10,5 mm Nikon rangefinder lens

[raid]

Recently, my travel combo has been 28/3.5; 35/1.8; 50/1.4; 105/2.5. The 35 is mainly for low-light work, when the 28 is just too slow. I like the CV 25/4 very much, but I'm not fond of separate finders.

My upcoming trip may result in me taking a similar set of lenses. I may replace the 28/3.5 with a 28/2.8 or a 25/4.

 

[jonmanjiro]

The Nikkor -PC is a Gauss design that was started after 1972, whereas the P version was a Sonnar design.

Hi Raid, I'm pretty sure the red C of the P-C on the lens (as you can see in the photo below) indicates that its coated. No doubt there is some kind of mark that distinguishes the Sonnar design 105/2.5 from the Gauss design 105/2.5 though. Anyone?

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The Gauss design was for the SLR version only, and started with the 105mm F2.5 P.C. lens introduced ~1973 or so. Nikon quit using the "C" suffix at the end of the RF era when most lenses were assumed to be coated. They re-introduced the suffix when they started multi-coating all of the elements of a lens. The change-over from the Sonnar formula 105 to Gauss coincided with the practice of Multicoating. I'm not sure if there were any single-coated Gauss lenses or Multi-coated Sonnar lenses.

 

[splitimageview]

Here are two variations of 105/2.5, the left one is S mount, the right one is a Leica thread mount lens (with an M mount adapter) that I got from ferider.

The serial number of the LTM lens is later than that of the S mount, but the lettering on the front of the S mount lens looks different/later vintage.

The S mount has a black ring/semi-shade, and the hood says simply 'Japan.' The LTM hood says 10.5cm f/2.5 and has the NK logo.

 

[furcafe]

I'll go against the tide a little, here. Ive always found the 10.5cm/2.5 Nikkor-P to be a fine performer & all, but it's a little too slow to be my favorite short telephoto. It's already big & heavy enough that I wonder whether it would really have been much bigger if Nikon had decided to go for f/2.

 

[splitimageview]

I find the heft of the 10.5cm makes it well-balanced, and relatively easy to hand-hold without motion. Not sure how much bigger it would have been to reach f/2.0; besides, that's what the 8.5cm/2.0 is for. 🙂

 

[raid]

I find the heft of the 10.5cm makes it well-balanced, and relatively easy to hand-hold without motion. Not sure how much bigger it would have been to reach f/2.0; besides, that's what the 8.5cm/2.0 is for. 🙂

I agree with you;the 85mm/2 is not to large or heavy but the 105mm/2.5 is large enough. This makes me suspect that the 105/2 for RFF would be even larger and heavier. The SLR 105/2 is large and heavy, isn't it.

 

[raid]

Actually, the 105/2 AF lens. The 105/1.8 was the manual focus lens:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/images1/105mm-f18/DSC_9189-950.jpg




"The 105mm f/1.8 has a 9-bladed diaphragm, has a built-in telescoping hood, and takes 62mm filters.

It has five elements in five groups.

Close focus is 3 feet or 1m.

It is 3.1" (78mm) around by 3.5" (88mm) long and weighs 20 oz (580g)."


The weight is 580g,and this is quite a lot. If a RF version of this lens wieghs this much, it would be too heavy for a RF lens.

 

[splitimageview]

This page indicates 525g. I doubt the 105/1.8 has any brass content like the 1950s lenses. Also, note the weight reduction progression in the 135/3.5.

 

[VinceC]

The Canon SLR 100/2 takes a 58mm filter and weighs 16 ounces/460g -- that's with a modern lens. If you used the brass and chrome of 1950s Nikkor construction quality, it would have jumped a lot higher. The RF Nikkor 105/2.5 weighs about 500g.

 

[raid]

The Canon SLR 100/2 takes a 58mm filter and weighs 16 ounces/460g -- that's with a modern lens. If you used the brass and chrome of 1950s Nikkor construction quality, it would have jumped a lot higher. The RF Nikkor 105/2.5 weighs about 500g.

Vince,

Usually, AF lenses are lighter than their manual focus counterparts. Maybe that's why the 105/2 has as weight 500 grams.

 

[NIKON KIU]

Raid,
the 105 f2.5 in RF mount weighs 525 grams
the 105 f2.5 in SLR mount weighs 435 grams
the 105 f1.8 Ais weighs 580 grams
I have the 105 f2.0 Defocus control lens, it's the heaviest @ 640 grams

Kiu

 

[aoresteen]

I have the 105 f/2.5 in Contax mount that I use with my IIa. Getting the Nikon BL finder was a pain and cost me $300 when I found one. Great lens.

I also have the black 85mm f/2 in Nikon mount that I use with my SP. Great lens.

I use them both. The 85 is easier to use with the SP viewfinder

 

[noimmunity]

HU: pristine looking LTM version

HU: pristine looking LTM version

there is a very clean looking 105 in LTM on ebay right now, ending in 1 hour, price is climbing... kind of dramatic (no connection to seller...)

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...item=180228877465&_trksid=p3984.cWAT.m240.lVI