Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Nikon 105mm f/2.5 Ai on D700
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
mfkita wrote:
.Again, "K" refers to COSMETICS NOT OPTICS...

Simply because the "K" and the "Ai" share the same cosmetics doesn't mean that you can call a "K-lens" an "Ai lens"..


I'm saying just the opposite ...that a "K" lens is NOT necessarily an AI lens....it may be but it is not always the case, as I've explained in detail here....


PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
mfkita wrote:
..... AND THE PRE-AI version of 105 GAUSS optics...

That still allows three possibilities - F, C & K. All are pre-Ai - even the K!


I don't know what an "F" 105 is, unless you're referring to the Sonnar design....that is not a lens I have been referring to here....
... the C refers only to the COATING....as in P.C...P referring to the number of elements, C referring to the coating...the 105 GAUSS lens was a P, and P.C, as in the photo with it's sibs, the 200 and 300, and as both a "K" PRE-AI and AI mounts...
These all had long throw focusing barrels, and differ from the 105 AIS in that the AIS lens has a short throw focusing barrel....

The point I made about the aperture ring was to note that THAT conversion would allow an pre-AI lens to mount on the current Nikon dSLRs that are designed for them....


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
mfkita wrote:
.Again, "K" refers to COSMETICS NOT OPTICS...

Simply because the "K" and the "Ai" share the same cosmetics doesn't mean that you can call a "K-lens" an "Ai lens". And you can't do it even when you've replaced the aperture ring of the "K" with a new factory (Nikon) ring.

Please look at the pair of pictures of the 105 mm f/2.5 Ai lens. In the left hand picture you can see a metal post or prong projecting from the mount and just touching the picture frame. You can see the same post at the bottom of the lens in the left-hand corner of the right hand picture. It's called a lens speed indexing post, or more simply, a lug. The diagram here may help. It's needed for matrix metering in some cameras. It's present in "Ai-lenses" but not in "K-lenses". If you visit the photosynthesis site you can find pictures of the "K" and "Ai" lenses and you will see that they are different.


I made the point about the speed indexing post....and posted photo of the 135-K to show the difference...


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
mfkita wrote:
sichko wrote:
mfkita wrote:
.Again, "K" refers to COSMETICS NOT OPTICS...

Simply because the "K" and the "Ai" share the same cosmetics doesn't mean that you can call a "K-lens" an "Ai lens"..


I'm saying just the opposite ...that a "K" lens is NOT necessarily an AI lens....it may be but it is not always the case, as I've explained in detail here....


First of all may I appologise for not reading your account thoroughly. It seemed to contain so many details which are at variance with my own experience that I did not fully understand what you are doing. You appear - and correct me if I am wrong - to be using the terms "K" and "Ai" to describe optical schemes. So, in your world, if a "K" lens has the same optical scheme as the following "Ai" lens then the "K-lens"itself is an "Ai" lens. You are, of course, free to do this. Unfortunately lots of other people use "K" and "Ai" differently. They refer to the physical construction of the lens -its cosmetics if you like - the lens mount and its functionality.

So for example Nikon distinguishes between the ...Nikkor Auto ... the New NIKKOR, the AI Nikkor and then t... the AI-S Nikkor. (Here New=K). They refer to the Nikkor 105 mm f/2.5. All of the variations use the same basic (optical) design but there is no suggestion that the "K" is an "Ai" or the other way round.

The Photosynthesis site follows Nikon's example and explains the difference between "K" (a pre-Ai lens) and "Ai" in terms of functionality.

Photography in Malaysia is another well respected Nikon site. How do you think it uses the terms "Ai" and "K" ?

Thom Hogan is a well known commentator on all things Nikon ....

All these people use "Ai" and "K" in the same particular way. How many more do you want ?

Can I return to my first question in this thread. Do you have any sources for, or links to anyone else who is using "Ai" and "K" in the way that you do ?


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
mfkita wrote:
sichko wrote:
mfkita wrote:
..... AND THE PRE-AI version of 105 GAUSS optics...

That still allows three possibilities - F, C & K. All are pre-Ai - even the K!

I don't know what an "F" 105 is, unless you're referring to the Sonnar design....that is not a lens I have been referring to here....
... the C refers only to the COATING....as in P.C...P referring to the number of elements, C referring to the coating...the 105 GAUSS lens was a P, and P.C, as in the photo with it's sibs, the 200 and 300, and as both a "K" PRE-AI and AI mounts...
These all had long throw focusing barrels, and differ from the 105 AIS in that the AIS lens has a short throw focusing barrel....


Again you are confusing the physical construction of the lens and its mount with the optical scheme. "F" refers to the earliest Nikon SLR lens - it's explained in the Photosynthesis link given earlier. Sometimes "A" (for Auto") is preferred. There are in fact two (more if you include minor details) F-mount 105 mm f/2.5 lenses. The earliest used a Sonnar scheme. The later lenses used a Xenotar (Double Gauss derivative) scheme. So we have two different optical schemes in the same mount.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Let's get our info from the horse's mouth, i.e. Nikon:

http://imaging.nikon.com/history/nikkor/5/


NIKKOR-P 10.5cm f/2.5


AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5

Quote:

The Fifth Tale concerns the AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 lens.

The history of the Nikkor 105mm begins quite some time ago, tracing back to the S-type camera and the Leica screw mount. The first NIKKOR-P 10.5cm f/2.5 was designed by WAKIMOTO, Zenji in 1949, and released in 1954. At that time, it was the fastest lens available in the 100mm class.

It shared popularity with the NIKKOR-P 8.5cm f/2 lens released in 1948, and established itself as a best-selling lens. Offering superior optical performance from the initial design, the optical systems developed for this lens was continued on into the Nikon F era. The initial design used Sonnar type optics (5 lenses, 3 groups). As you can see from the cross-section in Fig. 1, the thick lens included a group made of three lenses cemented together, and offering sharp, solid images. This optical system was continued for about 17 years until the 1970s, thanks to the accurate design concepts and superior optics design implementation.

In 1971 the lens underwent fundamental design changes, emerging as the Nikkor Auto 105mm f/2.5. The optics were designed by SHIMIZU, Yoshiyuki, who was one of WAKIMOTO's disciples. He designed a large number of lenses from the early Nikkor Auto through AI Nikkor, and was also active in designing optics for diverse other applications, including object lenses for microscopes. He was active as a designer until quite recently, and still comes to Nikon as an educator, and he has taught me much since I first entered Nikon. In fact, he is probably one of the most experienced people at the company.

The design for the 105 mm f/2.5 was completed in the winter of 1966. The design proposal for this best-selling mid-range telescopic lens was continued for three generations, from the Nikkor Auto to the New NIKKOR, the AI Nikkor and then to the AI-S Nikkor. And surprisingly enough, the AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5S being sold now still uses the same basic design: a design on the market for 34 years. We will enter the 21st century in about half a year, and the superior performance of this lens is proved by the fact that the basic design required no changes over 34 years.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Let's get our info from the horse's mouth, i.e. Nikon:

http://imaging.nikon.com/history/nikkor/5/


NIKKOR-P 10.5cm f/2.5


AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5

Quote:

The Fifth Tale concerns the AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 lens.

The history of the Nikkor 105mm begins quite some time ago, tracing back to the S-type camera and the Leica screw mount. The first NIKKOR-P 10.5cm f/2.5 was designed by WAKIMOTO, Zenji in 1949, and released in 1954. At that time, it was the fastest lens available in the 100mm class.

It shared popularity with the NIKKOR-P 8.5cm f/2 lens released in 1948, and established itself as a best-selling lens. Offering superior optical performance from the initial design, the optical systems developed for this lens was continued on into the Nikon F era. The initial design used Sonnar type optics (5 lenses, 3 groups). As you can see from the cross-section in Fig. 1, the thick lens included a group made of three lenses cemented together, and offering sharp, solid images. This optical system was continued for about 17 years until the 1970s, thanks to the accurate design concepts and superior optics design implementation.

In 1971 the lens underwent fundamental design changes, emerging as the Nikkor Auto 105mm f/2.5. The optics were designed by SHIMIZU, Yoshiyuki, who was one of WAKIMOTO's disciples. He designed a large number of lenses from the early Nikkor Auto through AI Nikkor, and was also active in designing optics for diverse other applications, including object lenses for microscopes. He was active as a designer until quite recently, and still comes to Nikon as an educator, and he has taught me much since I first entered Nikon. In fact, he is probably one of the most experienced people at the company.

The design for the 105 mm f/2.5 was completed in the winter of 1966. The design proposal for this best-selling mid-range telescopic lens was continued for three generations, from the Nikkor Auto to the New NIKKOR, the AI Nikkor and then to the AI-S Nikkor. And surprisingly enough, the AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5S being sold now still uses the same basic design: a design on the market for 34 years. We will enter the 21st century in about half a year, and the superior performance of this lens is proved by the fact that the basic design required no changes over 34 years.


And your point is ?


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
To clear up any confusion.

It is preferable to refer to the actual maker than any individual.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 4:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
To clear up any confusion.

It is preferable to refer to the actual maker than any individual.


Anyone who has read my posts will have found a link to Nikon. The fact that you posted a link to the same article some 90 minutes later suggests that you didn't read my posts, and it only adds to the confusion.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Please, no need to be so hostile. Smile

I was just trying to be helpful, hence I cut to the chase by posting the key information direct from the maker, it wasn't clear from the wealth of info you posted, especially for those members who aren't native English speakers. A picture of the two designs is, I think more helpful to them than any amount of text, hence I posted them.

I am interested in the Nikkor 2.5/105, many times I've almost bought one.

The earlier Sonnar type is cheaper, both types are common on ebay. I am interested in the differences in performance and character of rendering between the two types.

Does anyone have both types and can post image samples from both?


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Unfortunately I sold my AI-converted 105 Nikkor PC, and my AIS, so I can't make a physical comparison. My question is if the PC version was the earlier Sonnar type, with added multicoating (I expect not) or if it's the later type used in AI version but packaged in the earlier Non-AI body? It seems a simple external check to compare curvature of the front element would be definitive. I also understood from some previous discussion I can no longer find that the AIS had redesigned optics. This seems to be refuted by the article, but the article isn't going into any particular detail about coatings or subtle changes, only in the overall design formula. The forumula could be maintained while adjusting design parameters to change coatings, materials, etc without Nikon having to admit any change to the basic design, yet resulting in significant changes in optical performance. I do remember that the coatings were different between AI and AIS, and the image quality (ignoring bokeh) was also different. Admittedly, my tests were for use of the lens in short-focus macro using extensions, which are beyond the design range of the lens, but there were clear differences in chromatic aberrations and sharpness (probably related...) between AI and AIS, indicating that there indeed were differences in some design parameters...Ray


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nikon introduced multi coatings in 71-72, so I expect all of the first version Sonnar type were single coated and all of the second version Xenotar type were multi-coated. How to confirm that I am unsure, perhaps an email to Nikon?


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
My question is if the PC version was the earlier Sonnar type, with added multicoating (I expect not) or if it's the later type used in AI version but packaged in the earlier Non-AI body?

According to http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#105 the PC is a multicoated Xenotar design.

Quote:
It seems a simple external check to compare curvature of the front element would be definitive.

The link provides pictures of the different versions. I don't know if they are helpful.

Quote:
I also understood from some previous discussion I can no longer find that the AIS had redesigned optics. This seems to be refuted by the article, but the article isn't going into any particular detail about coatings or subtle changes, only in the overall design formula. The forumula could be maintained while adjusting design parameters to change coatings, materials, etc without Nikon having to admit any change to the basic design, yet resulting in significant changes in optical performance.

The link suggests minor optical differences between the Xenotar-type variants : F, C, K, Ai and Ais. As you suggest the article talks about ... the same basic design - which would not exclude small variations.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If you're talking about optic design, there're only two, one is Sonnar type, the later one Gauss type. Let's just use these terms.

If you're talking about different models, there're F, C, K, AI, and AI-S. Simply use http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#105 to map your serial number to the model.

If your pre-AI has been converted to AI, then explicitly mark so.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eno789 wrote:
.... the later one Gauss type. Let's just use these terms.


Why ? Nikon called it a Xenotar derivative - and they designed it.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
All this talk about minor points and no photo samples?

A picture (with one of these Nikkors) is worth a thousand words.

We can talk ad infinitum about Sonnar vs Xenotar, single or multi coated...

But it would be 100x more informative to actually see some shots taken with different versions.

The Sonnar design with single coatings is usually more than adequate in contrast, so it would be interesting to see if this particular Nikon Sonnar type fits that rule of thumb.

If I am interpreting the Nikon optical diagrams correctly, the first Sonnar type has 6 air-glass surfaces, and the second Xenotar type has 8. That's not a huge difference, but if the first version is SC and the second version is MC, the second one may have more contrast even though it has 2 more air-glass surfaces.

See what I mean, we can talk about these little differences for a long time, but images from the lenses would be much more informative.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
eno789 wrote:
.... the later one Gauss type. Let's just use these terms.


Why ? Nikon called it a Xenotar derivative - and they designed it.


http://imaging.nikon.com/history/nikkor/nwords-e.htm scroll down to Xenotar, you can see Xenotar is Gaussian derivative.

But my point is, don't use AI-converted, or AI as the optic design. Use either Sonnar, or Gaussian (Xenotar).


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Let's use Sonnar and Xenotar, as that is how the manufacturer referred to them. Also, Gaussian isn't at all specific, it could cover a whole host of designs, whereas Xenotar is specific. Furthermore, it is a simplified double-gauss type, so Gaussian isn't really accurate.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eno789 wrote:
sichko wrote:
eno789 wrote:
.... the later one Gauss type. Let's just use these terms.


Why ? Nikon called it a Xenotar derivative - and they designed it.


http://imaging.nikon.com/history/nikkor/nwords-e.htm scroll down to Xenotar, you can see Xenotar is Gaussian derivative.


Yes I know. I've already described it as a Double Gaussian (DG) design - in this thread. Why don't you like using Xenotar ? Biometar, Biotar, and Planar - all terms for DG designs - are widely used on this forum.

Quote:
But my point is, don't use AI-converted, or AI as the optic design.

I agree completely. It's a point I've been trying to make.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It isn't really a double Gauss design, it's a half-way house between a double Gauss and a Planar, therefore let's call it what it is - a Xenotar, which is what Nikon did.

Xenotar:



Gauss and Double Gauss:



Rudolph's original Planar:



PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
mfkita wrote:
.Again, "K" refers to COSMETICS NOT OPTICS...

Simply because the "K" and the "Ai" share the same cosmetics doesn't mean that you can call a "K-lens" an "Ai lens". And you can't do it even when you've replaced the aperture ring of the "K" with a new factory (Nikon) ring.


I NEVER SAID THAT "K" AND "AI" ARE THE SAME....AND AGAIN, I SPECIFICALLY POINTED OUT THAT YOU CAN HAVE A "K" LENS WITHOUT AN AI APERTURE RING AND WITHOUT AN INDEXING POST, OR A "K" WITH AN AI APERTURE RING AND WITHOUT AN INDEXING POST, AND A "K" LENS WITH AN AI APERTURE RING AND WITH AN INDEXING POST...

I SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT "K" IS STRICTLY COSMETICS, THAT A "K" LENS MAY BE A PRE-AI AS THE 105 P.C AND 85/1.8 PICTURED HERE...AND "AI" REFERS TO THE APERTURE RING AND MOUNT THAT CONNECTS TO THE APPROPRIATE AI BODY....

sichko wrote:
Please look at the pair of pictures of the 105 mm f/2.5 Ai lens. In the left hand picture you can see a metal post or prong projecting from the mount and just touching the picture frame. You can see the same post at the bottom of the lens in the left-hand corner of the right hand picture. It's called a lens speed indexing post, or more simply, a lug. The diagram here may help. It's needed for matrix metering in some cameras. It's present in "Ai-lenses" but not in "K-lenses". If you visit the photosynthesis site you can find pictures of the "K" and "Ai" lenses and you will see that they are different.


AGAIN, I NEVER SAID THAT "K" AND "AI" WERE THE SAME....I HAVE NO IDEA WHY YOU WOULD CONTINUE TO WRITE THAT I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY...

Last edited by mfkita on Sat Aug 24, 2013 10:34 pm; edited 3 times in total


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Calm down, using caps is considered the same as shouting, so it's rude. Smile


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Calm down, using caps is considered the same as shouting, so it's rude. Smile


I AM SHOUTING BECAUSE I SEEM TO HAVE TO REPEAT THE SAME SENTENCE AGAIN AND AGAIN....


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Gaussian version of the 105/2.5 was "aimed" at improving closer focusing IQ (specifically portraiture range) vs the medium range IQ of the earlier Sonnar version...
The AI Gaussian version may have "better" bokeh than the AIS Gaussian, so I've read, but only now that I have both will I be able to see if there is a difference, and whether it matters much (to me)...

Again, the real reason I got the AI is to "test" my focusing ability with the two lenses' and their focusing barrels' different rotational "throw" as it affects the appearance of in-and-out of focus points on the focusing screen and to my eye...


PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
It isn't really a double Gauss design, it's a half-way house between a double Gauss and a Planar, therefore let's call it what it is - a Xenotar, which is what Nikon did.


Planar is a registered tradename owned by Zeiss. Zeiss uses it for specific lenses. Planar is also a general term for a particular lens design. The design is also called a Double Gauss or simply a Gauss. Zeiss Oberkochen also made a five element Planar similar to the five element Biometar made by Zeiss Jena and the Schneider Xenotar. Oberkochen also calls its five element design a Gauss and, as we've seen, Gauss and Double Gauss are synomomous in this context.

I'm happy to call the Nikon 105 mm f/2.5 Xenotar but maybe we should recognise that other people might use the Gauss/Double Gauss terminology. Of course knowing the names, that other people use, doesn't mean that I understand the detailed optics.

Info. on the use of names by Zeiss :

http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/en_CLB_40_Nasse_Lens_Names_Planar.pdf
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4