Nikkor 85mm f2 AI-S or Nikkor 105mm f2.5?

[gryffinwings]

Looking at buying a Nikkor 105mm f2.5 AI-s, most likely tomorrow, heard that it's great and all that. This will be used on my Nikon FM that I just got back from having seals and mirror foam replaced.

I've got a Nikon Series E 50mm f1.8, which is fine for full body shots, just want to make sure that the Nikkor 105mm f2.5 is a better idea than the 85mm f2.

Also, I do not plan on using any sort of zoom lens on this camera, primes keep things simpler.

Thanks for any advice provided. Please let me know if any additional information is needed.

 

[Derrel]

I've owned two samples of the 105/2.5 Ai-S, and three different 85mm f/2 models, two Ai, and two Ai-S. I bought the last 85mm, an f/2 Ai-S a few years back in immaculate condition, for a really low price; I took it out two years ago, and shot it on a walk around the neighborhood. I was shocked at how poor it was wide-open at f/2, but it was remarkably better stopped down to f/4.

In the mid-1980's I had an 85/2 Ai which developed very dry and squeaky focusing ring movement, which was common on that lens (squeaky focusing ring movement), and I replaced it with another 85/2 Ai in '88. The Ai-S lenses are actually _different_ than the Ai-S; the Ai lenses have non-linear diaphragm mechanisms, and typically have stiffer, longer-rotation focusing than the Ai-S models. The difference between an Ai lens and an Ai-S lens is also often seen in the lens barrel cosmetics. The Ai-S lenses have an almost feather-light focusing ring movement, while the earlier Ai generation lenses have much-stiffer, and slower, turning of the focusing ring. I prefer Ai-S lenses for these two reasons.

Take note: the 105/2.5 Ai used a screw-in lens hood, but the Ai-S 105/2.5 model has a built-in, sliding lens hood.

Anyway, great memories of both the 85/2 Ai and the 105/2.5 Ai-S. The 105 was the first "good lens" I bought brand-new, as a youngster, back in 1982; I payed something like $179.95 for the 105/2.5 Ai-S; this was at that time, sold to me as being a lens that offered the then pretty new CrC, or close-range correction. I STILL own that lens, and still shoot it occasionally. This is, hands down, one of the FINEST lenses Nikon ever released. This lens focuses superbly by hand and eye. It has a wonderful mix of focal length, maximum aperture, and focusing helicoid pitch that make this, in my opinion, the easiest-to-focus manual focus Nikkor ever made. In the 1980's this was my go-to lens. I cannot recommend this lens enough. BUY one! You most likely will really,really enjoy it.

In my opinion, the 85mm f/2 is an "average" imager....the lens has crappy lens character, both in the Ai and Ai-S eras...its images are just "Meh". The 105/2.5 on the other hand, is a beautiful imager. Wide-open it has a slightly dreamy look. Stopped down to f/3.5 to f/5.6, it's just awesome. At f/8 to f/11, it makes really great landscapes with deep depth of field. This was, I would say "the" lens focal length for general photography, from the 1960's to the start of the 1990's.

The 85mm focal length on full-frame is like a long normal lens, to me. The 105mm length is a true, short telephoto, and is selective in angle of view, and is long enough to start getting into blurred backgrounds in many situations, but is easier to use as a general-purpose lens than a longer tele like the then-popular 135mm f/2.8 models that were so common. Where a 135mm lens is TOO long in many indoor situations, the 105mm is more easily deployed in situations like speeches or in meeting rooms, etc. Again, the 105mm f/2.5 Ai-S has the newer-style short-throw focusing helicoid, and it's pretty much perfect for hand-focusing! It is a definite must-buy lens for anybody who likes manual focus Nikkor prime lenses. Take an asparagus bunch, blue rubber band, and slip that behind the rear edge of the sliding lens hood, and you'll create a shock-absorbing front setup, and protect the front element from bumps, and also eliminate the need to use the front lens cap when dropping the lens into the camera bag or backpack after having changed it out.

 

[cgw]

Like my 100/2.8E. Usually gets dissed in the echo chamber. Can’t see consistent difference between it and the larger, heavier 105/2.5.

 

[JTPhotography]

The 105 is a legend. The famous afghan girl nat geo cover was shot with it I think. I had one, it is as close to perfect as any lens can be. If your budget allows, I enjoyed the 105 1.8 and 135 f2 more just because of wide open creaminess.

 

[gryffinwings]

The 105 is a legend. The famous afghan girl nat geo cover was shot with it I think. I had one, it is as close to perfect as any lens can be. If your budget allows, I enjoyed the 105 1.8 and 135 f2 more just because of wide open creaminess.

I just picked up the lens today, Darrel's thoughts on the lens helped push me toward the 105mm which I was going toward it anyway, I'm glad I got it. The Nikkor 105mm f1.8 wasn't in the budget to be honest, which is fine, I should get superb results from this lens anyways.

Next lens, I really haven't decided, I'd like a dedicated 5omm type lens for my Nikon FM and keep the Series E lens on the Nikon EM. I'm thinking about maybe a Nikkor 55mm f1.2 AI probably, I've seen them to be potentially in the price range I would spend in. Just not a ton of information on it. But I think I will save for it.

 

[compur]

I had a Nikkor 105/2.5 AI back in the mid 1980s. Results were so good at times that it was the first lens that made me think there can be something almost magical about a particular lens' ability to render an image. It's also the lens that made me decide to never use a zoom again. It's a great portrait lens even though some would consider it too sharp for that purpose.

I also had an 82/2 AI. I liked it's compactness but I thught it was only OK image-wise and not really worth having if you already have the 105. It also had a tendency to leak oil on the diaphragm blades. I had it cleaned once by Nikon and then it got fouled up again a year or so later so I just sold it.

Tamron also made a 105/2.5 that is pretty darn good too. I suspect it is a close copy of the Nikkor. It's very hard to find but the advantage is you can use on multiple camera mounts.

The 135/2.8 Nikkor (AI or AIS) is also very good, IMO.

I'm not impressed with the results from the 55/1.2 wide open (which is the only reason one would buy such a lens). Any of the 1.4 Nikkor normal lenses is a better buy, IMO. (I've never tried the Noct Nikkor 1.2, so maybe that is an exception.)

 

[gryffinwings]

I had a Nikkor 105/2.5 AI back in the mid 1980s. Results were so good at times that it was the first lens that made me think there can be something almost magical about a particular lens' ability to render an image. It's also the lens that made me decide to never use a zoom again. It's a great portrait lens even though some would consider it too sharp for that purpose.

I also had an 82/2 AI. I liked it's compactness but I thught it was only OK image-wise and not really worth having if you already have the 105. It also had a tendency to leak oil on the diaphragm blades. I had it cleaned once by Nikon and then it got fouled up again a year or so later so I just sold it.

Tamron also made a 105/2.5 that is pretty darn good too. I suspect it is a close copy of the Nikkor. It's very hard to find but the advantage is you can use on multiple camera mounts.

The 135/2.8 Nikkor (AI or AIS) is also very good, IMO.

I'm not impressed with the results from the 55/1.2 wide open (which is the only reason one would buy such a lens). Any of the 1.4 Nikkor normal lenses is a better buy, IMO. (I've never tried the Noct Nikkor 1.2, so maybe that is an exception.)

Glad I made the right decision.

Could you explain why you were not impressed by the results?

 

[compur]

The 85 wasn't that sharp wide open and that's why one buys a fast lens. It's also not that much longer than a 50.

 

[gryffinwings]

The 85 wasn't that sharp wide open and that's why one buys a fast lens. It's also not that much longer than a 50.

I should've specified, why were you not impressed with the Nikkor 55mm f1.2?

 

[Kiron Kid]

The FM is a very good camera. And there is good reason why the 105 f/2.5 is legendary. It’s a MUST have lens. I shoot with the first edition (pre-AI) version. It’s incredible. The attached image was shot with it on Portra 400 film. No post processing.

 

[compur]

I should've specified, why were you not impressed with the Nikkor 55mm f1.2?

Same reason as for the 85mm. It's also only half a stop faster than a 1.4 but costs 3-4 times as much. Paying hundreds of dollars just for that half stop (which isn't that sharp anyway) just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Derrel]

Here is a manual focusing tip for you. Turn the focus ring from "far" distance to the near distance. This is the quickest and easiest way to achieve spot on focus. Go from infinity to close and as soon as it looks good,stop;then if needed, do a small hitch the other way,and boom! you are in focus. Practice this a little bit with the 105, and you will soon be nailing focus with ease and speed.

 

[ac12]

Next lens, I really haven't decided, I'd like a dedicated 5omm type lens for my Nikon FM and keep the Series E lens on the Nikon EM. I'm thinking about maybe a Nikkor 55mm f1.2 AI probably, I've seen them to be potentially in the price range I would spend in. Just not a ton of information on it. But I think I will save for it.

Don't bother with the f/1.2 lens, IMHO it isn't worth the cost and weight difference over the 50mm f/1.4 lens.

 

[Kiron Kid]

Next lens, I really haven't decided, I'd like a dedicated 5omm type lens for my Nikon FM and keep the Series E lens on the Nikon EM. I'm thinking about maybe a Nikkor 55mm f1.2 AI probably, I've seen them to be potentially in the price range I would spend in. Just not a ton of information on it. But I think I will save for it.

Don't bother with the f/1.2 lens, IMHO it isn't worth the cost and weight difference over the 50mm f/1.4 lens.

I agree.