Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIS Lens / 3100

<p>The several pictures posted are awesome. This lens is fun at close range still shots with light. I have noticed some problems with my efforts at low light moving subjects at distance. So much so that I have discarded the idea of using the lens except in closer range still shots. </p>

<p>I have been using the 105 Sonnar (old one) since the 60's on film and now with my digital cameras. I did have it AI'd, but no chip. Here's two shots, the top one with DX format, and the bottom was 35mm full frame film.</p><div></div>

<p>"Hey, I don't actually make this stuff up.<br />Here is the text from page 132 of Rudolf Hillebrand and Hans-Jochim Hauschild 1993 <em>Nikon Compendium: Handbook of the Nikon System</em>. Hove Press."<br>

The opinion of the authors regarding the 105 f/2.5 nearly twenty years ago probably doesn't carry too much weight nowadays. It's a very fine lens and I've owned several of them. It lacks a little contrast compared to the more modern Nikkors but that's not a bad thing for a portarit lens. It's very sharp but not as sharp as some of Nikon's modern pro lenses i.e. the 60 f/2.8 G or even the 24-70 f/2.8 let alone the 200 f/2 and other super telephoto lenses that cost a small fortune.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>The 105mm/f2.5 has been the legendary portrait lens from Nikon. However, I question whether it is a good idea to use that on a D3100. First of all, with the DX "crop factor," 105mm is long for a typical portrait lens on DX. There is of course no AF and also no metering. Meanwhile, the D3100 does not exactly have the best viewfinder for manual focusing. It may work for you if you always shoot from a tripod and use live view to adjust your focus.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>nearly twenty years ago</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Like they're not still copying and making the same prime lenses today? Look at the current offerings of both Nikon and Canon in primes and there really aren't a whole lot of "new" designs.</p>

<p>I'd go so far as to say that the real advances in the last twenty years have been in the computer assisted design of zoom lenses.</p>

<p>As I said, sometimes it's very hard to improve on a mature, time-tested standard of near perfection.</p>

<p>I'm not bound to defend a position that I characterized as "hyperbole" in my initial mention of it, but neither do I think that the older positions are irrelevant solely because they are old. Hell, many of our members would be irrelevant by that measure. Hmmm....</p>

<p>In my previous post I was referring to Nikon's newer professional lenses. However, I agree with you in some respects. My 28 f/2.8 AI-s Nikkor is outstanding and is easily superior to the Nikon 28 f/2.8 AF-D as an example, although the latter is not a pro lens.<br>

The modern professional lenses, primes included, such as the 24 f/1.4G, show a marked increase in micro contrast, probably due to Nano coating. Sharpness is also improved over the 24 f/2 AI-s Nikkor.<br>

I've been using Nikon cameras and lenses for well over thirty years and haved owned and still own several AI and AI-s lenses. I use my 105 f/2.5 AI lens now and again but prefer my Zeiss 100 MP for portraits as I personally find it a better all round lens.<br>

Time marches on, even in lens design and for anyone to claim the 105 f/2.5 as the finest Nikon lens ever produced in 2011 would be unrealistic. The reference to such a claim for the lens in 1993 may of had considerable merit back then but not now. As such, I think that this single older position is irrelevant today. Older positions (as you put it) in general are another matter entirely and I said nothing to that effect.</p>

 

What's the "MP" in Zeiss 100 MP? Is that the Cosina Zeiss lens, or an older one? The modern Zeiss seems marvelous,

from what I've read and seen (without having used one), but it's twice the size and weight, and ten times the price, of the

little old Nikkor.

 

 

Is it fair to say that the 105/2.5 is one of the very best Nikkors that you can buy for under $200?

<p><em>"What's the "MP" in Zeiss 100 MP? Is that the Cosina Zeiss lens, or an older one?"</em><br>

The MP stands for Makro Planar, which means that it's a macro lens. The current Zeiss lenses are made by Cosina in Japan under supervision of Zeiss.<br>

<em>"Is it fair to say that the 105/2.5 is one of the very best Nikkors that you can buy for under $200?"</em><br>

Absolutely! Even under $500 I'd say.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>This is a really nice lens. I have a pre-AI version with the indexing prong that was modified to work on AI cameras. I wouldn't shoot with this lens at f/2.5 or f/2.8, but at f/4, it magically becomes sharp with beautifully dreamy bokeh.</p>

<p>I noted nobody took up on the Sonnar part and portrait values of the 105mmf2.5. It was meant for portraits not a MTF test that did not exist then. It's great for portraits used wide open,f4 and f5.6. Stopped down it is sharp. Really sharp. I used it with a diffusion filter in my fashion days and some weddings. The effects with halo/back-light pure magic. I have long ago stopped worrying about what lens is the sharpest,the best and value.My 105mm was purchased new in 1971, after trying out a Komura Zoom that jammed my new Nikon-F.<br>

The lens was way more fun to use than my Leica-M 90mm Tele-Elmarit f2.8. The results easier to see and evaluate. It also was better built. The Leica lens fell less than 15ins. onto a floor and it was away for repairs and counseling for over 1year. Parts were needed and the helicoid was damaged. The 105mm flew out of my backpack while I was cycling and landed on it's front. One filter deleted. I'm seeing my plastic mounts and helicoids wearing out and becoming useless. The "old" lenses may not fit all the "hype" of improvements but heck the photos,images and prints testify to what is good in usage and result. The 105mm has all it's numbers and engravings very visible. The Leica lens back in the seventies, when it traded owners, very suddenly, in an attack on my car, was used by feel and memory. All the paint had worn off. I never bothered to replace it.<br>

My 55mmf3.5 Micro-Nikkor is giving me some of the sharpest images I've ever done! At infinity. Something I'd not considered when I purchase a really well used one a few years ago. The 105 mm complements it admirably.</p>