Nikon 135mm f/2.8 - any users here?

[Ian Rance]

<p>Today I picked up a 135mm f/2.8 Ai-S for a very low price from a camera shop that is clearing all the old Nikkors out to make way for the new digital models. I have been buying a few lenses recently, but the prices set are so low as to make leaving them impossible for me (the 135mm today cost me 30 Pounds).</p>

<p>It is in nice order and I look forward to running a roll through using this lens, but looking back on past threads, very little seems to have been said about it - perhaps it is not very popular?</p>

<p>Any thoughts or comments are appreciated as always to get me going on the right foot as it were.</p>

<p>Ian</p>

[michael_bradtke]

<p>Its a good solid lens. Not a dog but not one of the stellar performers. For the price you paid you can not go wrong.</p>

[mark liddell]

<p>I had one for a while because it was cheap. I never got on with it, it was a bit too long and I got a lot of unsharp pictures in between ones that were OK and never really got to the bottom of exactly why - in the end I ditched it for the 105mm f/2.5 AIS and had no more problems.</p>

[vincent_peri]

<p>I have a Nikkor 135mm f/2.8 AIS lens, and it is outstanding. I have no complaints.</p>

[rick_donnelly]

<p>A perfectly fine lens, I have no complaints about it. It requires care in focusing wide open as does the 135 on a Leica. the 105 is perhaps nicer for portraiture, but I would not sell either of them and carry both with an F3.</p>

[christiaan_phleger___honol]

<p>Good little lens, quite surprisingly sharp if you take the usual tele-care with it, it is a bit small so its kind of easy to try to shoot things unsupported when you should use a tripod. If looking for one, choose the Ais version over the Ai version, same optics but the Ai one is a horrendous lens for any kind of tune-up or adjustments, not that much goes wrong with the Ai except maybe stiff focus but don't think by purchasing an Ai with "stiff focus' and doing a CLA will be easy cheap or fun, I've done 3-4 and they are nightmares. Ais much better.</p>

[peter]

<p>I onw two - the early pre AI one and th eone you have. Both are fine performers and like all Nikkors of this era built like the proverbial brick outhouse. A nice lens to use that produces fine results.</p>

[gary_watson]

<p>It's under-rated--not quite a "sleeper" but better than run-of-the mill. The 135mm focal length was usually considered about the longest anyone could handhold with consistently sharp results. Nearly every major camera maker had one but once cheap 70-210 zooms became popular, longer-than-normal prime lens sales slipped. Very few people who bought a 105/2.5 would have bothered with a 135.It works as a stealth portrait lens and is handy for picking out architectural/landscape detail. I use the old 85/1.8 and 180/2.8 AIS far more. For the price, why not?</p>

[shiang_wang1]

<p>I own one as well, it is light and small, great lense for protrait (though a little long), one of few lenses I have when I started taking pictures. But I have to admin after I bought 80-200 AFD, I hardly use it. The reason I haven't sold it is price is too low on ebay. Great you got a good deal.</p>

[rjm photo]

<p>I just got my early non-AI version adapted for use on D200. I am impressed with this lens so far after twenty or so shots with digital camera. I still have to develop the Tri-X roll I shot with my F2, but so far I don't find this lens any less sharp or lacking in color rendition than the exhaulted 80-200 AI zoom with the square fitting in one end.<br>

I bought this lens for $30 6 years ago and I have never used it until now. I am finding out how nice these old Nikkors are (pre AI and AI/AIS) on late model digital cameras. I am not impressed with the pull out lens hood....not one of Nikon's significant accomplishments.</p>

<div></div>

[oskar_ojala]

<p>It's not a very popular nor very famous lens. However, the performance is solid, improving clearly when stopping down. Flare is a weakness, but resolution and lack of distortion are strengths. I've also used mine successfully with Nikon's diopters for close-ups. Clearly this lens is by far the best value in this focal length class.</p>

[david_harris15]

<p>I like the lens enough to have two of them. I have an AI version that is constantly attached to my F3 & the AIS version that lives in the bag with my other primes. I have been very happy with their image quality. I have the 105mm F2.5 AIS as well and find uses for both.<br>

You got it for a bargain price & if you decide that you don't like it, you could put it on ebay and you would at least get you money back & could even treble it.</p>

[User_502260]

<p>I have three 135.2.8 Nikkors. All are the older design. There is a Q with a factory AI conversion ring, a QC and a 'K." The QC is my favorite. I find that these lenses are not as sharp at their closest focusing distance when used wide open as the 135/3.5 Nikkors I have. For distant subjects they are fine even wide open. They have beautiful out of focus rendition at or near wide open and are very sharp even close up if closed down just one stop. My first medium telephoto was a 135 so I've used that focal length for a long time. My other 135 Nikkors include a 13.5cm/3.5, three 135/3.5s and two 135/3.5 AIs. They are all good. The cm lens needs care in flare situations. My only complaint is that they don't focus closer. For that I have 105/2.5 Nikkors and an 85/2. Any of the 135/3.5 lenses, with a short extension tube, is also fine for getting a little closer.</p>

[Ian Rance]

Thank you for the really informative answers - I look forward to using the 135 on holiday next week - some portraits and seascapes.

 

I have noted that mine is a very late serial number - just a couple of thousand off from the end of the run. It looks well built and I just need a filter for it now. Results as soon as I run a roll.

[aruns]

<p>Hi Ian,<br>

I understand it is a late response, and I hope this helps you as well as others with future queries. I have had this lens for about a year or so, and I love this lens. I used to use it on D70 and my brother's D200, and it is a gem. Now I have a D700, but I haven't gotten a chance to use it extensively on the Fx body yet. On the D70 / D200, this is a small, lightweight tele lens (180mm equivalent). If used correctly, it is sharp. The colors are good, contrast is good, and the f/2.8 is nice. Especially as the 135 f/2 costs several times more. Attaching a sample pic for reference (if i remember correctly, this is a 100% crop. I do remember that there's no pp except cropping in Picasa).<br>

Hope this helps. Cheers, Arun.</p><div></div>

[aruns]

<p>correction - sorry, i did save it as jpg a few times in Picasa resulting in little bit of lack of sharpness.</p>

[Ian Rance]

<p>Very nice Arun - I really like the manual Nikkors and it is so nice that they fit the digital bodies too.</p>

[tom_dwyer]

<p>Hi Ian,<br>

I ended up w/ the same lens about a year ago, when I purchased an F3/MD4 combo. I didn't really want it and tried to negotiate the price down w/ the lens not incl. I could not have it my way and tried the lens, thinking all along that I'd sell it. It's great - sharp, great color/contrast, small pkg, built-in hood - I'll keep it even though I recently acquired a 105 f2.5 ais.<br>

Good Luck!<br>

Tom</p>