai description is significant, since I'll be using it with FTZ. The SN is 676159, which marks it as a "K" version in that lens list, Sept '74 to '77. It may be multi-coated but the dates of that SN sequence and the previous SN range marked as multi-coated overlap.
I wasn't looking seriously so I didn't make note of them but I recall seeing others available for slightly higher price, with an AI designation IIRC.
So what am I looking at here? Or rather, what should I be looking for?
pbraymond wrote:
Serge and Colin, excellent collaboration on the 105! Jim, I own the AIS and love it. However one of my reasons for the AIS was the built in hood, especially since I don’t have a developed eye for rendering evaluation.
Thank you for the note. But I'm not sure I follow you. I extend the hoods on my 200 and 300 all the time but I don't see how that relates to "a developed eye for rendering evaluation" unless there is solar flare from direct sun on the lens.
---------------------------------------------
NightOwl Cat wrote:
best bet for you is either the AI, or AI-s. AI-s has the built in hood, never had any problems with it sliding, has shorter focus throw than AI.
Thank you too. Except for the hood, I don't see any value in the AI designation unless Nikon improved the optics incrementally over time. The MF lens data in Z5-II includes the maximum aperture. On all of my current lenses, even the AI-S 300, the aperture ring has immediate effect, with no full-aperture-focusing/auto-stop-down. Aperture-priority (or manual) is the only exposure mode the FTZ allows. (In contrast, with the Tamron 90mm and FTZ the camera requires that I set the aperture to 32, and then presumably tells the lens electronically where to stop the aperture when the shutter is released.) Of course I may be missing something important. If I operate them right my old lenses work just fine, probably better than the operator most of the time.
It's too bad Moses dropped that 3rd tablet because I'm pretty sure the 11th Commandment was supposed to be "Thou shalt not spend thy neighbor's money."
pbraymond wrote:
Serge and Colin, excellent collaboration on the 105! Jim, I own the AIS and love it. However one of my reasons for the AIS was the built in hood, especially since I don’t have a developed eye for rendering evaluation. Once in a blue moon I think I know what that truly means, but many times I can’t explain it or put a strong preference for one rendering vs another in online photo evaluation. I very much enjoy the 105 F2.5 AIS.
Yes, the contingent of folk on this thread can be MIGHTY convincing when it comes to recommending certain lenses (you'd almost think we get sales-commissions!), and the 105/2.5 is one that I believe is pretty much mandatory to own as a MF Nikkor fan. Like Raymond, I prefer the AiS: Built-in hood (which some find annoying), a bit more compact, and with a shorter focus-throw. Others prefer the AI or earlier K versions (longer focus-throw, possibly better bokeh due to rounded vs. straight aperture blades).
Jim, the differences in rendering across all versions are subtle, relating mostly to improvements in lens coatings (with the exception of the very earliest uncoated versions which have a Sonnar optical layout), and for use with the FTZ adaptor any copy of the 105/2.5 will work fine, so it would be down to price/condition and personal preference on things like the hood, aperture-blades, and focus-throw.
jimmuller wrote:
Thank you for the note. But I'm not sure I follow you. I extend the hoods on my 200 and 300 all the time but I don't see how that relates to "a developed eye for rendering evaluation" unless there is solar flare from direct sun on the lens.
Sorry, I meant the the inclusion of the built in hood was a bigger factor for my purchase of the AIS version than the various renderings that exist between the many versions of the 105 f2.5. I still have a hard time identifying rendering differences between the various 105s.
pbraymond wrote:
Sorry, I meant the the inclusion of the built in hood was a bigger factor for my purchase of the AIS version than the various renderings that exist between the many versions of the 105 f2.5. I still have a hard time identifying rendering differences between the various 105s.
Got it, thank you. I just placed an order for that non-AI version. Too many reviewers, not to mention FM members, said the 105 was essential, flawless, etc. Who am I to argue?
jimmuller wrote:
Great shot of Gibraltar, and all the other fabulous scenes you have posted!
Thank you for the pics and the nice comment.
Now about that 105... Now you've done it. That's like telling someone they might have dropped a washer into the oil pan in their car. It will bug them forever!
I do not have that 105. One Thousand and One Nights has 96 entries and I just haven't had time to pick up all of them yet! And I was warned several times to be careful of my wallet!
The truth is though, I have practically no use for a portrait lens, wouldn't know what to do with it. I do have a Tamron 90mm macro which I picked up for scanning my old slide collection. Were I ever in a situation that demanded a length between the 55 and the 200 I could always use that. Probably. Maybe. Of course I couldn't post the pics here. I have a hard enough time convincing myself of the subtle differences between my old 50 and the newer 55, as long as the 50 is stopped down.
OTOH, I saw an inexpensive specimen of the 105 in a camera shop listing online today. No! I will not go there! At least not yet! Don't tempt me! First I need to fish that washer out of my engine's oil pan....Show more →
Jim. thanks for the nice comments. I thought about swapping to the 50/2 for a better look at Gibraltar but decided not to risk the sensor with the salt air.
The 105/2.5 is simply a fantastic piece of glass, one of Nikon's finest designs. It is an excellent portrait lens but it is equally excellent at capturing just about anything under the sun. The AIs has a built in hood which is very convenient but the Ai has better build with slightly rounder aperture blades.
Collecting these lenses is fun and for unexplainable reasons, they seem to multiply as time goes on.
serge07 wrote:
The 105/2.5 is simply a fantastic piece of glass, one of Nikon's finest designs. It is an excellent portrait lens but it is equally excellent at capturing just about anything under the sun. The AIs has a built in hood which is very convenient but the Ai has better build with slightly rounder aperture blades.
Collecting these lenses is fun and for unexplainable reasons, they seem to multiply as time goes on.
Tell me about it! I now have five Nikkor 105's (six if you count the 100/2.8 Series-E, which I do). I actually ran out of 52mm filters, so have to leave a couple of them "naked". As you say, collecting is fun, especially as I didn't have to pay very much for any of my 105's (even the 105/2 AF-DC was pretty cheap), though the late serial-number (SIC version) 105/2.5 was a little more than chump-change..
grantgoodes wrote:
Tell me about it! I now have four Nikkor 105's (five if you count the 100/2.8 Series-E, which I do). I actually ran out of 52mm filters, so have to leave a couple of them "naked". As you say, collecting is fun, especially as I didn't have to pay very much for any of my 105's (even the 105/2 AF-DC was pretty cheap), though the late serial-number (SIC version) 105/2.5 was a little more than chump-change..
You have me beat, I only have a pair of the 105/2.5, Ai and AIs.
I also have the late serial SIC version that took a long time to hunt down but the AI is super as well. I think the most important factor is the condition which can vary quite a bit given their age.
DeltaSigma wrote:
Thanks Jim. Mine is a very early PC version #502xxx.
It came with a retro-fitted factory AI ring since I needed it to use the lens on my D7100 & D610 DSLRs.
This is what it looks like https://www.destoutz.ch/lens_105mm_f2.5_526586.html
I paid £78 ($100) for mine a decade ago. I never bothered sourcing a hood.
You have the P3 (purchase permission pass) - go and use it.........
But in the surviving tablets it says thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods, so go get yours while the permission slip is out
jimmuller wrote:
Thank you for the note. But I'm not sure I follow you. I extend the hoods on my 200 and 300 all the time but I don't see how that relates to "a developed eye for rendering evaluation" unless there is solar flare from direct sun on the lens.
---------------------------------------------
Thank you too. Except for the hood, I don't see any value in the AI designation unless Nikon improved the optics incrementally over time. The MF lens data in Z5-II includes the maximum aperture. On all of my current lenses, even the AI-S 300, the aperture ring has immediate effect, with no full-aperture-focusing/auto-stop-down. Aperture-priority (or manual) is the only exposure mode the FTZ allows. (In contrast, with the Tamron 90mm and FTZ the camera requires that I set the aperture to 32, and then presumably tells the lens electronically where to stop the aperture when the shutter is released.) Of course I may be missing something important. If I operate them right my old lenses work just fine, probably better than the operator most of the time.
It's too bad Moses dropped that 3rd tablet because I'm pretty sure the 11th Commandment was supposed to be "Thou shalt not spend thy neighbor's money." ...Show more →
NightOwl Cat wrote:
But in the surviving tablets it says thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods, so go get yours while the permission slip is out
I see your point! (I ordered it already!)
Off-topic but related: I have ridden bicycles most of my life, bought my first derailleur bike in 1972 (I think - it was a long time ago). I've always ridden steel frames. Starting about 20 years ago I began rebuilding, collecting if you want to call it that, vintage steel-frame bikes with period-correct vintage components. I already knew the technology and what was worth keeping, what wasn't. The differences from bike to bike are subtle but real.
I was interested in photography even earlier but back then I had little money and therefore no experience with these vintage lenses. Whereas I knew about the road bikes from Masi and Motobecane and Peugeot and Tommasini, etc., I have no idea what their lens equivalents would be until you kind folks tell me about them. Next you'll tell me to buy a 37.5mm f/3.87 and I'll have no idea whether you are feeding me truth or pulling my chain. It's a big adventure!
jimmuller wrote:
I need to share a sentiment with everyone here: This thread has been so much fun and your community have been so welcoming. Also I've learned a lot. Along with that fun I've seen beautiful pictures of places and things I will likely never see in person. I've seen sunset/sunrise/noon (or whatever time of day it was) in Denmark, beautiful flowers in South Africa, gorgeous buildings in Spain, snowfall in Ohio (okay, I've been to Ohio, just not in winter), mountains in Provence, and a bunch of other places I don't recall just now. It has been a real treat. May it last long and prosper! (Do I really need a 105mm f/2.5?)...Show more →
Right back at you, Jim. I am glad that for your question, you have received solid advice and taken it. "That's what (forum) friends are for".
The best part is you can usually move on and resell a lens for what you paid (if you took a few minutes to research a fair price) which essentially makes it riskless.
Of course once you realize you like the lens you keep it so your wallet might not agree with ‘riskless’, but still…
jimmuller wrote:
I see your point! (I ordered it already!)
Off-topic but related: I have ridden bicycles most of my life, bought my first derailleur bike in 1972 (I think - it was a long time ago). I've always ridden steel frames. Starting about 20 years ago I began rebuilding, collecting if you want to call it that, vintage steel-frame bikes with period-correct vintage components. I already knew the technology and what was worth keeping, what wasn't. The differences from bike to bike are subtle but real.
I was interested in photography even earlier but back then I had little money and therefore no experience with these vintage lenses. Whereas I knew about the road bikes from Masi and Motobecane and Peugeot and Tommasini, etc., I have no idea what their lens equivalents would be until you kind folks tell me about them. Next you'll tell me to buy a 37.5mm f/3.87 and I'll have no idea whether you are feeding me truth or pulling my chain. It's a big adventure! ...Show more →
I miss my Columbia bike from the 1970's, racing handlebar, just an off the shelf bike, but I rode that thing all over town as a teen. I have two bikes now, but it's been eons since I've ridden either one. Both have flat tires.. but neither have racing handlebars. I don't find the straight up sitting comfortable. I replaced the seat on one, but I still hate it.
jimmuller wrote:
I see your point! (I ordered it already!)
Off-topic but related: I have ridden bicycles most of my life, bought my first derailleur bike in 1972 (I think - it was a long time ago). I've always ridden steel frames. Starting about 20 years ago I began rebuilding, collecting if you want to call it that, vintage steel-frame bikes with period-correct vintage components. I already knew the technology and what was worth keeping, what wasn't. The differences from bike to bike are subtle but real.
I was interested in photography even earlier but back then I had little money and therefore no experience with these vintage lenses. Whereas I knew about the road bikes from Masi and Motobecane and Peugeot and Tommasini, etc., I have no idea what their lens equivalents would be until you kind folks tell me about them. Next you'll tell me to buy a 37.5mm f/3.87 and I'll have no idea whether you are feeding me truth or pulling my chain. It's a big adventure! ...Show more →
on the 3P's! 