Determining age of a Nikon lens

It would be helpful to know exactly which model this 55mm macro is. See this link for more information: Nikon Lenses

Maybe it is a 55mm/f2.8 AI-S version?

An image of the lens may help, also.

It would be helpful to know exactly which model this 55mm macro is. See this link for more information: Nikon Lenses

 

Maybe it is a 55mm/f2.8 AI-S version?

 

An image of the lens may help, also.

It is 55mm/f2.8 AI-S version.

The AI-S version was in production from 1979 to 2006, but the AF era started towards the end of the 1980's and the AF, pre-D version was introduced in 1989. Back around 1990, AF was still very primitive and plenty of people preferred manual-focus lenses. As a very rough, ballpark estimate, I would probably drop the last decade from that 1979 to 2006 period. This lens is likely from the mid to late 1980's.

However, IMO it is far more important whether an old lens is well kept over the decades than the exact production date, and a new lens could potentially sit on some shelf for a couple of years after leaving the factory. If it used roughly and carelessly, even a well built AI-S lens could show serious wear and even flaws on the front element after a year or two.

"However, IMO it is far more important whether an old lens is well kept...... "

Agreed! Condition is everything, and much more important than age - unless the lens pre-dates decent coating or design techniques.

Some years ago I was fortunate enough to come across a 10 year old 55mm f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor that had lain unused since new. The focus had stiffened up almost solid, but after a bit of gentle warming and working, it softened up to focus normally. In effect I had a brand new lens - just 10 or so years after it was made.

The AI-S version was in production from 1979 to 2006, but the AF era started towards the end of the 1980's and the AF, pre-D version was introduced in 1989. Back around 1990, AF was still very primitive and plenty of people preferred manual-focus lenses. As a very rough, ballpark estimate, I would probably drop the last decade from that 1979 to 2006 period. This lens is likely from the mid to late 1980's.

 

However, IMO it is far more important whether an old lens is well kept over the decades than the exact production date, and a new lens could potentially sit on some shelf for a couple of years after leaving the factory. If it used roughly and carelessly, even a well built AI-S lens could show serious wear and even flaws on the front element after a year or two.

If the OP lens is indeed an AI-S lens then it must be after 83 or 84 when the FA was introduced. In 77 only AI lenses were available.

Actually Nikon started introducing AI-S lenses in 1979; see the link I posted earlier. For example Series E lenses are AI-S lenses. My parents bought an EM with a 50mm/f1.8 Series E in 1979. My family still has that set up and I have confirmed that the lens is AI-S.

But Nikon didn’t advertise the difference between AI and AI-S lenses until later. By the time they introduced the FA in 1984, plenty of AI-S lenses were already in circulation.

See this old thread: Nikon 50mmf1.8 E Series (AI-S) Lens

Actually Nikon started introducing AI-S lenses in 1979; see the link I posted earlier. For example Series E lenses are AI-S lenses. My parents bought an EM with a 50mm/f1.8 Series E in 1979. My family still has that set up and I have confirmed that the lens is AI-S.

 

But Nikon didn’t advertise the difference between AI and AI-S lenses until later. By the time they introduced the FA in 1984, plenty of AI-S lenses were already in circulation.

 

See this old thread: Nikon 50mmf1.8 E Series (AI-S) Lens

Wow! All the AI lenses I bought used after 2000 are AI and not AI-S. I must have been unlucky getting them although all of them work well.

Wow! All the AI lenses I bought used after 2000 are AI and not AI-S. I must have been unlucky getting them although all of them work well.

Nothing wrong with Ai lenses. With a few notable exceptions (28mm f/2.8 for one) many are identically optically to their later AiS successors, although the very latest AiS production models would have slightly improved coatings (SIC vs. NIC). Many Ai lens are more "robust" mechanically than the same lens in AiS, with a much more refined internal construction with tighter tolerances.

One advantage of AiS lenses over Ai in the digital age is that many of them can have a CPU chip added to work with lower end "dumb" DSLRs and to allow electronic aperture control, Due to the non-linear nature of the aperture linkage, that's not a practical option on Ai lenses.

...Many Ai lens are more "robust" mechanically than the same lens in AiS, with a much more refined internal construction with tighter tolerances..

I'd like some proof of that. I've used dozens of Nikkor lenses (AI and AI-S) since 1978, and NONE of them has given me any trouble at all.

I'd like some proof of that. I've used dozens of Nikkor lenses (AI and AI-S) since 1978, and NONE of them has given me any trouble at all.

- I think you missed the salient words 'CPU chip added' Vincent.

All AI and AI-S lenses work equally well on compatible DSLR bodies, but if a Dandelion chip is fitted to enable control of the lens aperture from the body, only AI-S lenses are guaranteed to have the correct aperture linearity.

AI lenses fitted with a CPU module may not give the correct exposure when the aperture is controlled from the camera.

In lens-ring aperture control mode, there's no issue.

- I think you missed the salient words 'CPU chip added' Vincent....

How would a "CPU chip added" change the mechanical robustness of the lenses or have anything to do with "more refined internal construction with tighter tolerances"?. I shoot film exclusively, and I have both AI and AI-S lenses, all of which have been perfect. My AI-S lenses are the equals or better than my AI lenses.

How would a "CPU chip added" change the mechanical robustness of the lenses or have anything to do with "more refined internal construction with tighter tolerances"?. I shoot film exclusively, and I have both AI and AI-S lenses, all of which have been perfect. My AI-S lenses are the equals or better than my AI lenses.

You have to disassemble the lenses to see what Michael is talking about. Plus it depends on the exact date of the lens(es) whether there's much difference in helicoid or barrel construction.

You can certainly see a paring back of materials and repairability between early and later manual focus Nikkors when dismantling them. But none of them are shoddily or flimsily made. It's more a difference between over-engineering and well-made.

You'd probably have to seriously abuse the lenses before seeing the difference in robustness. For example: I have an AI 50mm f/2 with horrendous damage to the front filter thread that could only be got from a major drop or knock. It still focusses smoothly and performs as new. OTOH, I have an AI-S 50mm f/1.4 with a minor ding in the filter thread that's caused a stiff-spot in the focus.

I think it's things like that, that Michael is talking about.

My AI-S lenses are the equals or better than my AI lenses.

Its relative, depending on the individual lens model and how you look at things. Repair techs noted evidence of cost-cutting on the more price sensitive, popular, slower consumer AIS lenses of the time (as well as some high-volume "pro" lenses). Most of the cost-cutting axe fell on over-engineered aspects that made the earlier lenses more fussy to assemble and disassemble, but again it varies lens to lens: some AIS are easier to repair than AI, others more difficult.

From today's user standpoint, the choice between AI and AIS comes down to second-hand cost more than anything else: people buy whichever one they can get the best price on in good condition. A sizable portion of manual Nikkors are being snatched up by Canon video shooters and Sony A7 mirrorless enthusiasts, neither of whom benefit from the AIS mechanical "improvements" in any way whatsoever. They don't even need AI: its meaningless on non-Nikon bodies. If you're using Canon or Sony bodies, you can save some money by looking for the pre-AI versions and not lose any optical performance (except in a handful of cases where the AI or AIS version was notably redesigned, like the various 135mm versions and the 28mm f/2.8). Some lenses were only available in AI and/or AIS form.

If you're using Nikon lenses on Nikon bodies, there are some functional advantages of AIS over AI, but it depends on your priorities. The older AI offer much longer focus throw on every lens, allowing finer control (and more leeway for video use). Personally, I couldn't care less about shutter priority or controlling the aperture with the camera body dial: if I'm using a MF lens, its because I want to operate it manually, not as some AF-crippled half-1978, half-2018 contraption. I prefer a longer focus throw, and have no interest in chipping because I can't focus manually with the tiny viewfinders of my DX bodies anyway (my MF lenses go strictly on the D700 or Sony). So most of my manual Nikkors are AI. Others will feel differently, and want as much modern functionality from their MF lenses as possible: they'll choose AIS. Nice to have both options at various price points.

The main advantages of 'chipping' are that the correct lens data are automatically entered into EXIF with no menu mining, and the addition of a useful focus trap facility; whereby the camera shutter is automatically tripped when the subject is in focus.

You also get full matrix metering, which I've never personally noticed to be any different from the crippled MF version, but it doesn't hurt to have it.

Later versions of Dandelion chip offer the facility to fine-tune focus -making the focus confirmation dot a bit more reliable.

So more of a makeover than a Frankenstein's monster.

I'd like some proof of that. I've used dozens of Nikkor lenses (AI and AI-S) since 1978, and NONE of them has given me any trouble at all.

I have serviced dozens and dozens of Ai and AiS lenses, including complete mechanical teardowns. Well over 100 lenses from 24mm to 200mm. I said the former was generally more robust internally than the latter, not that one gave any more trouble compared to the other.

You have to disassemble the lenses to see what Michael is talking about. Plus it depends on the exact date of the lens(es) whether there's much difference in helicoid or barrel construction. .... I think it's things like that, that Michael is talking about.

Exactly. There is a difference. :-)

The AI-S version was in production from 1979 to 2006 ...

Small correction: the AI-S 55/2.8 is still in production, or at least can still be bought new. At the start of 2006 Nikon announced that most AI-S lenses were discontinued, the AI-S 55/2.8 micro was one of the few which was kept in production. The serial numbers for most lenses were also reset at that point.

The AI-S 55/2.8 micro started production at the end of 1979 with serial no 179041. Serial numbers continue up to 60xxxx, probably around year 2000. Then serial numbers jump to 701xxx, up to a high of 752406 by the end of 2005. Serial numbers re-start at 800001 from 2006 up to a confirmed high of 811470 (probably a bit higher by now).

Serial number is 463921 is about mid-way in the first series. I would say production rates were higher in the early years, slowing down when AF models were released, so I guess the lens was made somewhere between 1985-1990. As Shun said, the age of a lens is less important than it's current condition. A relatively new lens which has been heavily used or badly stored will be in worse condition than a much older lens which has been well looked after. I have lenses over 50 years old which are still nearly good as new...

One thing to keep in mind that Nikon Series E lenses are AI-S lenses. (Can't say every single Series E lens is AI-S, but the 50mm/f1.8 Series E my parents got in 1979 is definitely AI-S.) Those Series E lenses generally have weaker construction compared to non-Series E AI and AI-S lenses.

All series-E lenses are built to AI-S standard - they have the linear aperture action which permits accurate aperture stop-down in program and shutter priority modes, they have the "scoop" in the mount to indicate it is AI-S, and they have the minimum aperture on the ADR scale colored orange. The only difference is that they are made from cheaper materials, don't have the aperture coupling prong for pre-AI cameras, and they aren't labelled "Nikkor".

The first Nikkor AI-S lens was the 55/2.8 micro in 1979, which was designed to the new Series-E/AI-S standard. Instruction sheets for very early lenses still refer to "AI" rather than "AI-S". The AI-S line wasn't really launched until 1981 when virtually all existing AI models were upgraded. The optics for most lenses stayed the same but the mechanics were almost completely designed. It must have been a monumental task, Nikon have never upgraded or released so many lenses in one year before or since...

All my friends (a shrinking group) who still use Nikons (the friends, not the use of Nikon, is shrinking) always tell me how great it is that Nikon has never changed the F mount since 1959-60.;)

As it happens, most of my Nikkors are non-AI.

I use the Nikonian's checklist [link] when I am matching up my newer Nikons with appropriate lenses.