Nikon 180mm f/2.8

I have had such great luck with buying new standard lenses that I

thought I might pick up a 180mm f/2.8 Nikkor. It's only about $609

after rebate.

 

Recently I've read it's a great lens, but I was thinking older

versions were not that sharp. Could you comment on:

 

1. Your experiences with this lens for great, sharp, contrasty images

(pro level images), or

 

2. Do you have any recommendations in a comparable pro-level zoom lens

I should be looking at instead?

 

Thank you!

It's one of those lenses which produce images that just jump out of the page because of their brilliance and sharpness. I have only used one 180, my AF-D version. The manual focus lenses are reportedly a bit softer at close distances but they also have less color fringing of the out-of-focus areas.

 

The 70-200 mm AF-S VR is a nice lens, but it doesn't have the kind of pop that the 180mm gives. The 180 mm is a lot sharper at close distances and wide apertures, and it produces images with higher contrast as it is less prone to flare. However, the 70-200 produces images with nicer (softer) out-of-focus areas. The 70-200 also has TC-E teleconverter support, AF-S, and VR, which are important to many users. But if I had to choose to keep one, it would be the 180.

 

All in all, the 180 is a brilliant lens which puts many more expensive lenses to shame when you look at the images. It is capable of a lot of "WOW" factor in the images with minimal post-processing.

Thanks, I'll look into the 70-200mm. I was also considering the 80-200mm and Nikkor, but optically, the 70-200mm might be better? With VR it definitely would have some advantages.

I have a 180 for sale. I truly liked the quality of the lens, but I really needed the flexibility of a zoom, so I went with an 80-200, which is also very sharp. I think the 180 is a tad sharper, and it is certainly more compact. If you're set on primes (which has merit), you might consider an 85 1.4 to complement the 180.

Michael

If money is not a problem, I would not consider the 80-200, it doesn't have 1) AF-S, 2) VR, 3) the beautiful bokeh of the 70-200, 4) TC-E support. These things might not be so important as individual features but they do add up to make a big difference in the end.

Unfortunately, quality always outweighs my budget<g>. I appreciate your comments about the 70-200mm, and it looks like a good alternative.

 

As for the 85mm, you're talking my talk. I just bought a new 1.8 version, and it's the kind of jaw-dropping sharpness I'm looking for in this new lens. I thought my old 85mm AIS version was pretty good, but the newer AF in 1.8 is amazing.

 

I'm thoroughly disappointed in the kit lenses Nikon is distributing as "ED" and aspherical, so now I'm sifting through what's out there to find the real Nikkor quality lenses I need.

Without a doubt one of Nikon's best lenses optically. My experience was that tripod mounted at f5.6 it produced bitingly sharp and crisp images on Velvia 50.

 

When I went all digital, I used it on my D70 and later D2h, but eventually succumbed to the siren song of the AF-S 70-200/2.8 VR, and sold the 180 to partially make up the cost.

 

For my purposes, the fast-focussing zoom was and still is a better all-around choice, plus I can use a 1.4 convertor. Compared to the 70-200, the 180 was noticably slower to autofocus, especially on the D70, and if I recall correctly, you needed to move a switch on both the lens and camera body to enable manual focus.

 

So a lot depends on what and how you shoot. But gosh, for only $609? Buy it! I think I got $650 for mine when I sold it used.

 

As for comparable pro-level zooms other than the AF-S 70-200, although I have never used one, many people have good things to say about the latest (current model) AF 80-200/2.8D.

You should buy one. I sold mine in 2000 to (partially) subsidize an 80-200mm. My zoom

is wonderful and doubt that I'll ever part with it, but I do miss the 180mm. It was far more

fun to just carry around. Decent AF performance, not too big or obtrusive, could be carried

around all day without tiring you out, a great discrete telephoto lens in the era of big

monsters. I really miss mine and am actually a bit scared to think about picking up

another one, since I might like it more than the zoom I paid $1400 for! FWIW, you can

have your pick of these guys on the used market for <$500 and buying used is a safe bet

on this lens. Good luck in your search.

EVERY version of the Nikkor 180mm f2.8 lens is sharp. Including the earliest, non-ED glass version (which are rumored to actually have ED glass despite the lack of such markings).

 

If you want a pro-level zoom instead, your choices are the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR lens, or the earlier 80-200mm f2.8.

I ordered the 180 in early November from my authorized Nikon dealer. He was never able to get one, nor was his Nikon rep able to find one in his territory. Also, Nikon had none available and had no idea when they would have any. I wound up getting my US version from B&H. Since then, I've used it on my F5, F3, & D70 and I am extremely pleased with its performance.

 

However, I was at my dealers D200 preview on December 10th and spoke with the Nikon rep. I told him it seemed pretty strange that Nikon would put a double rebate on a lens that they didn't have available. His response was that, the 180 is not selling very well and it will most likely be discontinued in the very near future. THESE ARE HIS WORDS, NOT MINE.

 

If there is any truth to his statement, I would get one ASAP.

I have a 180/2.8 AFD which is in brand new condition for sale for $425 shipped in continental USA. I hate to sell it but I need the money. Email me if you're interested.

<em>EVERY version of the Nikkor 180mm f2.8 lens is sharp.

Including the earliest, non-ED glass version (which are rumored

to actually have ED glass despite the lack of such markings).

--Douglas Green<br>

</em><br>

My understanding is that some 180/2.8 AI(s) may be ED lenses that

were made without the famous gold band and ED moniker. The 180/2.8

ED Nikkors have 5 elements in 5 groups. There was an early non-ED

180/2.8 Nikkor-P that featured 5 elements in 4 groups. This lens

is reputed to be sharp but not as sharp as the ED. I have no

experience with the non-ED version. My January 1979 Nikkor sales

manual shows that Nikon was selling the old 5/4 version at that

time.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

The 180/2.8 ED AIS performs beautifully wide open gaining just a

touch of corner sharpness when stopped down to f/4.0. The wide

sweet spot is essentially f/2.8 to f/5.6. The performance

declines gracefully through f/8 to f/11 then dips at f/16 before

rolling over and dying. I find it best at f/8.0 or wider.<br>

<br>

The 180/2.8 ED AIS is a very sharp lens and performs well even

close-up on the PN-11 tube. With a single PN-11 tube and 25.7mm

of its own helical the 180/2.8 ED will yield a touch more than 0.4x.

With a PN-11 and PK-12 it will yield 0.5x. The light loss at half

life size -2 stops because of papillary magnification (please

double check this figure, YMMV). In <u>Closeups In Nature</u>

John Shaw shows and recommends the 180/2.8 ED with a PN-11 tube.

Id stay above f/11 for close-up. Im not sure if it

needs to be stopped down a little or not. Joseph D Cooper

recommends stopping down the old 5/4 version for close-up.<br>

<br>

Regards,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.<br>

<br>

Postscript: My preference would be a 70~200/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR

and 180/2.8 ED AIS. I own the 180/2.8 ED AIS and 80~200/2.8D ED AF with collar. The latter is a fine lens if the 70~200/2.8 is out of reach.

The 180/2.8 AIS is a stellar lens, as is the AF-D version. I don't think you can go wrong

with either, they are certainly pro-class lenses. For a comparably priced zoom, take a look

at the 80-200/2,8D-AF "two-touch" Nikkor.

The previous comments summed it up well. It's one of Nikon's best lenses, and it's size and weight make it easy to carry around with perhaps only one other lens, say a 35mm or 50mm prime. This is all you need. I traded in a 28-300mm zoom for this lens because I realized I was always using the zoom all the way out to 200-300, or most of the way in to 35-50mm. So, in a sense you're really only using two lenses. I kept my Nikon camera only to be able to use this lens. It is quite sufficient for sports--basketball--without the flash and for grand prix horse jumping. Also, great for portraits where you want great out-of-focus background.

I forgot to add: try to find a like new or prime used lens. The lens is well made and you will probably find one whose previous owner didn't use it very much anyway. I cannot see any reason to buy a new one; should be lot's of used one's out there. Try KEH.COM

The 180 is a gem. My 80-200/2.8 had a fantastic bokeh, fwiw (see below).

<p align="center"><img width=600 src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1247155-md.jpg"><br><Br>80-200/2.8</p>

<b>I think LEX has the NON ED version of the 180mm F2.8, and says it is decently sharp.</b> He is probably outside shooting off bottle rockets now for newyears !<BR><BR>Here my nice 180mm F2.8 ED got dunked under salt water in my summer home during Katrina.

According to my research into the serial numbers of these lenses I have the second incarnation of the 180/2.8, a pre-AI, non-ED version. It is very sharp, even wide open, with beautiful bokeh. I have absolutely no complaints about this lens, other than the fact that I can't use it on my D2H or FM2N because I still haven't had it AI'd.

 

The later models with ED glass and more sophisticated multicoating can only be better.

 

Okay, I do have one minor complaint: the lens is a bit heavy. The later versions of the 180/2.8 Nikkor are a bit lighter which is actually a good thing.

If the 180 is not selling well, it's because it doesn't have AF-S and Nikon should add this feature to it. Also, there are many available on the second hand market. Nikon can't really "discontinue" it without introducing a replacement as the gap between the 135 mm and 300 mm is too large (and no, the 200/2 doesn't count). By the way, I paid 1300 e for my 180. At $609 it's a steal.

Ditto AF-S for the 180/2.8. It'd be well worth $700-$800 U.S. street price for that improvement. Add VR for a bit more money and I'd have a seriously difficult time choosing between it and the 70-200/2.8 VR. Since I tend to use telezooms at the long end most of the time the flexibility of a zoom becomes moot anyway.

That old 'Moose' rumor about the 180 AI being an unlabeled ED may or may not be based

in fact. The way to check is to see if the lens in question focusses past infinity.

 

The ED lenses (I have a 180 f2.8 Ais ED) that I have seen focus past infinity to compensate

for the fact that ED glass changes more w/ temperature variations. The AI and earlier

lenses that I have personally seen all stop at infinity. Regardless, they are all great lenses.

I've said this before on this forum.....the 180 AF Nikkor is a fantastic lens. I sold mine because I "had" to have a 80-200 AFS for a lot of what do (stage performances and some commercial work). If I didn't need the zoom, I'd sell it in a minute and get another 180. It would probably be the longest lens I would need. The addition of AFS would be nice, but it would no doubt make the lens bigger and heavier.

 

FWIW, the 80-200 AFS is also a fanstic lens. Extremely sharp. I have 16X20 images from mine.

Alot of the Nikkors such as the 180mm ED and Non ED have an adjustable stop, inside the lens. This allows one to "focus past the infinity tick mark" on the lens. Many real old Preset Nikkor Telephotos were like this. Also sometimes folks had a telephoto modified so the lens always focuses under a wide temperature range than stock. I sure would not assume a Nikkor lens that "focuses past the infinity tick mark" is an ED lens. A non ED 180mm that focuses past infinity can just be a NON ED lens set up that way, or one with a stop that got loosened up over time. Here I currently have a 180mm ED lens apart.

Thanks to all for your great input. It seems nearly everyone agreed with how great this lens is, so I bought it. WOW! I'm impressed too. I'll post some pix when I get something better than just test shots.

 

What really impresses me is a) how easy it is to hand hold (perfect!), and b) how beautifully made it is. Sometimes Nikkors are just so dang impressive to just hold!<G>