Mint 180/2.8 ED AIS - Worth It?

[john_hinkey]

<p>I have an opportunity to buy a mint copy of the 180/2.8 ED AIS - it's a really nice lens in essentially brand new condition, but the owner wants $495 for it. It would go on my D300 and would serve as a much lighter alternative to my 80-200/2.8 AFS when I need the long end and weight/space are a concern. Some have suggested that this is too much $$ for this lens and that a modern 180/2.8 ED-F AFD lens could be had for not too much more if not the same.<br>

Is this too much $$ for this lens? They can be found for less, but usually in not nearly as good of shape. KEH has some listed as EX for $600, but KEH seems to be a bit expensive on most of their lens prices.<br>

I have not found an excellent+ condition 180/2.8 ED-F AFD (or non-D) lens for anything near $500 - they usually go on KEH for over $700 although they currently have an EX non-D AF 180/2.8 for $569.<br>

Is the ED AIS IQ less than, the same, or better than the modern ED-IF version?<br>

Also, what teleconverter can the 180/2.8 ED-IF take? Is it the TC-14A like the 180/2.8 ED AIS?<br>

Which would you prefer for landscape-type work - the AIS or the modern AF version?<br>

Thanks - John</p>

[christiaan_phleger___honol]

<p>I have nearly all the versions of this lens, the P, P.C, ED, and the AF. THe best is the AF, but not by very much, the ED is essentially the same at 5.6, or even f4. While that price is much more than I paid for mine, I realize that prices have gone up. Since its a MF lens you'll need to weigh the options on if you'll ever need AF, I only MF so that's not a big deal for me. The ED does have excellent handling, very crisp colors and excellent Bokeh. My wife has the AF, she likes the IF for the focussing, and I like the ED. For all but the most persnickety pixel peepers the ED is as good and useful if you don't need AF. </p>

[rob_wall]

<p>I bought mine (180 2.8 ED AIS) new in the employee purchase program when I was a junior in high school -- that was, gasp, more than 20 years ago. I think it was $550 then. I mostly use my 20, 28, and 85 lenses, but I have easily made more money off that 180 than all my other lenses put together, except for weddings where I use it sparingly.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>KEH actually has the best on-line retailer pricing, but even their prices have climbed substantially in the past year. Prices on the 180/2.8 ED AIS, and the other best lenses, have pretty much doubled. KEH "bargain" lenses are often almost as good as new, and I have bought a couple of their "ugly" lenses and I have been extremely pleased. You can save quite a bit of money with these grade lenses with very little, if any, problems.</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>It's a great lens, but a so-so deal. If you want it, you're not getting a bad deal.</p>

[yeux tortu]

<p>I sold mine last week, pristine, for 569. The premium was for the mint condition which is harder to find for this lens in the past several years. I love MF lenses so using this version was very enjoyable. I have used all the 70/80 to 200 mm 2.8 zooms and the ED AIS was sharper and more contrasty in my experience at the equivalnet focal length. For landscapes MF would be fine.</p>

[hughes]

<p>John<br>

it's a great lens but if you shop around you will find an AF version which is superior on a D300 for similar money<br>

Steve </p>

[john_hinkey]

<p>So, will the 180/2.8 ED AIS be sharper than my 80-200/2.8 AFS? My 80-200/2.8 AFS seem to be the sharpest lens I currently have @~200m (my 80-200/2.8 AFD was my sharpest, but I sold it due to it not being AFS and it had back-focus problems wide open).</p>

<p>I've searched around and cannot find any 180/2.8 AF lenses for $500 that are nearly this kind of condition. I also have a chance to buy a fairly used 180/2.8 ED for $300, with supposedly perfect glass, but it may be a bit too beat up for me.</p>

<p>- John</p>

[yeux tortu]

<p><strong>Weighted MTF for 180 mm: f2,8</strong> 0,75, <strong>f4</strong> 0,81, <strong>f8</strong> 0,83<br>

<strong>Weighted MTF for 200 mm: f2,8</strong> 0,75, <strong>f4</strong> 0,78, <strong>f8</strong> 0,82<br>

These numbers kind of match my field experiences as well. The AIS is about half the weight.</p>

[john_hinkey]

<p><strong>Weighted MTF for 180 mm: f2,8</strong> 0,75, <strong>f4</strong> 0,81, <strong>f8</strong> 0,83<br /> <strong>Weighted MTF for 200 mm: f2,8</strong> 0,75, <strong>f4</strong> 0,78, <strong>f8</strong> 0,82<br /> These numbers kind of match my field experiences as well. The AIS is about half the weight.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Hmm - it seems that for the 180/2.8 AF the numbers from photodo are:<br>

<strong>Weighted MTF for 180 mm:</strong> <strong> f2.8</strong> 0.72. <strong> f4</strong> 0.75. <strong> f5.6</strong> 0.79. <strong> f8</strong> 0.80<br>

Which are slightly worse than the 180/2.8 ED, which is opposite of what some have reported. I guess this could be due to sample variation.<br>

On Monday I will go back to the store that has the 180/2.8 ED AIS and compare it to my 80-200/2.8 AFS on a tripod with my D300 focused with live view. If the 180 ED AIS is as sharp or sharper I will buy it - if it's inferior then I won't.<br>

Also for my 80-200/2.8 AFD comparison (which was the best I've ever had at 200mm):<br>

80-200/2.8 AF (non-ED): <strong>Weighted MTF for 200 mm:</strong> <strong> f2.8</strong> 0.62. <strong> f4</strong> 0.68. <strong> f8</strong> 0.79<br>

80-200/2.8 AF-ED: <strong>Weighted MTF for 200 mm:</strong> <strong> f2.8</strong> 0.67. <strong> f8</strong> 0.82<br>

80-200/2.8 AFD-ED: <strong>Weighted MTF for 200 mm:</strong> <strong> f2.8</strong> 0.67. <strong> f4</strong> 0.74. <strong> f8</strong> 0.80</p>

<p>So there is some sample variation in there, but it appears that the 180/2.8 ED AIS has the potential to be as sharp or sharper than the current 180/2.8 AFD AND my 80-200/2.8 AFS. I'll have to give it a try and see. If it's that sharp I won't mind the lack of AF.<br>

Thanks for the input! - John</p>

</blockquote>

[StefDevos]

<p>Years ago I did side-by-side comparison between 180 AF ED and 80-200 AF ED at 180mm (2ring version) - subject of my analytical test was a flat wooden chess board at a distance of approx 3 meter.<br>

The sharpness, detail and what I would call "3D rendering" was much better for the prime lens (the zoom suffers a bit at the long end, especially wide open).<br>

Having said this, I must admit that the 80-200 'surprises' me time and again in the field (for portraiture)</p>

[StefDevos]

<p>Years ago I did side-by-side comparison between 180 AF ED and 80-200 AF ED at 180mm (2ring version) - subject of my analytical test was a flat wooden chess board at a distance of approx 3 meter.<br>

The sharpness, detail and what I would call "3D rendering" was much better for the prime lens (the zoom suffers a bit at the long end, especially wide open).<br>

Having said this, I must admit that the 80-200 'surprises' me time and again in the field (for portraiture)</p>

[alan_wilder1]

<p>I've owned the 180/2.8 ED AI-S, AFD and 80-200 AFS and after doing detailed field and USAF resolution testing, I can safely say the AFD has the best resolution of the group across the frame but only marginally better than the AIS version. The AIS actually bettered the AFD in that it had less chromatic aberration than the 180 AFD towards the corner so I'd say it was a wash. Unfortunately, neither primes can take the better teleconverters (TC-14 E II, TC-20 E) like the 80-200 AFS. For this reason plus the excellent IQ and versatility of the 80-200 AFS, I only now own the zoom of the three.</p>

[john_hinkey]

<p>Stef and Alan -</p>

<p>Thanks for the input - I'm going to test the 180 AIS ED lens and if it's a very good copy and can best my 80-200/2.8 AFS then I'll probably purchase it. I've found it difficult to find a 180 AFD (or non-D) in good condition for a reasonable amount of $$, plus I like to hold a lens in my hand before buying it.<br>

Thanks - John</p>

[alan_wilder1]

<p>I had my 180/2.8 ED AIS for sale on the forum's classified in mint minus condition a few weeks ago. No takers at $375 but it finally sold at that price on another forum.</p>

[john_hinkey]

<blockquote>

<p>I had my 180/2.8 ED AIS for sale on the forum's classified in mint minus condition a few weeks ago. No takers at $375 but it finally sold at that price on another forum.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's me - always a day late (but usually not a $ short).<br>

- John</p>

[hanh]

<p>Hello John,<br />I recently bought the Nikkor 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS with some scratches in the front element for $100.00. This lens is superb and its sharpness wide-open rivals any other Canon L prime lens that I have 135L f2, 200L f/2.8, 300L f/2.8. The bokeh is exceptional as you can see in this image that was taken handheld with the D2x at about 15 feet from the subject.<br /><br />You can download the full size image <a href="http://vietshare.com/photo/misc/hook-nikon-180-ais-org.jpg">http://vietshare.com/photo/misc/hook-nikon-180-ais-org.jpg</a><br>

<br />Good luck in finding the lens - it is definitely worth searching and waiting for.<br /><br /><img src="http://vietshare.com/photo/misc/hook-nikon-180-ais.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[john_hinkey]

<p>Well, I had a chance to "test" this copy of the 180/2.8 ED AIS against my 80-200AFS yesterday. The results are over at dpreview:<br>

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1030&thread=32455926<br>

Basically, the 180 ED AIS was a bit sharper up to f/11 and had more contrast at all apertures than the 80-200AFS, but it did ghost in the really severe contrast situation that I tested them in (bright overcast cloudy background with a dark subject in the center of the image). The 180 ED AIS also had some minor PF/CA wide open, but it was not bad (definitely better than my old 80-200/2.8 AFD). The 180 ED AIS is definitely sharper than a 200/4 AIS that I recently picked up as well.<br>

I guess I was expecting it to be more sharp than my 80-200/2.8 AFS, but this may be unrealistic (I had a 80-200/2.8 AFD that was sharper than my AFS version at 200mm, but this may have been an exceptional copy).<br>

I'm still debating if this mint 180/2.8 ED AIS is worth $495. I cannot find a really nice copy of a 180/2.8 ED-IF (D or non-D) for anywhere near this price. This lens is supposedly even sharper than the 180 ED AIS.<br>

- John</p>

[alan_wilder1]

<p>I sold my 180 ED AIS before I could test it on my D700 but on film, the biggest performance advantage over the 80-200/2.8 ED AFD or ED AFS was much performance at the edge of the frame and corners. Centrally and mid-frame it was a draw, especially by f/4 and smaller where the two would be indistinguishable. Because the D300 has a crop factor, the edge and corner softness of the zoom at full frame (FX) is practically a moot point in DX format.</p>

[john_newell2]

<p>Make sure you do more than shoot brick walls before you reach final conclusions. My 80-200 AF-S may or may not be particularly good (it was the third I tried), but it is extremely good, giving very little ground in real life use to my 180/2.8 ED AIS. Haven't tried the 180/2.8 AF/AFD.</p>

[john_hinkey]

<p>I took images as best I could with my tripod and D300 in front of the camera store that has it on consignment. I posted my review over at dpreview with a couple of images. I compared it to my 80-200AFS and found the 180 ED to be a tad bit sharper and a bit better contrast. The 180 ED did have a ghosting problem (under very severe back lighting conditions) that the 80-200AFS did not.<br>

Search the Nikon SLR Lens forum for jhinkey (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1030&thread=32455926)<br>

for my write-up.<br>

I'm still hunting for a nice 180/2.8D ED-IF AF due to it reportedly being sharper than the 180ED AIS, the AF capability (not a must, but would be nice), and the slightly lower weight.<br>

- John</p>

 

[john_newell2]

<p>The images in the post linked above were at f/16. Did you shoot any wide open or at f/4 or f/5.6?</p>

[john_hinkey]

<blockquote>

<p>The images in the post linked above were at f/16. Did you shoot any wide open or at f/4 or f/5.6?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, I shot everything from f/2.8 to f/16. I'll work tonight to get those images up. The ghosting was only a problem for the 180 ED AIS at f/11 to f/16 and it really looks like a reflection off of the aperture blades back to the sensor.<br>

- John</p>

[john_hinkey]

<blockquote>

<p>The images in the post linked above were at f/16. Did you shoot any wide open or at f/4 or f/5.6?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, I shot everything from f/2.8 to f/16. I'll work tonight to get those images up. The ghosting was only a problem for the 180 ED AIS at f/11 to f/16 and it really looks like a reflection off of the aperture blades back to the sensor.<br>

- John</p>

[john_hinkey]

<p>Well, I ended up getting an excellent condition 180/2.8 ED-IF (non-D) off of e-bay for $425, so my look at the 180/2.8 ED has ended.<br>

I'm currently comparing this lens to my 80-200/2.8 AFS and 70-300VR (also my 200/4 AIS even though it can't do 180mm, but one can still compare).<br>

So far the 180/2.8 ED-IF AF is at least as sharp as all the three lenses above even when then are shot at 200mm (i.e., I can see just as much detail at 180mm with the 180/2.8 as the others at 200mm).<br>

- John</p>