presspass
filmshooter
I agree with narsuius - the 85 is too close to the 50. A nice three lens spread would be the 28, 50, and 105. If you wanted just two lenses, the 35 and 85 make a nice pair. When I was shooting film for work, my four lens set was 20, 35, 85, and 180 [or 200 with the Canon F1]. I have not shot the 85 1.8 - the original one - so I cannot comment on that lens. I have, and do shoot, the 105 2.5 and the 1.8. The 2.5 is pre-ai but not the sonnar formula. Whichever one you buy, you can probably sell it for close to what you paid for it.
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
Agree with the positive comments above on both 85 and 105 lenses. Both terrific.
Also to consider: 50-135 f/3.5 zoom. If f/3.5 is OK for you, this is an excellent lens with the flexibility of a zoom.
Nice Nikon article here. "The 50-135 got forgotten in the transition to AF."
https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0061/index.htm
Also to consider: 50-135 f/3.5 zoom. If f/3.5 is OK for you, this is an excellent lens with the flexibility of a zoom.
Nice Nikon article here. "The 50-135 got forgotten in the transition to AF."
https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0061/index.htm
AlexBG
Well-known
This is what I was thinking, don't want to have a 50mm with my Nikon, I have a 50mm on my Leica.
How do the 85mm lenses compare to each other?
There is- the 85/2 was brought out as a Portrait lens, under-corrected for spherical aberration. "Way back when" it was introduced, some felt that the planar formula 105/2.5 was "too sharp" for portraits compared with the older Sonnar formula lens. The 85/2 replaced the 85/1.8, it gives up 1/3rd F-Stop but is much smaller. If I had to keep one- it would be the 85/2.
I worked in a camera shop in the '70s, and this was a discussion with the Nikon rep.
One of my favorite shots with this lens- wide-open, on the Df.
Orthogonal
Established
I bought a 105 2.5 AIS on an impulse purchase a couple of years ago, it was cheap but in poor condition. To be honest while I like Nikkor glass I'm rarely blown away by it, the 105 is an exception. Essentially the only reason I keep my FE body is to use the 105, which I have found is more versatile than I was expecting and ergonomically excellent as a walkaround lens. Depending on the version it's probably only slightly longer than your 50mm 1.4 and possibly a little narrower. It's a special lens with a creamy, slightly dreamy feel without the compromise on aberrations and sharpness I normally associate with a vintage look.
While I haven't tried any Nikkor 85s I would recommend the 105 over the 85 just based on the fact 85 is so close to 50.
While I haven't tried any Nikkor 85s I would recommend the 105 over the 85 just based on the fact 85 is so close to 50.
I don't find the 85 to be close to the 50, at all.
For example at a distance of 2 m, the DOF is .19 m with the 50 but only .06 m with the 85, both at f/2.
The telephoto compression makes for a completely different look than the 50.
For example at a distance of 2 m, the DOF is .19 m with the 50 but only .06 m with the 85, both at f/2.
The telephoto compression makes for a completely different look than the 50.
AlexBG
Well-known
I'm not keeping the 50mm, just the 35mm.
keytarjunkie
no longer addicted
I think you should get the 85mm, especially if you give up 50mm. I don't like longer focal lengths either, and I am not that attracted to the 105mm focal length (though the early Sonnar model is a nice lens!).
The 85mm f/1.8 H is the one to get if you're mostly shooting B&W, prefer the older optical designs of the 60's, etc. Get the 85mm f/2 AI or AI-S if you need better coatings for color rendition and flare. User Richard Haw has some really nice reviews of all three. Personally I have the AI-S version but I'm not against picking up the Nikkor-H in the future.
The 85mm f/1.8 H is the one to get if you're mostly shooting B&W, prefer the older optical designs of the 60's, etc. Get the 85mm f/2 AI or AI-S if you need better coatings for color rendition and flare. User Richard Haw has some really nice reviews of all three. Personally I have the AI-S version but I'm not against picking up the Nikkor-H in the future.
Bingley
Veteran
I really like my sample of the Nikkor 85mm f2.0. It rounds out a Nikon SLR kit that includes the fantastic CV Ultron 40mm f2.0 SLII and the Nikkor 28mm f2.8. Been v satisfied with the optics of the 85/2.0, which I use primarily for landscape photography. Despite its legendary reputation, I have no need for the 105mm. YMMV.
madNbad
Well-known
Another vote for the 85 2.0 Ai-S. The non-Ai 85 1.8 is a great lens but it’s heavy and at more than fifty years old, will need service. Good luck with your search.
Orthogonal
Established
Sorry I misread. That makes things harder - personally I'm a fan of the appx double/divide philosophy of focal lengths, i.e. 35/85, 50/105, etc. which would lean me towards the 85.
Best of luck.
james.liam
Well-known
The Voigtlander 2/90 in AIS mount will give you a tad more reach and it’s an APO lens to boot. Perfect focal length if 105 is too long.
narsuitus
Well-known
For a lens to "just play around with," I highly recommend one of the following inexpensive Nikon lenses:
85mm f/1.8
100mm f/2.8 Series E
75-150mm f/3.5 Series E Zoom
hap
Well-known
Seems to me that the 105P 2.5 and the 135 3.5 would be decent lenses for me to use on my FA and F3HP. For not a lot of $$$
JohnBeeching
Well-known
Around a year ago, overcome by a moment of pure lust, I bought a Nikon F3 HP with a 50mm f1.4 lens. I have a love-hate relationship with the camera as it weighs a ton, makes an incredibly loud noise and everything works the wrong way round - but it is a sexy beast. I have kept it and used it on and off over the year. Recently, I decided to get some more lenses for it and, controlling myself from buying the same lenses that I already have for my M6, I got a 24mm f2.8 and a 135mm f2.8. I do enjoy both, especially the 24, though I have difficulty focusing that one; however, I still find myself using the 50mm most. Just my experience.
hap
Well-known
Perhaps you meant 90mm f3.5 APO AIS mount?
Starting to get into more expense than what I've seen in this thread.
AlexBG
Well-known
I usually shoot a 50, the only reason why I even have the Nikon is because I wanted to get an SLR that I've not owned while my M3 was getting serviced. As soon as it's back I'll probably sell the Nikon and lenses. I did enjoy the 28mm F2 on the camera but as it's way too wide have swapped it for the 35mm F2 which is still wider than what I am used to and like but will make a nice change. I know what you are saying about your camera, they are big and heavy and backwards, but the lens pricing is reasonable with good quality. The more I shoot the more character I want from lenses, if I want a super crisp shot I'll pull out my fuji and 16-55.
Nikon MF lenses - good choices not expensive.
Nikkor-NC 24/2.8 (multi-coated, the 24/2.8 is Nikon's first lens with a floating element)
Nikkor 28/2 Any (Mine is a beater, perfect glass, was $100, also a floating element design)
Nikkor-O or Nikkor-OC 35/2 , second and later versions, SN above 690101. First version- bad reputation.
Nikkor 50/2, 6 element version, NOT the Nikkor-S 50/2. (The latter is not as good, and prices are high due to rarity)
Micro-Nikkor-P 55/3.5
Nikkor 85/2
Nikkor 105/2.5, Small rear element= Sonnar, large = Planar.
Nikkor 135/3.5 Ai/Ais
Nikkor 200/4 Ai or Ais
With patience: found each for under $100, some down to $25.
My incomplete list of less expensive Nikon lenses to own...
It's dangerous to ask me for opinions on Nikon lenses. I have many. Many: ~100. Most under $100, many under $50. Lots of Ebay bargains coming out of Japan, the newer generation is not as interested in what was a national pastime.
Nikkor-NC 24/2.8 (multi-coated, the 24/2.8 is Nikon's first lens with a floating element)
Nikkor 28/2 Any (Mine is a beater, perfect glass, was $100, also a floating element design)
Nikkor-O or Nikkor-OC 35/2 , second and later versions, SN above 690101. First version- bad reputation.
Nikkor 50/2, 6 element version, NOT the Nikkor-S 50/2. (The latter is not as good, and prices are high due to rarity)
Micro-Nikkor-P 55/3.5
Nikkor 85/2
Nikkor 105/2.5, Small rear element= Sonnar, large = Planar.
Nikkor 135/3.5 Ai/Ais
Nikkor 200/4 Ai or Ais
With patience: found each for under $100, some down to $25.
My incomplete list of less expensive Nikon lenses to own...
It's dangerous to ask me for opinions on Nikon lenses. I have many. Many: ~100. Most under $100, many under $50. Lots of Ebay bargains coming out of Japan, the newer generation is not as interested in what was a national pastime.
Adding to that list:
20/3.5 AI/AIS
35/2.8 AI/AIS
50/1.8 AIS Pancake (the one with the 0.45 close focus)
24/2.8 AI/AIS (close range correction aka floating element)
some may skoff at these, but they are quite good, the build and feel is not up to the standards of AI/AIS but I use them on manual focus as well as AF bodies:
35/2 AFD
85/1.8 AFD
28-70 AFD
28-105 AFD
20/3.5 AI/AIS
35/2.8 AI/AIS
50/1.8 AIS Pancake (the one with the 0.45 close focus)
24/2.8 AI/AIS (close range correction aka floating element)
some may skoff at these, but they are quite good, the build and feel is not up to the standards of AI/AIS but I use them on manual focus as well as AF bodies:
35/2 AFD
85/1.8 AFD
28-70 AFD
28-105 AFD