AIS LPrime Lenses for FM3A

I got a sweet deal in a new(2 months old) black FM3A black Nikon

w/Nikkor 45 2.8 Black Pancake-all with valid warranty from B&H-from

EBay.Now I'm looking into buying lenses and i'm inclined into the AIS

series.My initial choices are all primes(a 24,a 55 micro,a 85,a 135

maybe and 200).There're are some choices in aperture in some of them

and I have hear that some are are best than other regardless of

price.This selection will take money and time,but I'm not in a rush.

I will aprecciate some honest imput regarding this choice and if I

should avoid or add another one and why.Any particular flash for this

camera will be also taken into consideration(nothing bulky,but

capable of doing a decent work)

Thanks in advance for any reply,

Robert

Robert,

 

You may want to consider the 105 f/2.5 AIS, I have one and plan to hang onto it. It is an outstanding portrait lens.

 

Do you anticipate much low/available light work? If so, another lens you should consider is the 35mm f/1.4 AIS. Many photographers use this lens as their normal. I will get one of these when I get the chance.

 

For something in the 200mm range, you may want to consider the 180mm f/2.8 AIS ED.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Vernon

The 45mm f2.8 AIP lens performs so well that you'll have to take care if you want to match it's quality level.

 

The 55 micro f2.8 AIS, 85 f2 AIS, and 135 f2.8 AIS lenses come close enough if you don't use them wide open. The 55mm AIS macro lens is actually optimized for infnity focus rather than micro work, and is incredibly sharp. The 85mm f2.0 is not as sharp wide open as you might wish if you will be using it for portraits. There is always the 85mm f1.4 for this, of course. For tele get the 180mm f2.8 AIS if you can, although the 200mm f4.0 AIS is quite good with just a little less contrast for fine details. For wide angle, definitely use the 35mm f1.4 AIS or 28mm f2.0 AIS if you can, simply due to their excellent quality.

The 20mm is very nice and allows wild perspective views, plus solves not-enough-room-to-back-up problems. Personally, I've never taken a real "keeper" with the 200mm f/4. It's either too long or not long enough for what I tend to shoot. Nor is it exceptionally crisp. The 105mm f/2.5 is a real prize, as is the 55 micro. No better lenses out there.

hmmm my AI 200/4 is as sharp and contrasty as my AI 105/2.5 (i.e. killer sharp). Sample variation? You may also wish to consider AI over AI-S lenses. AI-S adds nothing to an FM3A, its more expensive, and the build quality is slightly inferior.

 

The most comprehensive reviews I've seen of Nikon lenses is here:

 

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html

 

I bought my AI 200/4 on Bjorn's advice and I am not disappointed. If I could afford it, I'd get an AF EDIF 180/2.8 but the 200/4 was a bargain for $90(!)

 

I think I would only want to own one of either 45/2.8 or micro 55/2.8. You haven't stated your photographic objectives so its difficult to comment. The non-AI 85/1.8 is legendary. Most consider it superior to the 85/1.4.

 

My kit (all AI Nikkors) 24/2.8, 50/1.4, 105/2.5, 200/4

First of all,thaks to everyone for your helpful answers.

My objetives are landscapes,macro,portrait,and some long range for ocassions of rare candid portrait or some animal photography(I know someone is going to say is not enough a 200mm).Don't worry,I'm not going to Africa:).Just heros on the Florida Keys and the likes.

I stated the AIS because I don't see any place that sell the AI,besides,can anyone tell me the differences?

Thanks again in advance,

Robert

Sorry,I mean herons....ooppsss!!!

I second the advice on purchasing AI vs. AIS. That is, AI is less expensive and there's no feature difference when mounted on the FM3A.

 

I had a 135mm F2.8 series E, which was a decent lens for the price. I "upgraded" to the 135mm F2 (AI). I like the speed, and I like the 135mm for portraits (many do not). The F2 135mm is significantly larger and heavier than the F2.8.

 

I have been happy with the 200mm F4 (AIS), but I haven't used it much since I got a 180mm F2.8 (AI). The 200mm is more convenient to carry, but I like the extra speed of the 180mm in spite of its extra weight.

Robert,

 

The difference between AI and AIS lenses is that AIS lenses communicate the focal length of the lens via a small scallop in the face of the lens mount. This information is used in the Program mode of the FA and perhaps a few other Nikon bodies.

 

None of the current bodies make use of this feature.

 

Vernon

I recommend you purchase AF-D versions (which are all AIS, by the way) if you're after prime lenses. You may be seduced by an AF body, or a digital body, down the road and your bodies will be able to share lenses.

<p>

I use a 20/2.8 AF-D, and a 35/2 AF-D on my FM3a. They have a good manual focus feel. In fact I prefer it over the manual lenses as I'm able to adjust focus with just a single finger. I had the 85/1.8 but I prefer the 105 focal length, and settled on a 100/2.8 E lens because of its size. Nikon needs to AF-d the 105/2.5.

<p>

If you're not doing a lot of low-light work, your money is wasted on the faster f:1.4 lenses. Even then, these lenses aren't at their best wide open.

<p>

The newer AF-D lenses have the benefit of improved coatings, computer element matching, and probably dozens of things we don't know about. They also have a lot more plastic but that's an advantage in weight, as far as I'm concerned. And the USA versions come with a five year warranty.

<p>

I am using one zoom lens with this body, an older 28-50/3.5. And it works well. I have a report <a href="http://www.jimtardio.com/28-50.html">here.

The 200mm F4 micro would be another good choice given your macro tendencies. it only goes to 1:2 by itself, but tubes, TCs or the 4T diopter all get you closer to or past 1:1. It's a nice compact lens to use, though it gets only good (not great) reviews for normal (non macro) use. The AF version of this lens is reputed to be of higher optical quality (also much higher price, higher weight, larger filter size etc) but I haven't used that one.

 

<p>Oh, the 200 also has a <i>great</i> tripod collar.

AF???No,thank you,I refuse to the handling or use of an autofocus lens even in manual focus!! ;).And I rather die than buy an autofocus camera...lol.

Anyway I found this link that answer the differences between the AI and the AI-S Nikkor lenses:

http://home1.gte.net/rhashiro/photography/nikkor-mounts.htm

Now....Houston,we have a problem....AI is not longer made,so I have to resort on EBay,KEH or other source of used lenses.I'm a bit picky,a bit of brassing and I'll be looking for the right paint to make it look new(and I think that Micro Tools sell it!!!)

 

Thank you very much to you all for your cooperation and share of knowledgement,

Regards,

Robert Armas

Just one observation: since you already have a 45mm pancake, I would not bother with the 55mm micro. This is not a great focal length for macro, since it forces you to move in very close to your subject. The other lenses you're looking at (105, 135, 200) would make better macro lenses, and would give you a useful focal length you don't already have.

 

(Of course you'll need extension tubes or closeup lenses or both. But even the 55mm requires help to go to 1:1 magnification. If you haven't already done so, pick up a copy of John Shaw's Nature Photography Field Guide. It has a great chapter on closeup photo).

" The non-AI 85/1.8 is legendary. Most consider it superior to the 85/1.4. "

 

I have used an AI'd 85 f1.8, and now I use an AI'd f1.8 HC (multicoated) model. They are both great. Also I think there was a factory-AI 85mm f1.8 which was multicoated. I've never used the f1.4, so I can't offer a comparison with it. The f1.8 models and the f2.0 models are roughly the same stoped down to f5.6 or smaller, but the f1.8 models are better at wide apertures. I and some others feel the f1.8 models have a better subjective "charm" quality as well. If you have enough time, find and try one of the multicoated AI'd or AI f1.8 models.

<P>I'm in the same boat, I got my FM3A 6 months ago. You would do well to buy AI-S lenses rather than AF, as they have superlative dampening in the focusing action. AF lenses usually have loose focus rings so they don't overstress the AF motor in the camera. They usually feel gritty, not smooth like AI-S lenses. There are some exceptions, like the excellent 60mm f/2.8 AF Micro-Nikkor, which I would recommend over the 55mm AI-S as it can do 1:1 and is more complementary to your 45mm.</P>

<P>I like classic lens designs so I bought the 45mm f/2.8P (Tessar), the 105mm f/2.5 (Xenotar). When my father upgraded from a F3 to a D100, I also obtained his 50mm f/1.4 and the cheapo "Nikon" (not Nikkor) 28mm f/2.8 Series E (I will replace the latter this Thanksgiving with the Nikkor AI-S version, which is one of the sharpest and best corrected wide-angle lenses ever made).</P>

<P>For whatever it's worth, the late Galen Rowell raved in "Mountain Light" about the 24mm f/2.8, the 35mm f/1.4 and the 75-150 Series E.</P>

<P>Two good sites to appreciate the pedigree of manual-focus Nikkor lenses:

<UL><LI><A HREF="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/index.htm">http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/index.htm</A></LI>

<LI><A HREF="http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/society/nikkor/index.htm">http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/society/nikkor/index.htm</A></LI></UL>