Short Nikon Tele

R

rxmd

May contain traces of nut
Local time
6:32 AM
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
5,814
Hi guys,

currently on the F2AS I'm using a Helios-40 (85/f1.5 in M39 mount). For portraits I'm very happy, but for anything approaching infinity I have to stop down a lot because of the lens register, which has made me lose a couple of shots I could have had. So I'm tentatively looking for a short tele in the 85-105mm range. The 85/f1.4 and 105/f1.8 are out for budget reasons, I'm afraid, as much as I'd like one.

So there's the various 85s (85/f1.8, 85/f2) and 105/f2.5s. What are the main versions of these, and how do they compare? Is it worth looking for specific versions of these lenses at all? Personally I think I'm more a 85 than a 105 "person", but then I never tried a 105, only a 135/f2.5 which felt distinctly too long, so maybe I could be convinced otherwise.

Philipp
 
try Nikon 100mm f/2.8 Series E, can be found cheap at the auction site. Series E lenses were the entry level Nikkor lenses.. but still good lenses.
 
Last edited:
The Nikon short teles that I own are the 85/1.4, the 105/2 DC, the 105/2.5 and the 135/2.8. They each do something the others don't. As Steve wrote above, the 105/2.5 is a legendary formulation. In fact, I'd go so far as to say if you can only have one portrait length Nikkor, this would be the one to go with. I got mine 20 years ago from a San Francisco pawn shop for about $80 and it is one of last lenses I'd part with. The 105/2 DC is an expensive specialty portrait lens and my favorite portraits in the last year come from it. You can use its selective defocus-control to choose whether the foreground or background is more out of focus and to dial in a certain amount of spherical aberration to in focus areas (sort of like an soft-focus filter effect). With the DC control set at neutral it is raaaa--aazor sharp and has a very pleasing color rendition. The 85/1.4 is another bokeh-king -- razor thin DOF, but large and a little heavy. I have never had strong feelings about the 85/2 one way or the other. Its main virtues seem to be its compact size and its lower cost. If you are looking for a first Nikkor portrait lens, get the 105/2.5 and a good hood.

Ben Marks
 
Hi Philipp,

I use the Helios 40-2 (modified for infinity focus) together with the 105/2.5. If you want the Sonnar version of the 105, look for one with chrome focus ring. They are all good though.

Best,

Roland.
 
Don't forget to check out the Samyang 85/1.4 as well. Very good value for money, and the money involved is not much more than for a 85/2 or 105/2.5 in a nice condition.
 
OK guys, I'll be on the lookout for a 105/2.5. I'm still not sure that it's my focal length but for sub-$100 one can always give it a try. Better than selling my M5 for a 85/f1.4 anyway ;)
 
I have both an 85mm 1.8 k series last version and a 105mm 2.5 AI which I use on F2S F2A AND F2AS. The 105 is sharper wide open but they are both fantastic lenses. Remember that if you don't get an AI converted 85 then with the F2AS you will have to use stop down metering by pushing the index lever into the head. These rings are like golddust for the 85's. I prefer the 105 AI over the AIS because it has the longer focus throw and makes accurate focus quite a bit easier. Good luck finding them.
 
The 105/2.5 (all variants) is a brilliant performer, one of the finest lenses made. It offers a greater working distance and narrower field for the head shots that are not so easy with 85mm.
 
When I think 105/2.5, I always think of this photo (Steve McCurry):

Sharbat_Gula_on_National_Geographic_cover.jpg


I believe he used the classic Sonnar version.
 
ferider said:
When I think 105/2.5, I always think of this photo (Steve McCurry):

Sharbat_Gula_on_National_Geographic_cover.jpg


I believe he used the classic Sonnar version.
Click to expand...

That's a photo of Steve McCurry? Must have been taken a long time ago, because he looks much different now. When I met him about four years ago, he was practically bald and not nearly as attractive.
 
ferider said:
When I think 105/2.5, I always think of this photo (Steve McCurry):

Sharbat_Gula_on_National_Geographic_cover.jpg


I believe he used the classic Sonnar version.
Click to expand...

FM, 105/2.5 and Kodachrome in 1984... :D He then went back in 2002 to photograph Sharbat Gula (the "Afghan Girl")--by now an adult--and used an N90 and 85/1.4.

I could be wrong, but I do not think he used a Sonnar (latest production date 1971) for the 1984 image. I think he used the AI (1977) or AIS (1981) version. I believe the Sonnar version carried a 105/2.5 P Auto NKJ designation, which was a non-AI lens (the latest of which could be AI-converted). The highest serial # on the Sonnar version was 286XXX.

Again, I could be wrong, so if anyone has authoritative info, please share. :)
 
85 2.0 105 2.5 135 3.5 135 2.8 All are fine lenses and I have them all.

One only I would get the 105 2.5 Ai or AiS
 
I use the 85mm f/1.8 AF lens on my FG all the time, and love it! Here's some examples I took at night at the fair:

corndogvendor.jpg


coupleatfair.jpg


girlatfair.jpg
 
Oops. Forgot I have an 85/1.8 AF also. A fine lens. It is more compact than the 1.4 and quite sharp. My 85/1.4 is manual focus; the 1.8 is AF and that often determines which one I use.

Ben Marks
 
I have many 105 F2.5's, all are good and sharper wide-open that the 85/2 AIs series that I use. With that stated, the 85/2 is great for portraits, being a little bit softer.

I end up using the 105 on SLR's and the Sonnar formula Nikkor-P 8.5cm f2 more often on the RF's.
 
Be true to your focal length :)

Be true to your focal length :)

Hi Philipp,

going against the collective grain :) here a bit: the 105 2.5, as fine as it is or can be - will still be a 105, and it really sounds like the focal length of 85mm works well for you.

I had a 105 2.5 AIS, in great shape. Bought it because of the rave (one of the best lenses ever, the one Nikkor you should not miss etc.), and yes, I liked it very much, a very good lens. Just not my focal length. I finally sold it, and do not regret it. 105 is too long for me, for unposed portraits etc.

You own a Nikon F2AS. You could consider the pre-AI 85 1.8. Would look mighty nice on your F2, and should be good enough. Maybe not as stellar as the 105 2.5. But rather having fun with a competent lens that fits your style, sense of distance and of seeing, than trying to make a "legendary" lens work for you. It might simply not be your cup of tea :)
Greetings!
 
The 85/2 AIS is a very nice SLR lens. It's actually what turned me onto the Nikon F system back in 1980s. Small and light, hardly larger than a fast 50mm lens, and really isolates people for portraits while giving a pleasant perspective and tight cropping to pictoral and environmental scenes. Pleasant out of focus background.

I'm the opposite of Brian Sweeney. I prefer the 105/2.5 on a rangefinder, as a kind of all-around telephotos, but prefer an 85/2 on SLRs, plus the option of something longer outside the RF range, such as the vastly underrated 200/4 AIS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom