TaoTeJared said:
Would that work for... lets say you are at dinner and the person across the table is 2 feet away? I have thought about that, but never tried it.

Just did a quick test. Using the PK-11A on the 105 mm f/2.5 AI-S you can focus from app. 70 cm (2.3 ft) to app. 1.55 m (5 ft).

Simply FYI for anyone who isn't aware, there is a great, and very long, thread about using Nikon manual focus glass on both digital and film bodies, at the Fred Miranda forums.

Goes for about 700 pages, with heaps of examples and discussion of many lenses.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/929565

Correlli said:
I sometimes use a PK-11A extension ring to get closer focus with the 105 mm f/2.5 or the 85 mm f/2. Works really well.

Would that work for... lets say you are at dinner and the person across the table is 2 feet away? I have thought about that, but never tried it.

TaoTeJared said:
Close focus looks like it may be an issue - Anyone know off the top of their head what the 105 f2.5 close focus is? Was that a Macro lens as well?

I sometimes use a PK-11A extension ring to get closer focus with the 105 mm f/2.5 or the 85 mm f/2. Works really well.

I've had three samples of these lenses and they have all been excellent. I love the smooth silky focus ring they have, but they are a touch on the heavy side due to the solid metal build. They usually can be had where I am for around $350. I'd probably still have one, but I need autofocus occasionally for short telephoto work on top of the regular macro shots.

They are all 1m except for the 105 DC, which is .9m

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html - Roland knows all :]

I have used the 75-150 - good little lens but for what I shoot I need the fastest possible. Close focus looks like it may be an issue - Anyone know off the top of their head what the 105 f2.5 close focus is? Was that a Macro lens as well?

> I'm actually wanting a bunch more reach.

Not to change topic too much, but may I suggest considering the 75-150/3.5 AIS, the later version with the metal ring. Very good ones go for about $200.

I had this for an Nikkormat FT-3 and then an FM3A, and have used it on a D60 and the current D3100, both for landscapes and portraits. Very nice rendition and as you were wishing for, a bit more reach. Close focus is about the same as the 105, ie 1m or 3 feet.

Only half a stop slower than the Nikon 70-200/2.8 VRII and not much less reach, however focusing is a bit slower.

;-)

Michael

I have one and use it on my F2 quite a bit. I've had it many years now and it always performs well. As DutchNikon states, there is a neat little pull-out lens hood built in. My copy requires a little bit more effort to focus than some of my other lenses, but not a problem.

I also have the 85 f/1.4, but I think the 105 gets more use. The close focus field of view is about the same for both lenses, but you are standing back almost a foot more for the 105. Overall, there is something a little "better" about the 85: it's smaller, it's faster, and it focuses more smoothly, but the 105 has always gotten more use just because it seems to fit my needs. My most used lens is the 55 mm f/2.8 micro-nikkor.

I was going to sell the 85 to help finance the D800, but since the price came in lower than expected I'm delighted to be able to keep them both. This lens, my 55mm, and my really old, battered 35 f/1.4 are the reasons I never bought a DX body and why I am looking forward to the D800.

SquamishPhoto said:
Why you would limit yourself to just film for this lens is somewhat confusing since its a bit of a legend and would totally rock on your D300.

Not limiting my use - just the discussion of "you should get this instead." I do have the 105vr that I use a lot and would for digital. The primary use would to sit on one of my FE2s for B&W film. I have a few film cams I just throw in a bag on my way out the door and take only one lens. I have a really old 50 1.4 (1958 version) on one and a 24mm on another. I'm actually wanting a bunch more reach. I have seen a couple that were fairly cheap and much more so than the 85mm and even the 85 1.8 AI. It is actually cheaper at the moment to get a used 85mm 1.8 AFD for film.

My main thought is a close focus range that the 105s have. That makes the most difference for my desire for one.

Thanks for the info. Still on the fence though.

THis one is a corner to corner very sharp lens, it's got a fine bokeh, but not as nice as the 85 1.4 in my opinion.

I find it a bit sensitive to flare though, but luckely Nikon put a telescopic lenshood on it, which you realy need...

Not many ppl did buy one when it was itroduced, ecause it came out around same time that the AI-s 85 1.4 did (1982) , which was considered to be THE lens to have.

Its just a bit larger than the AI-s 85 1.4, ( 8.9 cm) , filter size = 62mm ( 85 1.4 = 72mm) . Aperture runs from f1.8 - f22 ( the ais 85 from 1.4 - f16..)

This is, in my opinion, one of those "sleeper" lenses..

The users I've heard from say it is a great lens, but heavy.

I've almost pulled the trigger on that lens more than once. Retailers in Japan always seem to have a nice copy available. Why you would limit yourself to just film for this lens is somewhat confusing since its a bit of a legend and would totally rock on your D300. If you have a fast 85mm its harder to make the decision to get the lens, especially if its primarily for portraiture since you'll likely find the 85mm suitable for more situations. At least thats why I never bothered with it already having an 85mm 1.4 AI-S. Their performance is said to be very similar, so top notch.

Nikon 105mm f/1.8 AIS (Old Manual Focus model)

I have seen this one floating around every once in a while on Ebay. I have been looking at picking up a 105 MF for my film camera for a while. (THIS WILL BE USED PRIMARILY ON A FE2 AND FOR FILM- no need to delve into the digital or other versions) I do know a lot about the 2.8 & 2.5 models but haven't heard anything about the 1.8.

Anyone used/uses it and have any insight?

I currently own an AI version of the 28mm/f2 from 1978 that I bought s/hand 12 months ago. In the early 1990s I had a K-version (pre-AI) from 1974 that I converted to AI so it could be used on a Nikkormat FT-3. The AI and the AI-S versions are said to be optically identical.

This lens is one of the best Nikkors I've owned, and when a pal used it recently on a D700 (full-frame) my friend was astounded at the results.

I use this lens occasionally (sp?) on my D3100, where the DX format makes the lens a 42mm equivalent (28 +50%). The results have a certain "analogue warmth and richness" that digital-specific lenses sometimes lack.

I'm a big fan of this lens and recommend it for something extra in the quiver, if you can find a good one.

Mick

PB PM said:
The 28mm F2 AI-S has a different optical formula than the 28mm F2.8D, different max apertures. There is no 28mm F2D.

Whoops, just realized that.

Drab said:
The 28 AF-D is far inferior optically. It is the only wide angle prime playing that ballgame without Close Range Correction. This is one reason why it is cheaper than the 24 and 20.

Ah, I remember now, there's a couple threads about the 28mm AF-D. Some have said that it's not sharp wide open. Thanks for reminding me about that.

28mm AI-S if anything, or the 24mm 2.8.

The 28 AF-D is far inferior optically. It is the only wide angle prime playing that ballgame without Close Range Correction. This is one reason why it is cheaper than the 24 and 20.

The 28mm F2 AI-S has a different optical formula than the 28mm F2.8D, different max apertures. There is no 28mm F2D.

Hmm, I'd love to get the metal AI-S edition, but optically, is the AF-D the same?

Because it's half the price, new at around $275.

Squamish, for $375, like new that's a really good price. At B and H it's selling at over $500.

well, I do have a D7000, but I am ashamed to say I do not use the video on the camera, so even if I tried it my comments would not be worthwhile.

This is a lens I used with my F3, I still have the camera and use it for old times sake shooting black and white.

On the F3, ooooh I loved it, for still photography on the D7000, I do have other lenses that cover this focal length, so, now it is part of my collection of well loved lenses but not used much anymore.

best of luck with your video adventures with it.

NSXType-R said:
How much did you order it for?

I got it for $375. Copy is near perfect.

casperwb said:
Squamish

I have one, I shoot DX

important: I shoot DX

it gathers dust, well not dust because it is in a dry box.

that might be different if I shot FX

I bought for poorly lit situations where my 14-24 starts to fail me and also to get a shallow depth of field into my WA shots. Its going to be predominantly for my D700 but I am curious to see how well it performs on the D7000 for video. Primes tend to excel with video, so my guess is this one should be a good one.

Can't tell you about the f/2 as I use the f/2.8 version of this lens on FX. But I do use this one quite a lot.

Squamish

I have one, I shoot DX

important: I shoot DX

it gathers dust, well not dust because it is in a dry box.

that might be different if I shot FX