What is this 105mm f2.5 lens.

[Hamster]

I have read from various places about this nikon 105mm lens. It seems to have a cult status. So from all you nikon expert people out there, can I ask?

-Why was it so legendary?
-Does it work with a Kiev II?
-Do they still make them (in SLR or other mount)?
-Is it expensive? Did any other manufacturer make a clone?

I do mostly potriats so I would really like to know if this is something worth investing in. My other lens is a Jupiter-9 and I have been waiting forever for a 85mm pentax in M42, but since I cannot get hold of that, perhaps the nikon would be good?

 

[IGMeanwell]

Here is a little information when googled

but if it is like most Nikkor portrait lenses ... well the images usually speak for themselves

My main portrait lens for my DSLR (woops!) is the 85 1.8 ... its sharp at almost every stop and its not even considered near the best

 

[RayPA]

the 'mir' site that IG links to is a good one. I use it and THIS ONE (Ken Rockwell's) when researching Nikon lenses. The Rockwell site goes into the "legend" behind particular Nikon lenses, and is a good place to spend a couple hours building up GAS. I have the 105/2.5 in AIS. It's a sharp lens, and very well made.

🙂

 

[IGMeanwell]

the 'mir' site that IG links to is a good one. I use it and THIS ONE (Ken Rockwell's) when researching Nikon lenses. The Rockwell site goes into the "legend" behind particular Nikon lenses, and is a good place to spend a couple hours building up GAS. I have the 105/2.5 in AI. It's a sharp lense, and very well made.

🙂

Keep in mind Rockwell is referring to the SLR lens ... and there is a bivy of them on the bay

Rockwell likes the 105mm 1.8 better (because it's faster and basically same optics) ... but I don't believe the 105mm 1.8 was ever made for the rangefinder

 

[RayPA]

Keep in mind Rockwell is referring to the SLR lens ... and there is a bivy of them on the bay

Rockwell likes the 105mm 1.8 better (because it's faster and basically same optics) ... but I don't believe the 105mm 1.8 was ever made for the rangefinder

Yes, I'm referring to SLR lenses here (blasphemy, I know), but so is the Mir link. And yes Rockwell likes the 1.8 better.

🙂

 

[wlewisiii]

I tried following the link to Mr. Rockwell's site. I've been there before & there is lots of goodies to be found there. The problem I have is that as an old Canonista, I have no grounding in Nikon lore to make heads or tails out of much of what he has to say on these lenses.

The Mir website has some of the absolute best information on the web about a big chunk of the later Canon FD cameras & almost all of the FL&FD lenses. Is the Nikon information comparable? If so, I'll spend some serious time reading there, but if not, is there someplace like that for someone who'd like to know more about Nikon? I've been pondering eventually getting an F or F2 just so I can experience for real what they are actually like. I really like my Canon FTb-N, but it is always good to expand one's knowledge base.

Thanks!

William

 

[IGMeanwell]

The Mir site ... I'll link the page again HERE

Seems to have great information on the 10.5cm 2.5 P lens that hamster is enquiring about and also a little bit on the 10.5cm f4

The F mount version is easily attainable around 100 bucks on the bay

Always a good resource for Nikon equipment is the Nikionians forum ... especially for film cameras (not neccesarily the rangefinders), there is alot of older folk with some excellent information

 

[Harry Lime]

I think there are several versions of this lens. One is a 4/105 for the Nikon RF.
I believe this was followed by the RF 2.5/105, which is a Sonnar design.

This lens was carried over to the Nikon F SLR.

The second SLR version was reformulated as a Gaussian design, for improved performance wide open and closeup. It has just enough aberations to produce sharp, but pleasant portraits. This is the version that all of the fuss is about.


I actually bought a Niklon body, so I could use a single coated Nikkor-P 2.5/105 for portrait work. It's right up there with the original formula Nikkor-H(C) 1.8/85mm, which was a staple of fashion photographers through the 1960's.

Are there sharper lenses out there? Sure, but the classic 2nd version of the 105 is something special.

 

[VinceC]

Those links refer to the SLR version of the lens.

Nippon Kogaku introduced the 10.5cmf/2.5 Nikkor-P in 1953. It was available in Nikon-S mount, Contax RF mount and Leica screwmount. It's considered one of the finest telephotos of any era. It uses 5 elements in a sonnar-based formula. It is a heavy lens (18.5 ounces / 525g). It was extremely popular -- more than 20,000 lenses were sold in various rangefinder mounts, and the lens established the 105mm length as a Nikon "specialty" compared to the 85/90mm length used on Leica and Contax cameras. Because of the weight, in 1959, Nikon introduced a very light 105/f4 Nikkor-T lens using three elements and weighing 9 ounces/250 grams and costing half the price. However, the Nikkor-T lens wasn't as sharp. The f/4 Nikkor-T is fairly rare and so commands a high price as a collectible curiosity. The f/2.5 Nikkor-P is less rare and so not as expensive.

Prices for a rangefinder version of the Nikkor-P f/2.5 lens range roughly from $250 to $500, depending on mount and condition. Leica users have rediscovered this lens, so it usually costs a little more in Leica screw mount.

When Nikon introduced its SLR F camera in 1959, the 105mm lens was released in F mount. The early F-mount version of the lens is identical to the rangefinder version. The formula was evenually changed in the mid-1970s -- most photographers used it as a portrait lens, and the redesign slightly (emphasize SLIGHTLY) improved its up-close performance. This was an extemely popular lens in the SLR world. The early version can be purchased for $100 or usually a lot less. The later version (with a larger rear element) for $150 or less. For Nikon users, this was usually their first and favorite telephoto, usable both for portraits and street scenes; a good combination of speed and weight (especially in the F mount) so that it can be carried all day, whereas the faster f/1.8 is much larger and heavier.

 

[anandi]

Don't forget about the E series variant the 2.8 / 105

I picked one off the auction site in mint condition for a reasonable amount. From my experience it's pretty good optically.

An example: http://static.flickr.com/50/133168889_dec66adc65_o.jpg

 

[Hamster]

So are Contax mount version of this lens a collector's item or are they still affordable to users?

 

[Sonnar2]

Nikon History (Lenses) Tale Five : Nikkor 105 mm f/2.5

 

[VinceC]

>>So are Contax mount version of this lens a collector's item or are they still affordable to users?<<

From what I've seen watching Ebay, the Contax versions of lenses tend to sell for a little bit less because of slightly lower demand.

 

[rover]

I absolutely do not want to start another camera system, but I really like the features of the FM3a and absolutely would love to have a 105 Nikkor.

 

[VinceC]

A nice thing about the 105 is that it's really a one-lens-fits-all telephoto. If you're using an 85/90, it really isn't long enough for some situations. But a 135mm lens is often too long. Sometimes I carry an 85 and 135. Other times, just the 105.

 

[KoNickon]

The "correct" version of the lens for the FM3a would be the AIS version, which is slightly smaller than the earlier ones and has a built-in lens hood.

But I agree with anandi that the 100 (not 105)/f2.8 Series E is quite good also.

 

[NIKON KIU]

-Do they still make them (in SLR or other mount)?
-Is it expensive? Did any other manufacturer make a clone?

Nikon Stopped making all manual focus lenses except the 85mm PC(shift) lens but B&H and Adorama in New York still have new old stock, price is around $300(I think).
This lens is sooooo sharp that some photogs use soft filters for portraits😀
you don't wanna show all the imperfections on your models face, do you?🙂
Kiu

 

[BillBingham2]

Hamster,

You can find contax mount versions of the lens, I've seen them about once every two months or so. Never looked at what the final price as I am a M mount and Nikon S2 man myself.

I grew up on the 85/1.8 and still love it. I have an 85/2 LTM Chrome, but it just did not fit well with my 40/1.4, not enough difference. I got a 105/2.5 and fell in love again. I now have three, F (has been AIed), LTM and Nikon S.

Back in the 70's when I got my 85, I did not go with the 105 because I felt it was too slow. Shooting with an SLR then, I was right. Wish I had been smart enough to go RF then.

B2 (;->

 

[jdos2]

To answer the question, you reallly gotta use the Contax version on the Kiev if you want correct focus at anything away from infinity.

Brian's posted some shots with the Nikon ("S mount") version. Very pretty.

 

[wlewisiii]

I've definitely decided not to get into yet another mount, which leaves these, doubtless very good Nikon lenses out of the picture. OTOH, the discussion of the value of the focal length reminds me to keep an eye open for the Canon 100's - both the 100/4 & 100/2 for the RF's & the FD 100/2.8 SSC lens. Might well prove to be a good investment.

My wallet is, faintly crying out, "gee, thanks... 🙁 " but that's how the GAS crumbles... 😀

William