GarageBoy
Well-known
Which lenses do you prefer buying/using and why?
I'll admit, as much as I prefer the "modern" CRC equipped and multi coated Nikkors, the early pre AI lenses look cool on the camera (though they weigh a LOT)
I'll admit, as much as I prefer the "modern" CRC equipped and multi coated Nikkors, the early pre AI lenses look cool on the camera (though they weigh a LOT)
kxl
Social Documentary
I hate to say it, but it depends on a few things:
1) What body you use. Non-AI lenses will mount on some later F bodies but may cause damage
2) lens formula changes form non-AI to AI(s)
3) coating changes
It really depends on a lens by lens comparison and the look you are trying to achieve. Just like everything else, there were some great non-AI lenses, but there were also some dogs. The same is true for the AI/AIS lenses.
1) What body you use. Non-AI lenses will mount on some later F bodies but may cause damage
2) lens formula changes form non-AI to AI(s)
3) coating changes
It really depends on a lens by lens comparison and the look you are trying to achieve. Just like everything else, there were some great non-AI lenses, but there were also some dogs. The same is true for the AI/AIS lenses.
Fraser
Well-known
I like the pre ai as they seem to be a bit cheaper and are easy to convert, recently bought a D700 just for my old nikkors, like using at the moment all pre ai scalloped type 20mm F3.5, 35mm F2, 85mm F1.8, 135mm F2.8 and 180mm F2.8.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I buy my Nikon lenses for their imaging qualities and for how they function.
Whether a lens is preAI, AI, AI-S, etc, means little to me because at this point in time, I'll use Nikon lenses either on a 1965 Nikon F plain prism (everything fits) or on an adapter tube with the Sony A7 (everything fits).
What they look like means little to me.
So ... my current collection of Nikon lenses includes:
Nikkor 18mm f/3.5 AI-S
Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-S
Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 Pre-AI + M-Tube
Nikkor-H 85mm f/1.8 Pre-AI
Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 AI-S
Nikon 105mm f/2.8 Micro AF-D
(The last two are redundant; I liked the AF-D a lot but found I didn't like the AF mount, so I picked up the AI-S model and intend to sell the AF-D. It does work very nicely on the Nikon F80 body, however, although I rarely use that body.
G
Whether a lens is preAI, AI, AI-S, etc, means little to me because at this point in time, I'll use Nikon lenses either on a 1965 Nikon F plain prism (everything fits) or on an adapter tube with the Sony A7 (everything fits).
What they look like means little to me.
So ... my current collection of Nikon lenses includes:
Nikkor 18mm f/3.5 AI-S
Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-S
Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 Pre-AI + M-Tube
Nikkor-H 85mm f/1.8 Pre-AI
Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 AI-S
Nikon 105mm f/2.8 Micro AF-D
(The last two are redundant; I liked the AF-D a lot but found I didn't like the AF mount, so I picked up the AI-S model and intend to sell the AF-D. It does work very nicely on the Nikon F80 body, however, although I rarely use that body.
G
DominikDUK
Well-known
I prefer pre-ai lenses for colour and B/W the color palette is a bit more muted and the lenses were designed with B/W on the designers mind.
Pre-ai lenses are also build much stronger than some of the more modern offerings this makes them heavy but also difficult to kill. Another reason for prefering pre-ai lenses is that they often have less lens elements and for some reason I prefer simplier designs. My fav. Nikon is the Nikon F.
Current lenses I use though I also have some modern lenses which I rarely use
3.5/28 Nikkor H-Auto
2/50 Nikkor H-Auto
1.4/50 Nikkor-S
3.5/55 Micro-Nikkor
2.5/105 Nikkor P-Auto (old sonnar Version)
2.8/135 Nikkor-Q (Tessar)
4/200 Nikkor-Q Auto (Tessar)
In general I prefer the look of single coated to multicoated lenses even in LF
Pre-ai lenses are also build much stronger than some of the more modern offerings this makes them heavy but also difficult to kill. Another reason for prefering pre-ai lenses is that they often have less lens elements and for some reason I prefer simplier designs. My fav. Nikon is the Nikon F.
Current lenses I use though I also have some modern lenses which I rarely use
3.5/28 Nikkor H-Auto
2/50 Nikkor H-Auto
1.4/50 Nikkor-S
3.5/55 Micro-Nikkor
2.5/105 Nikkor P-Auto (old sonnar Version)
2.8/135 Nikkor-Q (Tessar)
4/200 Nikkor-Q Auto (Tessar)
In general I prefer the look of single coated to multicoated lenses even in LF
dasuess
Nikon Freak
See my signature... All non-AIs converted by John White.
mdarnton
Well-known
I like ai lenses because they're recent enough to often be cleaner and less worn, but I don't need anything ai-s offers, which usually comes at a premium price.
x-ray
Veteran
Pre AI lenses were not designed with B&W in mind any more than they were designed with a bias for color. I shot Nikon professionally in the late 70's onward and we were not in the dark ages back then and had a large selection of color film as well as B&W. Color wasn't new by any means. Lens designers were acutely aware of the demands color film put on lens design.
No pre AI were not built any better than the AI or AIs versions. I've shot most of the Nikon glass from the first generation slr glass to present G glass and own a large array of those lenses. Pre AI, AI and AIs are all built like tanks. When plastic started creeping into the AF glass then construction MIGHT have suffered a little but that's questionable. The AI, AIS and non AI manual focus glass were as close to indestructible as you can get.
Early lenses didn't necessarily have fewer elements. It all depended on the lens and what generation. Formulas did vary for sure like the 24mm f2.8. there were 3 different formulas as I understand. I currently have the first generation but have owned the 3rd also. The 105 f2.5 went through two formula changes and I have both. The 180 f2.8 were in two formulas and I've owned the late one. Coatings changes as well when they went to multi coating.
Designes changes within a series some times so they can be hard to determine which is which.
Don't worry about how they look on your camera. Just buy a good condition lens and make photos. That's what they were designed for not something to look cool with.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
DominikDUK
Well-known
Late 70's is not pre-ai at all the slower tele lenses of the Nikon pre-ai were Tessar designs long lens as opposed to tele designs the faster 2.8 Q was a tele design. So fewer lens elements the early 2.5/105 was a Sonnar the newer a double gauss the Sonnar is a simplier design (triplet). At the time those lenses were designed by Nikon in the late 40's and 50's colour photography was not that dominant press photography was still done in B/W so yes they did have a bias towards B/W in terms of micro and macro contrast but not in relation to color transmission and focussing. All in all I feel that the older lens simply had more character because they did not correct all possible faults like today's design try to do.
maryland_fotos
Well-known
My 1960 beat up 10.5cm f2.5 pre-AI lens still looks cool mounted on the D800. Moreover, the abuse it took in the decades until I got it had no effect in the images it produces.
LoveThatSun2 by maryland_photos, on Flickr
LoveThatSun2 by maryland_photos, on Flickr
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
Nikon f3hp & f4 Ai-s lenses though I do have one Ai only because I paid $10 for it.
L. M. Tu
Established
There is one advantage that pre-AI and AI lenses have over AIS ones: their focusing action, with a considerably longer throw as well as firmer dampening. This may be important when you need to focus very precisely; I would choose the AI 105mm F4 Micro over the AIS version for that reason. This is also useful when you don't need to focus at all 
. I have two generations of the 24mm F2.8 (CRC), AI'ed and AIS, and I love them both. When I'm out and walking around, I set the lens to the hyperfocal distance. The firmer action on the older lens gives me more confidence that I will not move the focusing ring by accident. Lastly, in terms of tactile sensations, the focusing feel on such old gems as the AI 35mm F1.4 and 105mm F2.5 is so butter smooth, aaahh...And the feel of non-AI lenses is just as good.
. I have two generations of the 24mm F2.8 (CRC), AI'ed and AIS, and I love them both. When I'm out and walking around, I set the lens to the hyperfocal distance. The firmer action on the older lens gives me more confidence that I will not move the focusing ring by accident. Lastly, in terms of tactile sensations, the focusing feel on such old gems as the AI 35mm F1.4 and 105mm F2.5 is so butter smooth, aaahh...And the feel of non-AI lenses is just as good.GarageBoy
Well-known
The reason I brought this topic up is that I'm planning on picking up a "nicer" 105 2.5 AIS to replace my heavy beater (I thought was pristine til I hit it with a flashlight, and internal dust and coating marks were discovered, and the OCD in me can't handle that) 105 2.5 PC Factory AI conversion. The Pre AI's nice metal grip feels nice and everything, but it's a brick
willie_901
Veteran
Some of the early pre-AIs have minimal coating technology. They can draw with a nice glow. I own a pre- 1977 Nippon Kogaku NIKKOR-S Auto 50mm f/1.4 lens. Optically it underperforms the AIS version, but the look is unique because of the coating difference. It might perform better if I sent it out for a CLA.
Buying pre AI lenses for almost nothing and having them AI'd, cleaned and adjusted is attractive.
I had a 105/2.5 AI and it was excellent. Some people prefer the other version though. I also owned the 20/2.8 and 24/2.8 AIS lenses. I did not like ether of them. The 24/2.8 will ghost when other lenses with that field of view do not. I did not like the color rendition of the 24 mm lens' coating. The 20 mm lens I owned was mediocre in every way. The 28/2.8 AIS has a stellar reputation. I owned a late 28/2.8 AI and it was the most used lens on my D200. It performed was a nice lens.
Buying pre AI lenses for almost nothing and having them AI'd, cleaned and adjusted is attractive.
I had a 105/2.5 AI and it was excellent. Some people prefer the other version though. I also owned the 20/2.8 and 24/2.8 AIS lenses. I did not like ether of them. The 24/2.8 will ghost when other lenses with that field of view do not. I did not like the color rendition of the 24 mm lens' coating. The 20 mm lens I owned was mediocre in every way. The 28/2.8 AIS has a stellar reputation. I owned a late 28/2.8 AI and it was the most used lens on my D200. It performed was a nice lens.
dasuess
Nikon Freak
Go here for most, if not all, the info you'll need on Nikkor lenses:
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz
For a 105/f2.5 Nikkor, you might like the "P" that was made up to early 1971 - it's lighter than any later version including the Ai-S (370g vs 435g). This is the one that I have, recently purchased used and cut to AI.
Fraser
Well-known
I'm sure most of the old nikkors won't look that great if you shine a torch through them they are 50ish years old
Better to leave well alone takes a quite a lot of marks/dust/fungus to make any real world difference, you can never have too many lenses
good luck and enjoy the new lens.Highway 61
Revisited
+1There is one advantage that pre-AI and AI lenses have over AIS ones: their focusing action, with a considerably longer throw as well as firmer dampening. This may be important when you need to focus very precisely; I would choose the AI 105mm F4 Micro over the AIS version for that reason. This is also useful when you don't need to focus at all
But for some optical design improvement brought up by the Ai-S version, I will always favor the Ai over the Ai-S because of a better build quality. The Ai have all-metal innards with even bronze components inside some models while the Ai-S have polycarbonate innards focusing tubes in which some white metal linear sliders take place, and light alloy focusing helicals with some average damping.
As a result I've often seen focusing wobble and decentering of the whole optical unit in some of my new Ai-S lenses while this doesn't appear on their Ai counterparts until the damping grease has fully dried up...
Last year in Tuscany I used my Ai-S 28/2.8 and on each shot, I could feel the optical unit move inside the lens barrel when the D700 shutter was fired. As a result I got some motion blur on some landscapes shots while focusing at infinity... I fixed the lens once back home ; this required a total teardown and cleaning of the double focusing helix, new damping grease, and adjustment of the focusing tube sliders. Yet - I have a 1977 28/2.8 Ai which offers a fabulous damping feeling, with no need to service it whatsoever, and its optical results have nothing to envy to the Ai-S version (of course it's not CRC corrected and can't focus as close). I recently picked up a 28/2 and it's an Ai ; I disdained the Ai-S version (identical optically) and did it well. Man, what a lens.
Both my 35/2 Ai-S and 105/2.5 Ai-S suffer from the same problem as the 28/2.8 Ai-S yet I haven't tackled them. Instead I now use a Nikkor-O 35/2 and a K 85/1.8 which was Ai factory converted. Both feel fabulous, focusing damping wise. I once bought a 20/2.8 Ai-S which was even worse in that respect (I replaced it with a 20/3.5 Ai which is a better lens with less distorsion anyway).
Of course, some of the best MF Nikkors exist in Ai-S version only (55/2.8 Micro, 180/2.8 ED...), so you don't have the possibility to pick the Ai version of that lens, because it doesn't exist.
besk
Well-known
My used 55/2.8 AIS micro's focal helical is loose - just touch the focus ring and the focus changes. Since I am only using it on a Sony Nex3n for close ups in table top photography I can correct for it if necessary.
This is the only Nikon lens I have ever had this problem with.
This is the only Nikon lens I have ever had this problem with.
Highway 61
Revisited
I have seen wobble and play in many MF lenses focusing rings, including some Leica ones...