Classic Nikon 105mm F2.5 AI worth buying?

[rui_wang3]

<p>I can get it for around $120 off Ebay. Is this lens worth owning? I am debating between 105/2.5 and 85/1.8D. The latter cost more than $300 used. I am buying this for portraiture. I already own a 50/1.4D.<br>

I am a Canon shooter. I am buying this lens for my wife's Nikon D3.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>The 105/2.5 is one of the classic Nikkor primes, by all accounts one of the finest lenses Nikon has ever made. And it adapts very well to EOS bodies. I should know: I'm also a Canon user, and I have three of them. :-)</p>

[Sanford]

<p>That's a decades old lens, make sure no mold has started. I have one and it's a real penicillin factory in there. It can reproduce that "Leica glow" look.</p>

[owen_omeara]

I have been using Nikon cameras and lenses for just over 50 years. This lens is the finest I have ever owned. If it is in

good condition I suggest you buy it.

 

-O

[craigd]

<p>I'd buy it for a full-frame camera such as your wife's D3. As Mark says, it's one of the classic Nikkors, especially for portraits.</p>

[User_6502147]

<p>Some speculation on my hand, but I'd guess that the Tammy 90/2.8 or Zeiss 100/2 may be slightly better. For time being I'm keeping my 105 (37yrs of age), since it's a v. sweet lens.</p>

<p>Les</p>

[elliot1]

<p>No experience with the 105mm f2.5 (I have the newer f2.8 AF-S version), but I suggest perhaps you consider/look at Nikon's new 85mm f.8 AF-S lens. While a little more expensive than the lenses you are looking at, you may find you get better overall image quality for portraits, plus you will enjoy the convenience of AF, a really nice focal length especially for portraits and a long warranty.</p>

[rui_wang3]

<p>I considered the 85/1.8G. It is probably slightly better than 85/1.8D. But Nikon D3 has a built-in motor, so both lenses will autofocus. The 85/1.8D has an aperture ring, so I can use it on my Canon 5D II.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>You are correct, both lenses will AF but the new G lens has noticeably better IQ (I had the D lens prior to upgrading to the G). </p>

[jose_angel]

<p>Using MF lenses in an AF camera screen is not so fast nor accurate, so it`s not the best idea for action, candids or dim scenarios. Here I`d by far prefer an AF lens.<br /> If she will work taking the time with an MF lens, the 105/2.5 is a very good one. BTW, I don`t see the point of using a Nikkor lens on a Canon camera... no AF, no metering, no split image... Doesn`t Canon have good cheap lenses like Nikon?</p>

[craigd]

<p>Jose, Canon EOS cameras are smart enough to meter in stop-down mode when they are unable to detect an electronic lens.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Yes, it's worth it, but $120 is very little - be sure it is in a decent condition! Normal prices are a bit higher than this. For what it's worth, the 105 f/2.5 is miles better than the 85 f/1.8D (I have both lenses) - really no comparison. The 105 f/2.5 is a well-deserved classic and to me both a joy to use and a joy to see results from. Great portrait lens.</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<blockquote>

<p> The 85/1.8D has an aperture ring, so I can use it on my Canon 5D II.<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But Rui, I <em><strong>thought</strong> </em>you were buying this for your wife's D3?.. :-) </p>

<p>I'd go with Elliot's 85mm AF-S, it means either of you can buy a nice little D5200 for 'casual' use when you don't want to have a D3 or 5DII hanging around your neck!</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>Thanks Craig.</p>

[mihai_ciuca]

<p>There is a bit of magic in the way 105/2.5 draws an image, especially a portrait. I own two copies: first an old Sonnar design that was AI'd and then a newer Gauss design (AI-S). Both are giving stunning results on cameras like D300, D700, D7000, D600 and D800. What I like at this lens is that apart the magic on portraiture it is an excellent landscape lens, being very sharp across the frame when stopped down.</p>

[richard_thomas9]

<p>Forget the 85 1.8D! Used to have one and got tired of the purple fringing shooting wide open. You have to stop down or underexpose just to avoid it. Now, I can't speak for the 105 2.5 coz' I have never tested one but I have the 85 1.8G and it is one hell of a lens not counting the fact that it is dirt cheap. </p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I got one because it was so cheap and I had read so many cool reviews. I love it, rarely shoot with it, but keep it because I can't get much for it anyway. I'd rather have the 85mm f1.8G actually, but can't afford it.</p>

[rui_wang3]

<p>Thank you for your replies! I will give Nikon 105/2.5 a try. I will spend more on a good copy off Ebay.<br>

I have used Nikon 50/1.4D and Zeiss 135/2.8 on my 5D II without any metering problem, and the focus confirmation works well. (Both adapters have focus confirmation.) When I buy Nikon lenses, I always look at lenses with aperture ring so I can use them on my Canon.</p>

[john_hinkey]

<p>I have the 105/2.5 AIS and it was pretty sweet on my D700 as I used it for portraits and for landscapes. There is an AI version as well and it has the advantage of rounded/curved aperture blades resulting in nicer specular highlights when stopped down to f/4 or more. <br>

It has problems with backlighting (flare) if you use it like that and the minimum focusing distance can be a bit long at times when I want to really zoom in on someone or something.<br>

I don't use it as much anymore with my D800 as it really starts to show it's flaws - especially in the corners wide open. I still have mine, but I use the Voigtlander 90/3.5 for the most part due to it's smaller size and much closer MFD - it's also sharper at f/3.5 than the 105 is at f/5.6.<br>

Still the 90/3.5 CV costs about 4x more than my 105/2.5 did so the cost per performance is certainly in favor of the 105/2.5 . . .</p>

<p>John</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>For $120 you really can't go far wrong. The 105mm f/2.5 can still hold its own among fancy modern aspherical designs, but it's probably not the absolute best portrait lens out there. It's younger cousin the f/1.8 105mm Ai-S Nikkor is marginally better IMHO. It's also twice the weight and size, and maybe twice the cost.</p>

[joey1]

The 105 2.5 Nikkor is a perfect lens for portraits and I'd venture to say you'll be borrowing the lens from your wife once

you see the results. I use this lens with the 800E and LOVE the results. Sharpness to the corners is overrated in the

context of portraits and I use the Zeiss Makro Planar 100mm F2 for everything else.

[joey1]

The 105 2.5 Nikkor is a perfect lens for portraits and I'd venture to say you'll be borrowing the lens from your wife once

you see the results. I use this lens with the 800E and LOVE the results. Sharpness to the corners is overrated in the

context of portraits and I use the Zeiss Makro Planar 100mm F2 for everything else.

[joey1]

The 105 2.5 Nikkor is a perfect lens for portraits and I'd venture to say you'll be borrowing the lens from your wife once

you see the results. I use this lens with the 800E and LOVE the results. Sharpness to the corners is overrated in the

context of portraits and I use the Zeiss Makro Planar 100mm F2 for everything else.

[JDMvW]

<p>There are several different formula revisions, but all are outstanding lenses, sometimes described as Nikon's best.</p>

<p>Nikon themselves are quite proud of it: http://imaging.nikon.com/history/nikkor/5/index.htm </p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>You cannot buy a better lens for portraits at any price. Bought mine circa 1979, used it multiple times a day during my newspaper days, and it is still works perfectly.</p>