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

Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIS - first shots
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:23 pm    Post subject: Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIS - first shots Reply with quote
I've read a lot about this classic, Sonnar based lens and decided it was about time I took one for a test run Smile It's a longish portrait lens but I didn't have any willing models, so I decided to (in between shopping, eating and drinking) shoot some street shots at a Christmas market for a test.

All shots are wide open at f/2.5.

#1




#2



#3



#4



#5



Some crops







Performance

The lens feels very nice to hold and focus. Results are very good although maybe I was expecting too much from it as I wasn't totally blown away...I needed to increase contrast myself slightly for example. There is slight CA, but in the main it is not noticeable.

Value for money

This lens is exceptional value for money. I think it was around £100.00 which is really good for a lens of this calibre!


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
well done ...


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi Graham, I just bought this lens few months ago and loved it at the first shots Smile
The reason I bought is that I was very curious about this lens reputation. Specially compared to the faster f/1.8 version which I already have.
I've speculated that maybe the cheaper price makes this lens more affordable and has more fans ... haha Smile
It's bad presumption and I was wrong. For me the lens is, if I may say, perfect. The color, contrast, sharpness, bokeh and .. size! Smile











PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have to say, this lens looks only average. The colours are quite good but the contrast & sharpness is unimpressive.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
To me it actually looks quite good, especially since it is wide open. There is hardly any glow of any sort and the results are sharp.
Bokeh highlights are rendered nicely even and not distracting.
Also the subjects are nice Wink and focussed well.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I used to have this lens since, like, 25 years Smile
At the time I was shooting Nikon (FM2) and i didn't have a cent in my pockets Laughing so I took advantage of the fact
that at the time Autofocus was just booming and every Nikon photographer started to sell their manual stuff for little
in order to buy the new AF equipment.
So I got the lens (quite worn by use on the barrel, but optically perfect) for -hear hear- no less than 50000 lire, which
corresponds roughly to... 25 Euros! Laughing
The lens has served me faithfully for many years.
It is indeed a very good lens, however it made no sense for me to keep it after I bought my Planar 85mm and 100mm and Elmarit 90mm.
I was never using it anymore, so in the end I sold it for something more than 100 Euros.
So in the end, I used a very good tele lens for 25 years and as a final balance, even earned 75 Euros from it.
Not bad, I think Wink


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's years since I had one of these. Well, actually I had two 105/2.5s at different times, the first a non-AI one and then later an AI-S which must have been a re-design as it was quite a bit larger and heavier. and the results were different too. I actually preferred the earlier one, because it produced results on Kodachrome that were "mellow". I was going to say they had a "glow" about them, but no doubt that might be interpreted as a defect by some, so instead I'll say "a bright pulsating warmth". (Mmm, almost poetic !)

Both were sharp alright, make no mistake about that, the the later version seemed to produce a bit more detail than the early one.

Martin wrote " I have to say, this lens looks only average. The colours are quite good but the contrast & sharpness is unimpressive." It's often hard to make any really reliable judgement looking at photos posted via the internet and I know Martin is commenting on only on what he can see. But I can promise him that sharpness is indeed all that one could ask with the 105 and lack of contrast was never a problem on film.

A nice lens.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@ Graham - You mention that you need to increase the contrast. Recovering some of the blown highlights might help as well. Also you are using Adobe RGB so that dinosaurs like me who still use non-colour managed browsers will not get the best view.

scsambrook wrote:
It's years since I had one of these. Well, actually I had two 105/2.5s at different times, the first a non-AI one and then later an AI-S which must have been a re-design as it was quite a bit larger and heavier. and the results were different too.

Nikon appears to have used two different optical formulas for the 105 mm f/2.5. I hesitate to mention this since there was a thread on this subject sometime ago, and on this site, where I managed to confuse myself. However a link to Nikon's description of earlier versions of the lens, which use a 5/3 configuration and which they describe as a Sonnar, is given here. Nikon used a 5/4 arangement in later versions and describe it as a Xenotar - link here.

Quote:
Martin wrote " I have to say, this lens looks only average. The colours are quite good but the contrast & sharpness is unimpressive." It's often hard to make any really reliable judgement looking at photos posted via the internet and I know Martin is commenting on only on what he can see. But I can promise him that sharpness is indeed all that one could ask with the 105 and lack of contrast was never a problem on film.


I too never found a problem with sharpness (Ai version) but I rarely used the lens wide open. A couple of reviewers on nikongear found a lack of sharpness wide open caused by blue fringing. This was cured by stopping down just a little. The nikongear review includes some nice samples and many more are found on Flickr. Examples include those taken using the Canon 5D, 5D Mk II, Canon Film and Nex-5.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The older pre-AI version is indeed a Sonnar lens, I had that one too, surely it's not on the same sharpness level as the AI(S) version,
but it has a very nice image rendering and probably a better bokeh, so it's not a bad lens, it's a lens that needs to be used
for subjects that do not require surgical details but would use great bokeh, flowers for instance are a good subject for the pre-AI lens.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:36 pm    Post subject: Re: Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIS - first shots Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
I've read a lot about this classic, Sonnar based lens


Graham, the AI(S) version is a Xenotar-like design. It's similar to the Contax 2.8/180 lens (which is different
from the classic Olympia Sonnar - the Jena lens is more faithful to the original design).
The pre-AI version is a true Sonnar design.
Xenotar is sharper. Sonnar is smoother.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sichko, Orio, Scsambrook - many thanks for the info re: different optical schemes, I had no idea!

Maybe I should have been a little more careful with the pp (I did very little) as the shots do indeed look a little overexposed on my work monitor, although they looked OK on my calibrated screen at home. Must check the histograms Smile

BTW, I wasn't shooting wide open for fun, conditions were quite tricky in the late afternoon light, and I would like to test the lens further in better conditions stopped down a little.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
The older pre-AI version is indeed a Sonnar lens, I had that one too, surely it's not on the same sharpness level as the AI(S) version,

Orio - the term "pre-Ai" encompassses several different lenses types, or designations, used by Nikon. For the 105 mm f/2.5 these were F, C & K. According to Roland Vink's site , and in agreement with the Nikon links I gave in my earlier post, only the earliest versions of the F-type used the 5/3 Sonnar configuration. In 1971 the design of the F-type was changed to the 5/4 Xenotar arrangement which was retained for C- and K-types. So "pre-Ai" includes both Sonnars and Xenotars for the 105 mm f/2.5.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
Orio wrote:
The older pre-AI version is indeed a Sonnar lens, I had that one too, surely it's not on the same sharpness level as the AI(S) version,

Orio - the term "pre-Ai" encompassses several different lenses types, or designations, used by Nikon. For the 105 mm f/2.5 these were F, C & K. According to Roland Vink's site , and in agreement with the Nikon links I gave in my earlier post, only the earliest versions of the F-type used the 5/3 Sonnar configuration. In 1971 the design of the F-type was changed to the 5/4 Xenotar arrangement which was retained for C- and K-types. So "pre-Ai" includes both Sonnars and Xenotars for the 105 mm f/2.5.


OK John, I stand corrected! Smile


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's very sharp for wide open, the images don't look overexposed to me on my monitor. The CA is very slight too, I bet it would disappear if you went down a stop or two. All in all, an excellent lens by the looks of it, although I have seen them go for a fair bit less than 100 quid I wouldn't be unhapy with that price.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Ian Smile Price wise, the AIS seems to go for £100-130.00, whilst the oldest versions can be had a lot cheaper by the looks of it. Possibly because they can't be used on Nikon DSLRs so easily.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I love this lens and you did prove it well Graham why I love it. Great lens from every aspects ,not easy to find significantly better lenses even for lot more money I think.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Thanks Ian Smile Price wise, the AIS seems to go for £100-130.00, whilst the oldest versions can be had a lot cheaper by the looks of it. Possibly because they can't be used on Nikon DSLRs so easily.


Probably the early one I've seen going cheaper. There are often bargains to be had with Nikkors that look battered because they were used by pros and led hard lives.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Thanks Ian Smile Price wise, the AIS seems to go for £100-130.00, whilst the oldest versions can be had a lot cheaper by the looks of it. Possibly because they can't be used on Nikon DSLRs so easily.


Probably the early one I've seen going cheaper. There are often bargains to be had with Nikkors that look battered because they were used by pros and led hard lives.


Early one significantly worst lens, but good enough for most purposes , I had both.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
(...)So "pre-Ai" includes both Sonnars and Xenotars for the 105 mm f/2.5.

I didn't know that, thx.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Phenix jc wrote:
sichko wrote:
(...)So "pre-Ai" includes both Sonnars and Xenotars for the 105 mm f/2.5.

I didn't know that, thx.


Another useful source is the "mir" site - here. It includes many pictures of the different versions/models of the 105 mm lens.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Were these shot in JPG or RAW? I think they lack of contrast and colour pop that I'm used with my Nikkor Non-AI 105/2.5. AIS should be much contrasty.

http://forum.mflenses.com/nikkor-p-105-2-5-n-ai-with-heavily-scratched-front-glass-t37561.html is what I was reffering to. Yes, I did very light contrast boost in PP.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Shot raw at f2.5 with a small contrast boost. Have you used yours for street shots at all? I note you may have the Sonnar version with a different optical scheme...is your lens non-ai?


PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Shot raw at f2.5 with a small contrast boost. Have you used yours for street shots at all? I note you may have the Sonnar version with a different optical scheme...is your lens non-ai?


Yes, it's a Non-AI version hence Sonnar design.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ducdao wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Shot raw at f2.5 with a small contrast boost. Have you used yours for street shots at all? I note you may have the Sonnar version with a different optical scheme...is your lens non-ai?


Yes, it's a Non-AI version hence Sonnar design.

I guess you didn't look at the earlier posts.

Here's a link to a picture of a Nikon NIKKOR 105 mm f/2.5. Look at the aperture ring. It's not an Ai lens. Nikon tells us (look at the links in my earlier post) that this lens is a Xenotar. So Non-ai does not mean that the lens is a Sonnar.

Pictures of your lens are given in your link. Look at the serial number, the colour (black barrel not silver), the name on the name ring (Nikon not Nippon Kogaku Japan). And then look at Roland Vink's site - including the pictures (click on the focal length/aperture numbers highlighted in blue). What do you think you've got ? Sonnar or Xenotar ?


PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Duc, did you pp your images or were they straight from RAW?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2