Nikon 105 f/2.5 vs 85 f/2

R

rsolti

Established
Local time
3:44 AM
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
105
I recently purchased a Nikon 105 f/2.5 L39 and put it on my M9....I was floored with the results. The lens is unbelievabley sharp starting wide open at closer distances. The rendering is absolutely beautiful. I wanted a portrait lens at this length and this one fits the bill perfectly. Very long focus throw but that makes for accurate focusing, definitely not a lens for fast focusing ;). With all the good being said....I find the infinity performance kind of weak, even stopped down. Its not bad, I'm just not wowed like I am at minium - mid distance. I am looking for a long landscape lens and am wondering how the Nikon 85 f/2 performs. Is it similar in performance to the 105 f/2.5 or will it be sharper on the long end when stopped down vs the 105 f/2.5? Should I just stick with an M mount Leica? Anyone?

I don't want a 'this thread is useless without pics', so here are a few from yesterday :D

L1000027-XL.jpg


L1000029-XL.jpg


L1000030-Edit-XL.jpg


L1000038-Edit-XL.jpg
 
what a beauty!! can you post a pic at infinity?..... since i haven't noted that issue i would like to see what you have found.

thanks.
 
The 105/2.5 & 85/2 are both Sonnar designs &, IIRC, both are optimized for portrait work wide-open. That said, I haven't found either to be particularly weak @ infinity when stopped down, but I'm not a landscape shooter. I do like the little Canon 100/3.5 (both the black & chrome & all black versions), but again haven't used them for landscape. The only Leitz telephoto I have is the old 90/4 collapsible Elmar, but I don't use it enough to give you an informed opinion as to how it performs in comparison to the Nikkors (you also can't collapse the Elmar on the M9).

rsolti said:
I recently purchased a Nikon 105 f/2.5 L39 and put it on my M9....I was floored with the results. The lens is unbelievabley sharp starting wide open at closer distances. The rendering is absolutely beautiful. I wanted a portrait lens at this length and this one fits the bill perfectly. Very long focus throw but that makes for accurate focusing, definitely not a lens for fast focusing ;). With all the good being said....I find the infinity performance kind of weak, even stopped down. Its not bad, I'm just not wowed like I am at minium - mid distance. I am looking for a long landscape lens and am wondering how the Nikon 85 f/2 performs. Is it similar in performance to the 105 f/2.5 or will it be sharper on the long end when stopped down vs the 105 f/2.5? Should I just stick with an M mount Leica? Anyone?
Click to expand...
 
For landscapes I would like the VC 75mm f/2.5 or if I had the $$ the Leica Summarit 75mm f/2.5 Both repoortedly very sharp.
 
I had both and kept the 85. Much smaller, half stop faster, significantly closer min. focus. They are both near identical closed down, the 85 is a bit rougher in bokeh wide open and close.

You can pretty much use any M/LTM mount lens for landscapes if you stop down a bit. Even my 45 year old Elmarit is a stunning performer, and so are the LTM Nikkors from the 50s. Maybe your lens needs adjustment .....

I've used many different Leica-mount teles. Today, my lens of choice for landscapes is the 90/4 Rokkor: very small (easy to handle also on a small tripod), flare resistant, and really amazing performance across the field. Always suprised that it doesn't cost more .... And it even says "made by Leitz" on the beauty ring .... :)

Roland.
 
Last edited:
Thanks guys! Raymond, I will post tonight when I get home. It is very soft all over. I really don't mind as I like the lens for portraits and that is where i plan on using it...just wondering if the Nikon 85 will give me similar performance at infinity. I want a tele landscape lens that gives great detail. I had the 90 Elmarit-M and to be honest didn't like the 8 blades for portrait work...very harsh bokeh when shooting up close. Yes, it is razor sharp and would probably be a good candidate for landscape work. I have also seen where the Summarit would be a good option, but Roland you bring up something new with the 90 f/4 Rokkor. I will have to check that one out. I have the funds to spend on a Elmarit-M/Summarit...but why spend if I don't need to? :)
 
I have both the Nikon 105 f/2.5 and Rokkor f/ 4.0. The Rokkor and the Nikon are both great portrait lenses. I've never shot anything other than portraits with the Nikon so I never experience any softness at infinity, but I do know how marvelous it is for portraits.

The Rokkor is pretty cheap, but its so small and light which is great for out taking it out in the field, and I have never seen it be soft in any setting. I never bring the Nikon out really because its mint, rare, big, and heavy. The rokkor lives in my bag. Not to mention its no slouch in the portrait department either.
 
Just in case the OP doesn't know it, there is a Lieca branded version of that 90/4 called the 90mm Elmar-C. Both it and the Rokkor were made for the Leica CL camera which was a joint-project with Minolta. After Leica abandoned the CL Minolta issued a newer version called the CLE. There are Rokkor lenses NOT made be Leitz (the Rokkor 28mm and the Rokkor 40mm, and perhaps the later generation 90s) but all the original 90s were made by Leitz. Sorry - boring history insert.
 
The M-Rokkor and Elmar perform identically to my eyes (there might be some coating differences, since the Rokkor is newer). I had both but kept the Rokkor since it is much easier to filter (40.5mm vs. Series 5.5).

Really, you cann't go wrong with trying one. Should cost you around US 300 in good shape.

Roland.
 
I've got 3 Canon LTM 85s now, 1.9 1.8 and 1.5. All these are wicked sharp stopped down at infinity. The 1.9s are pretty reasonable at around 200USD.

Here is the 85/1.5
5968654591_39d9b0f36b_b.jpg


The Canon LTM 100/2 as mentioned above, is also stellar:
5941844069_f58247b7e1_b.jpg


My copy of the 100/3.5 is unbelievable at about 20ft, but not as great at infinity.
 
Last edited:
I have had both Nikkor lenses (85 and 105), and I kept the 105 because I already had a Canon 85/1.9, which was also sold. Now I also have a Canon 85/1.5 and a Summilux 75/1.4. The Canon 85/1.9 was heavy but sharp and very well built.
 
Thanks for the insight and comments all. It is a Voigtlander 28/90 LTM adapter and it has worked fine with other lenses. I think I may just be expecting too much. It is razor sharp on the wide end and it leaves me wanting more at infinity. uhoh7 those Canon shots look great!
 
As a satisfied owner of the following:
1965 90mm/2.8 Elmarit
2003 90mm/2.8 Elmarit-M
1950someting 8.5cm/2.0 Nikkor
...I can say that they all do everything I need and probably more that my meager skills don't take advantage of.
Do not overlook the Konica 90mm/2.8 M-Hexanon either. I don't own that lens. I was shopping for one when the 90mm Elmarit-M dropped in my lap. I do own 28mm & 35mm Konica rangefinder lenses and I am very pleased with them. The 90mm M-Hexanon is reportedly in the same league with it's wider siblings.
Obviously there are a lot of very good 85-90-100 lenses out there.
 
The Nikkor 105f2.5 very much cemented Nikon's reputation as a premium lens maker. First for the Rf cameras and later for for SLR's. Even with today's new "improved" short tele's it is outstanding. In the RF mount it is big and heavy - but that's the price you pay for "perfection". There are few portrait lenses that comes close - and it can be used as an all-round short tele lens too.
The 85f2 - later version in black is lighter - but somehow it doesn't have the same look to it. I tend to use the 85f3.5 Apo-Lanthar instead for Nikon Rf's (lighter and very sharp across all apertures) - same formula as the 90f3.5 Apo-Lanthar in LTM.
I have a Rf mount 105f2.5 (as well as a couple in SLR mount) and though it involves a conscious decision put it on a camera (due to the weight/bulk) - it always amazes me how good a lens it is - even after close to 50 years. Much nicer rendition than the Summicron 90f2 v2 and later. It is also built like the proverbial brick outhouse! No Nikon Rf kit should be without a 105f2.5 - or a Nikon F kit. One of the true legends in optics.
 
I agree with Tom.
I have a 105 for the RF cameras and one for the Nikon SLR cameras.
 
I like and have both the 10.5/2.5 and 8.5/2. In S-mount, Contax Mount, Leica mount, and F-Mount. Of course the F-Mount 85/2 is a different optical formula.

Great pictures of Daughters in this thread!

And the scenic pictures are very nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom