On my shopping watch list are the following Nikon MF lenses;
28mm 2.8 w/ CRC (are there versions of this lens that are better then others?)
105 f/2.5 AIS
135 f/2.8 AIS
200 f/4 AIS
I'm looking at the following AF-D lenses
60 f/2.8 Micro
105/135 f/2 DC
180 f2.8
I currently have the following;
50 f/1.8d
85 f/1.4d
105 f2.8d
200 f/4 AF-D Micro
300 f/4 AF-S
400 f2.8 AF-S
Zooms
24-70 f2.8
70-200 f2.8 VR1
My goal would be to have most of my bases covered. My interests are typically my kids sports, vintage industrial, nature/wildlife. I really liked the older AIS lenses for vintage industrial.
jonshonda wrote:
On my shopping watch list are the following Nikon MF lenses;
28mm 2.8 w/ CRC (are there versions of this lens that are better then others?)
105 f/2.5 AIS
135 f/2.8 AIS
200 f/4 AIS
I'm looking at the following AF-D lenses
60 f/2.8 Micro
105/135 f/2 DC
180 f2.8
I've never owned the 28/2.8 or /2, but looked into them when I was considering replacing my 24/2.8 non-AI. In the end, I chose the 24/2 AiS, but my research indicated the 28/2.8 with its close-focus of 0.2m is a great lens, and the 28/2 might be even better in some cases (less vignetting and CA). One thing to watch out for is that the CRC mechanism of these lenses is quite delicate, and if the lens was ever subject to a shock can be knocked out of adjustment and the lens will look fine but perform poorly: Some comparison testing of more than one copy might be a good idea.
The 105/2.5 AiS is my favourite classic Nikkor: Just get one!
I own a 105/2 DC, and it's amazing, but pretty pricey. I chose it over the 135/2 DC as I prefer 105mm for portraits, and the 135mm version seems to go for more money for some reason.
The 180/2.8D is easily found for bargain prices these days, since everyone seems to prefer an 80~200/2.8 zoom over a prime 180mm. If you're OK with the early non-D version in shiny-plastic, you can _really_ save some money for exactly the same optics.
Great detail, especially from that distance Jim. Good steady hands!
---------------------------------------------
AlexCruise wrote:
I got the 28/2 AIS | 50/1.2 AIS | 85/1.4 AIS | 105/2.5 AI ... id probably exercise all 4lenses .... Midwest a bit boring!
I like to say very different opportunities :-)
---------------------------------------------
jonshonda wrote:
On my shopping watch list are the following Nikon MF lenses;
28mm 2.8 w/ CRC (are there versions of this lens that are better then others?)
105 f/2.5 AIS
135 f/2.8 AIS
200 f/4 AIS
I'm looking at the following AF-D lenses
60 f/2.8 Micro
105/135 f/2 DC
180 f2.8
I currently have the following;
50 f/1.8d
85 f/1.4d
105 f2.8d
200 f/f Micro
300 f/4 AF-S
400 f2.8 AF-S
Zooms
24-70 f2.8
70-200 f2.8 VR1
My goal would be to have most of my bases covered. My interests are typically my kids sports, vintage industrial, nature/wildlife. I really liked the older AIS lenses for vintage industrial.
You did not identify whether it was the 200 f4 MF micro or just the regular tele. Here's a couple from the "non-micro" 200 f4. Really nice and compact lens, with built in sliding hood. Wish that would make a comeback!
jonshonda wrote:
On my shopping watch list are the following Nikon MF lenses;
28mm 2.8 w/ CRC (are there versions of this lens that are better then others?)
105 f/2.5 AIS
135 f/2.8 AIS
200 f/4 AIS
I'm looking at the following AF-D lenses
60 f/2.8 Micro
105/135 f/2 DC
180 f2.8
I currently have the following;
50 f/1.8d
85 f/1.4d
105 f2.8d
200 f/f Micro
300 f/4 AF-S
400 f2.8 AF-S
Zooms
24-70 f2.8
70-200 f2.8 VR1
My goal would be to have most of my bases covered. My interests are typically my kids sports, vintage industrial, nature/wildlife. I really liked the older AIS lenses for vintage industrial.
Jon (?)
The 105/2.5 and 135/2.8 are close enough in FL that I wouldn't bother with the 135.
I have both lenses and usually reach for the 105/2.5 since it is so good.
pbraymond wrote:
Great detail, especially from that distance Jim. Good steady hands!
Thank you!
... pbraymond wrote:
You did not identify whether it was the 200 f4 MF micro or just the regular tele. Here's a couple from the "non-micro" 200 f4. Really nice and compact lens, with built in sliding hood. Wish that would make a comeback!
Nice, subtle pics (as yours always are). My version of the 200mm f/4 is labeled Q, produced from 1971 to 1973. I probably bought mine in 1973. It is one of my favorite lenses. A year or so later they upgraded it, made it shorter and lighter, changed the focus ring. I imagine it produces similar images.
grantgoodes wrote:
I've never owned the 28/2.8 or /2, but looked into them when I was considering replacing my 24/2.8 non-AI. In the end, I chose the 24/2 AiS, but my research indicated the 28/2.8 with its close-focus of 0.2m is a great lens, and the 28/2 might be even better in some cases (less vignetting and CA). One thing to watch out for is that the CRC mechanism of these lenses is quite delicate, and if the lens was ever subject to a shock can be knocked out of adjustment and the lens will look fine but perform poorly: Some comparison testing of more than one copy might be a good idea.
The 105/2.5 AiS is my favourite classic Nikkor: Just get one!
I own a 105/2 DC, and it's amazing, but pretty pricey. I chose it over the 135/2 DC as I prefer 105mm for portraits, and the 135mm version seems to go for more money for some reason.
The 180/2.8D is easily found for bargain prices these days, since everyone seems to prefer an 80~200/2.8 zoom over a prime 180mm. If you're OK with the early non-D version in shiny-plastic, you can _really_ save some money for exactly the same optics....Show more →
Ok I will also put the 28/2 on my list.
Seems like while the 105/135DC are amazing, the additional price over the 2.5 might not hold water for my purposes. I honestly don't like photographing people, just stuff. haha
I don't like the shiny version of the 180 2.8, and am a sucker for the wrinkle finish of that era.
---------------------------------------------
pbraymond wrote:
You did not identify whether it was the 200 f4 MF micro or just the regular tele. Here's a couple from the "non-micro" 200 f4. Really nice and compact lens, with built in sliding hood. Wish that would make a comeback!
I've got the big 200mm f/4 AF-D Micro. It's a tank, and focuses just about as quickly as I could by hand.
---------------------------------------------
DeltaSigma wrote:
Jon (?)
The 105/2.5 and 135/2.8 are close enough in FL that I wouldn't bother with the 135.
I have both lenses and usually reach for the 105/2.5 since it is so good.
Thanks Colin, I lust for the DC versions mostly because of their legacy, but agree that the 105 2.5 will likely be the wise choice at this point in my life.
---------------------------------------------
saph wrote:
105 2.5 Nikkor any version is a fantastic lens, that's a must!!!
The mention of 200 f4 Q made me reach back into my albums. This is from late 2019.
F5, 200 f/4 Q and Ektachrome E100.
I'm getting the hint that the 2.5 needs to be on the list. haha
Yesterday was a day of misty rain from the coastal storm. (Today will be rainy too.) We did a long walk anyway. I carried the Z5ii and somehow managed to keep it dry. The 105m from the previous day wasn't quite enough for the birds we saw so I took the 1.4 x 300mm f/4.5 AIS. The rain made everything distant look gray and hazy. HazyColor
by James Muller, on Flickr
Got lots of pics good enough for us to identify the birds we saw. Also got these, rather exotic for us. Worth carrying all that glass.
Greater Yellowlegs, a species of sandpiper. Most certainly migrating, stopped for a quick bite on the way. GreaterYellowlegs
by James Muller, on Flickr
jonshonda wrote:
I'm getting the hint that the 2.5 needs to be on the list. haha
The 105mm f/2.5 is one of two lenses that members here forced me to buy under threat of bodily harm. The other is the 55mm f/3.5 Micro. I love both of them!
jimmuller wrote:
The 105mm f/2.5 is one of two lenses that members here forced me to buy under threat of bodily harm. The other is the 55mm f/3.5 Micro. I love both of them!
jimmuller wrote:
The 105mm f/2.5 is one of two lenses that members here forced me to buy under threat of bodily harm. The other is the 55mm f/3.5 Micro. I love both of them!
Yeah, the 105/2.5 is the only Nikkor I've ever sold and then re-purchased. Not to mention I now have 3 copies: An early AI'ed Sonnar, an early AiS with NIC coatings, and a late AiS with SIC coatings. So, yes, a mandatory lens for any MF Nikon shooter.
For Macro, I prefer longer focal lengths, so the 55mm Micro never attracted my attention.
Three more lenses that this list seems to be getting kick-backs on are the Nikkor-S 58/1.4 plus the series E 100/2.8 and 75~150/3.5. The 100/2.8 is "cheap-as-chips" as my Irish wife likes to say, but I still prefer the 105/2.5. I've had the 75~150/3.5 since it was new and it is a VERY nice travel lens, but many copies have zoom-creep (actually, it's usually more like no zoom resistance at all). I'm still resisting the list-pressure to pick up the 58/1.4S, but we'll see how long that lasts (no death threats yet!)
105mm f/2.5 P-C
