Which manual AIS primes work well with the Nikon N80?

[Frank Petronio]

I know the N80 is only supposed to play nice with AF or later Nikkors, or newer manual focus VC and Zeiss lenses that have been "chipped".... but are there any sleeper manual Nikkors (or Sigma, Tokina) primes that people have had success using? I know it may not meter, no biggee, I just don't want to damage the lens mount.

 

[Mablo]

N80 (or F80 here) is the best camera deal ever in my humble opinion. It's usually cheaper than a FED-1 from stone age. It's smaller and lighter than a F100 and it even has a cable release socket!

 

[Chris101]

Even the less better ones will work. I've shot it with a 50mm f/2, a 135mm f/2.8, an AI'd 43-86 and even a Lester Dine 105 f/2.8.

 

[Moriturii]

People regard the Nikon 28mm F2.8 AIS (not the AI, in this particular instance), Nikon 105mm F2.5 (AI, or AIS) and the 50mm F2 (AI, AIS) to be legendary lenses, some of the best lenses ever made.

 

[nobbylon]

People regard the Nikon 28mm F2.8 AIS (not the AI, in this particular instance), Nikon 105mm F2.5 (AI, or AIS) and the 50mm F2 (AI, AIS) to be legendary lenses, some of the best lenses ever made.

Agreed, those are the three manual Nikkor's I still have.
Oh and a 50 1.4 s.c. on the F.

 

[Chris101]

People regard the Nikon [...] 50mm F2 (AI, AIS) to be legendary lenses, some of the best lenses ever made.

Really? What makes it legendary. I have one, and I like it's size and weight, but there's nothing that stands out about it. Am I missing something?

 

[sanmich]

People regard the Nikon 28mm F2.8 AIS (not the AI, in this particular instance), Nikon 105mm F2.5 (AI, or AIS) and the 50mm F2 (AI, AIS) to be legendary lenses, some of the best lenses ever made.

If I'm not mistaken, the 105 has been recomputed, and the one that is a Sonnar (and much appreciated by aficionados) is the P version.

I have the 50 f/2, and I think it's good, but it seems to me that my RF 50 f/2's are sharper. I wonder if the 55 Micro Nikkor f/2.8 is sharper...
(and yes, I know sharpness is not everything, but in that case, that's what I'm after)

 

[sevo]

The only lenses (apart from the odd few non-retrofocus fisheyes/wides that won't even insert) that will actually damage the lens mount are pre AI lenses, as the F80 (like every consumer Nikon made after the early eighties) lacks a retractable AI coupler tab. But while AI/AI-S lenses are safe, they reduce the cameras to all-manual un-metered mode. They can be chipped to activate the meter/AE, but at about $30 per Dandelion chip even for a DIY conversion, that is hardly worth while - the price difference towards AI lens capable cameras like the F100, F4 or F5 is smaller than the chipping cost for some three or four lenses.

 

[sevo]

Really? What makes it legendary.

The legend. ;-) In its time, it was a noticeably better allrounder than the contemporary 50/1.4 (which had rather strong curvature of field and residual coma). But it is no better (and indeed, I cannot see any difference between them even in large prints - other than a barely visible misalignment of my 50mm E) than any of the 50/1.8's or 1.4's that followed it.

 

[nobbylon]

Really? What makes it legendary. I have one, and I like it's size and weight, but there's nothing that stands out about it. Am I missing something?

The one I have is as good as my 50 summicron R and cost a lot less.

 

[nobbylon]

If I'm not mistaken, the 105 has been recomputed, and the one that is a Sonnar (and much appreciated by aficionados) is the P version.

I have the 50 f/2, and I think it's good, but it seems to me that my RF 50 f/2's are sharper. I wonder if the 55 Micro Nikkor f/2.8 is sharper...
(and yes, I know sharpness is not everything, but in that case, that's what I'm after)

My RF lenses seemed sharper than my Slr lenses however I think a lot of that is mirror vibration. When I lift the mirror I see no differences. When I use high enough speeds I see no differences.

The 55 2.8 is sharp at 2.8 but I found it no sharper than the 50 f1.8 or f2 versions.
My 24-70 2.8 is just as sharp as them all.

 

[johannielscom]

AFAIK the legendary 105's are limited to the first version, the Nikkor-P 105/2.5. That was a Sonnar design, quite short for a 105 and very sharp. PJ's used it a lot. I got one for my Nikkormat FTn.

Can the N80/F80 take pre-AI lenses and meter with them? I might be interested if so. Might even cut off the AI notch on a body if they do meter.

 

[sevo]

AFAIK the legendary 105's are limited to the first version, the Nikkor-P 105/2.5. That was a Sonnar design, quite short for a 105 and very sharp. PJ's used it a lot. I got one for my Nikkormat FTn.

The first version is a nice Sonnar - a spitting image of the RF one (and its Zeiss heritage). The legend however is the second, Gauss-type, version - which outresolved pretty much every non-process lens at the time.

Can the N80/F80 take pre-AI lenses and meter with them?

Neither - it has a rigid coupling tab, so that nothing pre AI will fit. And even if you'd AI convert the lenses, the F80 won't meter with any unchipped lens.

 

[johannielscom]

The first version is a nice Sonnar - a spitting image of the RF one (and its Zeiss heritage). The legend however is the second, Gauss-type, version - which outresolved pretty much every non-process lens at the time.



Neither - it has a rigid coupling tab, so that nothing pre AI will fit. And even if you'd AI convert the lenses, the F80 won't meter with any unchipped lens.

Thank you Sevo, one can always count on you to know the details!

 

[Chris101]

Here is a place, just FYI and I have never done business with them, that will chip just about any Nikkor:

http://legacy2digital.com/nikon/

 

[rbsinto]

Really? What makes it legendary. I have one, and I like it's size and weight, but there's nothing that stands out about it. Am I missing something?

Chris,
What makes it legendary, is it's weight which means you can place it on top of a stack of important papers near an open window, and none of them will blow away, even in a substantial gust of wind.
Kind of like all 50mm lenses, but only more so.