I launched this video because I have a Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 pre-AI lens that I bought new in about 1973. I'm glad I stayed to the end to see your outstanding images. Thank you.
An iconic lens, for sure. But my very first Nikkor was the 85 1.8; so I never saw the need to obtain the 105. My old high school photography teacher had moved to Taiwan to teach at an army base there and visited town with two Nikon FTn's. He could see my envious look and said: Would you like to buy one? The one with the 50 or the one with the 85? I picked the 85. Still have it. A gorgeous lens, too.
I had the Nikkor 85mm f1.8 manual focus lens. I'm not sure what came before my lens and mine was originally non AI but had a rubber focusing ring. It was succeeded by the inferior (in my opinion) 85mm f2, and later another inferior 85mm f1.8. I mention this because newer wasn't always better and I loved my 85. I never had much interest in the 105mm f2.5. The loss of focal length didn't matter all that much (I had a Nikkor 180mm f2.8 ED as well) but the extra stop did, when the advantage of a fast aperture meant shutter speed not lack of depth of field.
There is a 105mm f1.8 version as well that is reputedly sharper than the f2.5 version. All that being said, I love the 85 or 90mm focal length on a 35mm film camera so if that works for you, why change?
hello sir, i got the from a friend the lens - nikon nikkor 105mm 1:2.5 , the nikon nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 , the Kalimar MC Auto Zoom 80 - 200mm 1:3.9 and the Nikon 28mm 1:2.8 . I wonder what dslr bodies i can buy and use them... Thank you so much sir
I have that Nikkor lens, and I also have the Metabone Speedbooster. With that, the focal length will be near 75mm and about F:1.8 or the same as the Olympus 75mm F:1.8. I have both, and they are just incredible, but, I mean the Nikkor has the edge, but the Oly has AF.
I have this one plus (3) 2.8 ais and 2 Voighlanders for F mount. FINALLY can shoot manual and MF very well adapting these to new Zf. As opposed to DSLR usage. The Nikkors have have no contacts and sadly no FTZ adapter is made for mechanical indexing. The Voightlanders do. That is hardly mentioned amidst the fuss that had been made that there will be no ZTF adapter with a motor for use with the 'D' lenses.
It would have made sense for Nikon to make an adapter that translated the physical aperture settings to electronic signaling. With the Olympus it is all manual
I came across a version of this that seems way older. Its hot a lot of chrome. The focus wheel has this scallop design but the aperture ring doesnt. Also the ring doesnt feel amazing to turn, i end up having to use the prongs by pushing them. Any insight?
There are earlier versions, even going back to the rangefinder Nikons. It should produce great images though. Sounds like your lens needs a clean lube and adjust. Thanks for watching and commenting!
This lens -- which I'm sure is fantastic (never owned this particular one but owned plenty of Nikkors: AI/s, Ds, Gs), really gets too much props over the "Afghan Girl" photo. ANY lens, practically, could have taken that photo. That was about the composition (the photographer), the color (Kodachrome iirc), and last but not least the subject herself. Whatever lens was the least important aspect. "My" suggestion if you shoot an F-mount Nikon is any 105mm f2.8 MACRO lens. I'm using the f-mount "D" version of this lens. Why. 1. "Approachability" -- the ability to focus close because it's a macro lens. This is a constraint I dislike about short-tele portrait lenses. You usually can only get around a yard from the subject, closest, before going out of focus. But with a short-tele that's also a macro lens? No issue whatsoever. You can be an inch away from the subject. 2. It's also a full-on macro lens, so dual purposed. 3. Finally, they cost about the same and can auto focus. Bokeh? Sharpness? No worries there. It's gonna have the same qualities as any other short-tele in the 100mm range.
One on the way like yours. Multicoated. Let's see how it works on a Fuji X-H1 with ibis. I made sure to order the adapter (Fotasy on ebay is the best deal) before the purchase. Having the lens arrive with no adapter would make me even more crazy. When it arrives, THEN I'll think about buying an old hazy fungus precoating to take apart and screw up even more. Tinker tinker... By the way, find and buy a Minolta Celtic 135mm 2.8. Pick the best one and best seller on ebay, and it should cost you less than 40. You won't believe how great it is. Knockout sharpness.
For me the only question is: can I see a photo and say: oh, thats the Nikkor 105mm, 2.5! And if I cant, that means its not THE lens. Its the focal lenght and the aperture, and the motiv and the photographer, but not the name of the lens.
So the P version predates the reformulation in 1971. It has 5 elements in 3 groups instead of 5 elements in 4 groups and it's design is similar to the Zeiss Sonnar. Still a great lens and should make great images.
I have tried this lens for astrophotography and the sharpness in the edges was underwhelming, even stopped down. Its big brother, the 105mm f1.8 is *much* better.
@Jack Warner No, totally wrong. In astrophotography sharpness really does matter. Unlike the 135mm/f2.8 and the 85mm/f2.0 which work perfectly well, the 105mm/f2.5 is widely overrated. I guess it was clever marketing by Nikon to introduce a non-standard focal length in the pre-zoom days.
I launched this video because I have a Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 pre-AI lens that I bought new in about 1973. I'm glad I stayed to the end to see your outstanding images. Thank you.
@bmwohl thank you! Thanks for watching and commenting too!
An iconic lens, for sure. But my very first Nikkor was the 85 1.8; so I never saw the need to obtain the 105. My old high school photography teacher had moved to Taiwan to teach at an army base there and visited town with two Nikon FTn's. He could see my envious look and said: Would you like to buy one? The one with the 50 or the one with the 85? I picked the 85. Still have it. A gorgeous lens, too.
Thanks for watching! The 85mm f1.8 takes no back seat to the 105. It is also a great lens!
An excellent lens review. Thank you for sharing this video.
Cheers! another nice Lens to add to my list Don 😎
Nice video! Thanks for introducing us to such a great bit of gear!
Thank you! I appreciate you watching my videos!
Very very good presentation. Thank you. RS. Canada
Thank you!
Thanks, I have it and decided to bring it out tomorrow morning, if it is not raining too much. I will put it on my Nikon D700 though 😊
Sounds fun!
I have one of these and it is an outstanding lens. No doubt.
Great video and lens. I have this lens. Thank you.
RS. Canada
Thank you! Thanks for watching and commenting too!
lovely video
My boy Dexter said that Riley is absolutely gorgeous :-) and I have to agree
Thank you! He is a lot of fun and is definitely living the life of Riley!
Cool pics, thanks for the recommendation. I will save up for this lens. Maybe the ais version for my FE.
Thanks for watching. That would be a great choice!
I had the Nikkor 85mm f1.8 manual focus lens. I'm not sure what came before my lens and mine was originally non AI but had a rubber focusing ring. It was succeeded by the inferior (in my opinion) 85mm f2, and later another inferior 85mm f1.8. I mention this because newer wasn't always better and I loved my 85. I never had much interest in the 105mm f2.5. The loss of focal length didn't matter all that much (I had a Nikkor 180mm f2.8 ED as well) but the extra stop did, when the advantage of a fast aperture meant shutter speed not lack of depth of field.
There is a 105mm f1.8 version as well that is reputedly sharper than the f2.5 version. All that being said, I love the 85 or 90mm focal length on a 35mm film camera so if that works for you, why change?
hello sir, i got the from a friend the lens - nikon nikkor 105mm 1:2.5 , the nikon nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 , the Kalimar MC Auto Zoom 80 - 200mm 1:3.9 and the Nikon 28mm 1:2.8 . I wonder what dslr bodies i can buy and use them... Thank you so much sir
Those lenses can be adapted to any mirrorless digital camera such as those made by olympus or if you want a DSLR then they would fit a Nikon DSLR.
I have that Nikkor lens, and I also have the Metabone Speedbooster. With that, the focal length will be near 75mm and about F:1.8 or the same as the Olympus 75mm F:1.8. I have both, and they are just incredible, but, I mean the Nikkor has the edge, but the Oly has AF.
Riley pictures say it all
I have this one plus (3) 2.8 ais and 2 Voighlanders for F mount. FINALLY can shoot manual and MF very well adapting these to new Zf. As opposed to DSLR usage.
The Nikkors have have no contacts and sadly no FTZ adapter is made for mechanical indexing. The Voightlanders do.
That is hardly mentioned amidst the fuss that had been made that there will be no ZTF adapter with a motor for use with the 'D' lenses.
It would have made sense for Nikon to make an adapter that translated the physical aperture settings to electronic signaling. With the Olympus it is all manual
I have the rangefinder version of this lens it’s amazing
I came across a version of this that seems way older. Its hot a lot of chrome. The focus wheel has this scallop design but the aperture ring doesnt. Also the ring doesnt feel amazing to turn, i end up having to use the prongs by pushing them. Any insight?
There are earlier versions, even going back to the rangefinder Nikons. It should produce great images though. Sounds like your lens needs a clean lube and adjust. Thanks for watching and commenting!
My favorite lens for film and digital (Micro 4/3). I have the AI-S version.
It's a great lens! Thanks for watching!
Thats a nice lens
This lens -- which I'm sure is fantastic (never owned this particular one but owned plenty of Nikkors: AI/s, Ds, Gs), really gets too much props over the "Afghan Girl" photo. ANY lens, practically, could have taken that photo. That was about the composition (the photographer), the color (Kodachrome iirc), and last but not least the subject herself. Whatever lens was the least important aspect. "My" suggestion if you shoot an F-mount Nikon is any 105mm f2.8 MACRO lens. I'm using the f-mount "D" version of this lens. Why. 1. "Approachability" -- the ability to focus close because it's a macro lens. This is a constraint I dislike about short-tele portrait lenses. You usually can only get around a yard from the subject, closest, before going out of focus. But with a short-tele that's also a macro lens? No issue whatsoever. You can be an inch away from the subject. 2. It's also a full-on macro lens, so dual purposed. 3. Finally, they cost about the same and can auto focus. Bokeh? Sharpness? No worries there. It's gonna have the same qualities as any other short-tele in the 100mm range.
Very nice.
Thank you!
One on the way like yours. Multicoated. Let's see how it works on a Fuji X-H1 with ibis. I made sure to order the adapter (Fotasy on ebay is the best deal) before the purchase. Having the lens arrive with no adapter would make me even more crazy. When it arrives, THEN I'll think about buying an old hazy fungus precoating to take apart and screw up even more. Tinker tinker...
By the way, find and buy a Minolta Celtic 135mm 2.8. Pick the best one and best seller on ebay, and it should cost you less than 40. You won't believe how great it is. Knockout sharpness.
Thanks for watching! I will have to look for the Minolta lens you mentioned!
It's karma I have the Nixon 105 & Olympus 3/4 with adapter, best is 58mm 1,2/1.4 . That's a portrait lens for 3/4 imho
For me the only question is: can I see a photo and say: oh, thats the Nikkor 105mm, 2.5! And if I cant, that means its not THE lens. Its the focal lenght and the aperture, and the motiv and the photographer, but not the name of the lens.
It's a LOT nicer on full frame cameras - mine is a 1973 pre-AI version, it's my favourite lens of all time.
No question it is a great lens! Tha ks for watching!
Hello ! i found a Nikkor-P. is this the same or a different one ? Thanx
I think it is the same but I will look into it.
So the P version predates the reformulation in 1971. It has 5 elements in 3 groups instead of 5 elements in 4 groups and it's design is similar to the Zeiss Sonnar. Still a great lens and should make great images.
I do a bit of street photography in downtown OKC. If you ever need partner to run around with let me know. I’m down there three four times a month.
That might be fun. Next time I plan something downtown I'll let you know.
I have tried this lens for astrophotography and the sharpness in the edges was underwhelming, even stopped down. Its big brother, the 105mm f1.8 is *much* better.
Thank you for watching! I agree, the 105mm f1.8 is indeed better but quite a bit heavier and much more expensive.
@Jack Warner No, totally wrong. In astrophotography sharpness really does matter. Unlike the 135mm/f2.8 and the 85mm/f2.0 which work perfectly well, the 105mm/f2.5 is widely overrated. I guess it was clever marketing by Nikon to introduce a non-standard focal length in the pre-zoom days.
Afghan Girl Lens
I can not compare a solide image with a digital Image