Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > SLRs - the unRF

SLRs - the unRF For those of you who must talk about SLRs, if only to confirm they are not RF.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Shots with Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ai-S
Old 05-27-2015   #1
wilonstott
Wil O.
 
wilonstott's Avatar
 
wilonstott is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Age: 39
Posts: 453
Shots with Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ai-S

I just picked up this lens for use with my FE2.

I've just put a roll of Provia 100f through it, and I'm waiting to get them back.

In the mean time, I'd love to see some examples or hear some thoughts about this lens.

Thanks in advance,

-Wil
__________________
LEICA M
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #2
View Range
Registered User
 
View Range is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 272
The SLR lens is essentially identical to the RF lens. Designed in 1953, it helped Nikon into prominence. It is legendary and sold in huge numbers. Greater flexibility from other lenses has reduced its use today. Search for and check out the following post-thread for images.

"Post your Nikkor 10.5cm 2.5 PC pics"
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #3
wilonstott
Wil O.
 
wilonstott's Avatar
 
wilonstott is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Age: 39
Posts: 453
Quote:
Originally Posted by View Range View Post
The SLR lens is essentially identical to the RF lens. Designed in 1953, it helped Nikon into prominence. It is legendary and sold in huge numbers. Greater flexibility from other lenses has reduced its use today. Search for and check out the following post-thread for images.

"Post your Nikkor 10.5cm 2.5 PC pics"
Now I was under the impression that the earlier lens is a Sonnar design and the later one (like mine) is a Gauss design. They'll render a bit differently, yes?
__________________
LEICA M
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #4
RObert Budding
Registered User
 
RObert Budding is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Arlington, Massachusetts
Posts: 1,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilonstott View Post
I just picked up this lens for use with my FE2.

I've just put a roll of Provia 100f through it, and I'm waiting to get them back.

In the mean time, I'd love to see some examples or hear some thoughts about this lens.

Thanks in advance,

-Wil
Here's a shot taken on a Nikon D700.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg i-2ccgM9b-L.jpg (41.8 KB, 61 views)
__________________
"We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true."
~Robert Wilensky

"He could be right, he could be wrong. I think he's wrong but he says it in such a sincere way. You have to think he thinks he's right."
~ Bob Dylan
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #5
wilonstott
Wil O.
 
wilonstott's Avatar
 
wilonstott is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Age: 39
Posts: 453
Beautiful shot, Robert. Thanks for sharing.
__________________
LEICA M
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #6
Shac
Registered User
 
Shac is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: White Rock, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by View Range View Post
The SLR lens is essentially identical to the RF lens. Designed in 1953, it helped Nikon into prominence.
Actually the Ai-S version is not identical - The one you refer you (the first version) was a Sonnar design and the second (Ai-S and Ai version was a Gauss formula.
The Gauss version is better corrected for close-range images.
But as you say whatever version is a great lens
105 Sonnar version

105 Gauss version
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #7
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shac View Post
Actually the Ai-S version is not identical - The one you refer you (the first version) was a Sonnar design and the second (Ai-S and Ai version was a Gauss formula.
The K version (pre AI rubberized barrel) is Gauss as well - the change happened some time before the switch to K, so there even are some aluminium barrel Gauss ones. In all, more than half the Non-AI 105mm SLR Nikkors are Gauss types.

The Gauss type is the famous one - at the time of its introduction it was tested to be the highest resolution 35mm lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #8
Shac
Registered User
 
Shac is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: White Rock, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,101
Sevo true - I stand corrected. The Gauss came in first before the change to Ai in 1971 according to Roland Virk
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #9
x-ray
Registered User
 
x-ray's Avatar
 
x-ray is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Age: 70
Posts: 4,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by View Range View Post
The SLR lens is essentially identical to the RF lens. Designed in 1953, it helped Nikon into prominence. It is legendary and sold in huge numbers. Greater flexibility from other lenses has reduced its use today. Search for and check out the following post-thread for images.

"Post your Nikkor 10.5cm 2.5 PC pics"
The First non AI version was the same as the LTM version but in the 70's the formuls changed. Both versions are great but the newer version is exceptional. I own both in Nikon mount and the rear element is the way to tell the difference. One is larger tha the other but not having them I front of me I don't remember which has the larger rear element.

I'm a huge fan of the 105 and have the LTM version as well.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #10
View Range
Registered User
 
View Range is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 272
Peter Braczko states there was a design change in 1973, starting with S/N 500001. Has anyone found a optical cross section of the second version?

The official Nikon discussion is interesting. http://nikkor.com/story/0045/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #11
View Range
Registered User
 
View Range is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 272
MIR shows the two designs.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...or/105mm25.htm
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #12
x-ray
Registered User
 
x-ray's Avatar
 
x-ray is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Age: 70
Posts: 4,625
This is one of my favorite Nikkor lenses since the 60's. The focal length is just right. IMO it's one of Nikons best primes.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #13
Shac
Registered User
 
Shac is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: White Rock, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,101
The second (Gauss) has the larger rear element - but of course that's a relative statement and you'd need both side by side to be sure The difference shows well in the MIR page that View Range showed.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #14
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,364
According to the Nikon lens serials database, lenses up to 286276 (1971) had the old five element, three groups design, while all lenses with a serial starting with a 4 or higher are the five element four group Gauss type.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #15
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilonstott View Post
Now I was under the impression that the earlier lens is a Sonnar design and the later one (like mine) is a Gauss design. They'll render a bit differently, yes?
Yes, the two lenses should render a bit differently. The later Gauss formula lens was specifically designed for smoother OOF rendering in an attempt to counter the reputation that Nikkor lenses had at the time for poor bokeh.

Sonnar optical formula:


Gauss optical formula:


Found here.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2015   #16
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
 
nikon_sam's Avatar
 
nikon_sam is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Alta Loma, CA
Age: 59
Posts: 4,945
Mine would be the "K" version but upgraded with the newer style Ai ring...Serial #685374...
A very nice little lens that needs to be used more often...
__________________
Sam
"tongue tied & twisted
just an earthbound misfit...I..."
pf
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #17
Wulfthari
Registered User
 
Wulfthari's Avatar
 
Wulfthari is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 611
Another lens to be added to things to buy for My F2s, even if usually I prefer the 85 mm length, can this one be used as a normal lens replacement like the 85/1.8?
__________________
Canon 7s, Canon 50 mm f1.2
Leica M3,M4-P,M5, Summaron 1:2.8/35,Summicron 1:2.0/50DR,Elmarit 1:2.8/90, Summitar 1:2.0/50
Contax IIA,IIIA, Sonnar 1:1.5/50
Zorki 4K,5,6, Leningrad,Industar 61LD 1:2.8/55,Orion 15 1:5,6/28,Jupiter 8 1:2.0/50,Jupiter 9 1:2.0/85,Jupiter 11 1:4/135,Jupiter 12 1:2.8/35
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #18
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,559
I have long had a lovely almost mint sonnar version and not too long ago picked up a cheap but also very good condition first model Gauss version of the lens. The price was low because it needed conversion to AI specification. However I can do that myself and recently did so. I must get them both out and do some comparison shots at the same apertures. I have always loved the rendering of the sonnar one and would like to see how the later one performs by comparison. If it comes to that I also have a 105mm f4 micro and 135mm f2.8 and should compare all of them. I will get back to you.

I must take a small issue with jonmanjiro though - I have never heard that the later 105mm was developed because the sonnar one had inadequate bokeh. In fact sonnars in general are well for the quality of bokeh and for their lovely "soft/sharp" rendering of in focus areas). I have read on a number of occasions the new lens design was adopted because the use of this focal length lens changed over time. In the early days longer lenses were used for long distance shots as you might expect. But this focal length Nikkor was one that came to be adopted more for portrait work. Gauss lenses were regarded as being better optimized for this work which usually takes place at much closer range. Hence the decision to redesign.

BTW the famous "Afghanistan girl" photo by Steve McCurry was taken with the later AI-s version of this lens. Nothing to complain about there in terms of performance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Girl
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #19
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
I must take a small issue with jonmanjiro though - I have never heard that the later 105mm was developed because the sonnar one had inadequate bokeh. In fact sonnars in general are well for the quality of bokeh and for their lovely "soft/sharp" rendering of in focus areas). I have read on a number of occasions the new lens design was adopted because the use of this focal length lens changed over time. In the early days longer lenses were used for long distance shots as you might expect. But this focal length Nikkor was one that came to be adopted more for portrait work. Gauss lenses were regarded as being better optimized for this work which usually takes place at much closer range. Hence the decision to redesign.
I was actually just paraphrasing Nikon's own website, and it wasn't so much the previous sonnar version of the 105/2.5 that had a reputation for bad bokeh, but Nikkor lenses in general. Particularly in Japan I've quoted Nikon's website below (taken from here). Its a poor translation though, and the original Japanese version here makes more sense.

Quote:
An anecdote back from the era of the Nikkor Auto lenses. There was a lens that delivered incredibly sharp resolution, but the defocus image (blur) was not so good. particular lens branded the whole Nikkor Auto family with a reputation of having bad defocus images, especially in Japan.
As the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 demonstrates, however, at the same time Nippon Kogaku K.K. was also making lenses offering the perfect combination of defocus image, tonal rendition and gradation.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #20
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
I was actually just paraphrasing Nikon's own website, and it wasn't so much the previous sonnar version of the 105/2.5 that had a reputation for bad bokeh, but Nikkor lenses in general. Particularly in Japan I've quoted Nikon's website below (taken from here). Its a poor translation though, and the original Japanese version here makes more sense.
I am OK with the qute from the Nikon site - it qualifies appropriately the statement seeming to exclude the 105mm from criticism regarding bokeh.

cheers

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #21
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
I am OK with the qute from the Nikon site - it qualifies appropriately the statement seeming to exclude the 105mm from criticism regarding bokeh.

cheers
That comment is a specific reference to the Gauss formula 105mm F2.5 though, not the previous Sonnar formula lens. Nikon's website coyly doesn't state which particular Nikkors where known for bad bokeh, just that the reputation of those lenses affected the reputation of the entire range of Nikkor lenses. I'll quit rambling on now and post a photo taken with my Ai-S 105mm F2.5!


by Jon, on Flickr
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #22
Highway 61
Revisited
 
Highway 61's Avatar
 
Highway 61 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,799
The later Gauss version really has a much nicer bokeh than the first Sonnar version.

Although not being a bokeh nut I was very surprised with what the bokeh of the Sonnar version looked like. I was expecting something very smooth but I saw the contrary.

So the later Ai-S version combines all the advantages IMO (but for a build quality which is a bit lesser than the Ai version because of some play in the focus and general assembly due to some polycarbonate inside).
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #23
Sparrow
Registered User
 
Sparrow's Avatar
 
Sparrow is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perfidious Albion
Age: 67
Posts: 12,451
--- ---
I don't think any of them will spoil an otherwise decent photo myself ... this is with the ais lens ...



Alice Getting Bored, Howdenbrook par Sparrow ... Stewart Mcbride, on ipernity
__________________
Regards Stewart

Stewart McBride

RIP 2015



You’re only young once, but one can always be immature.

flickr stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #24
wilonstott
Wil O.
 
wilonstott's Avatar
 
wilonstott is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Age: 39
Posts: 453
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
That comment is a specific reference to the Gauss formula 105mm F2.5 though, not the previous Sonnar formula lens. Nikon's website coyly doesn't state which particular Nikkors where known for bad bokeh, just that the reputation of those lenses affected the reputation of the entire range of Nikkor lenses. I'll quit rambling on now and post a photo taken with my Ai-S 105mm F2.5!


by Jon, on Flickr
Cool shot.

What's the breakdown on this--tripod mounted at about a 30th or 15th?

Also, is that film or digital?
__________________
LEICA M
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #25
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilonstott View Post
Cool shot.

What's the breakdown on this--tripod mounted at about a 30th or 15th?

Also, is that film or digital?
Thanks! This is digital. It was taken using a D700 on a tripod with a shutter speed of 1 second to catch motion blur of the branches and people.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #26
kxl
Social Documentary
 
kxl's Avatar
 
kxl is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sunny SoCal
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post


by Jon, on Flickr
Jon - is that the promenade at Sumida River Park in Asakusa?

-Keith
__________________
Keith
My Flickr Albums
RFF feedback


"... I thought the only way to give us an incentive, to bring hope, is to show the pictures of the pristine planet - to see the innocence.” ― Sebastiao Salgado
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2015   #27
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by kxl View Post
Jon - is that the promenade at Sumida River Park in Asakusa?

-Keith
Hi Keith, no this by the river near my apartment in Yokohama. It's a popular local cherry blossom spot.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #28
wilonstott
Wil O.
 
wilonstott's Avatar
 
wilonstott is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Age: 39
Posts: 453
Well, I got my first stuff back that I shot with this lens, and I like it quite a bit. I believe the hype. It's the longest lens I own, and I'm still getting comfortable with the focal length.

Here's a few. All are Provia 100f with an FE2.










Thanks for all the previous info, and please continue to share examples of shots with this lens.
__________________
LEICA M
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #29
TennesseJones
Registered User
 
TennesseJones's Avatar
 
TennesseJones is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 650

Nikkor 105 2.5 ai-s, D610
This is a shot we used in 'McQueen', the play, at St James Theatre in London.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #30
Stuart John
Registered User
 
Stuart John's Avatar
 
Stuart John is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 597
Here is one from my 105 f2.5 sonnar version.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/photogsjm/
http://www.sjmphotography.co.nr/

Canonet QL17, Canonet 28, Zorki C
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #31
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
Yes, the two lenses should render a bit differently. The later Gauss formula lens was specifically designed for smoother OOF rendering in an attempt to counter the reputation that Nikkor lenses had at the time for poor bokeh.

Sonnar optical formula:


Gauss optical formula:


Found here.
The rear element of version two almost fills the bayonet opening. The Sonar is half that size, a dime or less.

The first thing I noticed is near minimum focus distance, the Sonnar is not as sharp at 2.8. Stopped down, both are the same.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #32
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,137
Nikkor 105/2.5 ... a delightful lens. I owned an early pre-AI version as well as the last AI-S version. Both produced beautiful results.

I'd buy another, now that I have the F6, but I've become hooked on the Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8 AI-S. It renders a little differently, no less sweetly, and is still an extraordinary performer with macro focusing as a bonus. It is a bit larger and heavier, courtesy of the macro focusing mount.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #33
kshapero
Press the Shutter
 
kshapero's Avatar
 
kshapero is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida, USA
Age: 70
Posts: 9,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by x-ray View Post
This is one of my favorite Nikkor lenses since the 60's. The focal length is just right. IMO it's one of Nikons best primes.
100% totally agree. Just sharp as a tack throughout.
__________________
Akiva S.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kshapero

Cameras, Lenses and Photos
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #34
Nokton48
Registered User
 
Nokton48's Avatar
 
Nokton48 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,304
The Nikkor 105mm lens is a legendary lens. THE lens for fashion and beauty head shots. Evidence of this is above ^^. I've owned both versions of the early lenses, and the AI-S, as well. They all have their merits

Nowadays I'm more of a Minolta guy, the 100mm F2.5 MC Rokkor holds it's own against any Nikkor. And the 100mm F3.5 MD Macro can hold it's own against the 105 Micro Nikkor, which I have also owned.

Whatever you decide to go with, just enjoy the lens.
__________________
“The secret of getting ahead is getting started.”
― Mark Twain
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #35
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nokton48 View Post
...
Nowadays I'm more of a Minolta guy, the 100mm F2.5 MC Rokkor holds it's own against any Nikkor. And the 100mm F3.5 MD Macro can hold it's own against the 105 Micro Nikkor, which I have also owned.
...
Why was it necessary to say that in a thread about the Nikkor 105mm lenses? I'm enthused by your infatuation. But no matter how good your Minolta lenses are, they're not going to fit on my Nikon bodies. That makes them not worth much to me at all.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2015   #36
Noserider
Registered User
 
Noserider is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 324
I can assure you from my repair and tune of a few 105's all versions that the Ai version has not a bit of polycarbonate internally. It DOES have a few internal construction details that are common to the mid-length changes found in Ai spec, and many of those 'inconsistencies' were changed in the Ai-S version, which for this reason I recommend the Ai-S version over the Ai version. Both are good but the Ai version has a tendency to be quite stiff over time, and while a competent CLA will equalize it for the price and relative availability I suggest the Ai-S. unless the Ai version is dramatically low (and usually the reason the price is low is due to that stiff focus).
Nikon was making changes to their lens manufacturing process specifically in cost and volume and the Ai spec while somewhat simplifying (rubber grips instead of knurled) the internal complexity (and the problems it made) IMO warranted the change to Ai-S.
I knew of a few older shooters who had very strong feelings that the older F Non Ai lenses were a much higher level of internal quality and that specifically the Ai versions were 'junk'. While I never had such thoughts about the junk status of Ai after repairing and tuning many lenses from all the eras the old timer's were correct about the F series they are very well built. The Ai-S series has more stamped parts that are meant to be replaced rather than renewed. The Ai series seemed to have more modular constructions but with added complexity especially in the final adjustments which were then locked solid into place with TIGHT screws and thread sealer.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2015   #37
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
Yes, the two lenses should render a bit differently. The later Gauss formula lens was specifically designed for smoother OOF rendering in an attempt to counter the reputation that Nikkor lenses had at the time for poor bokeh.
I don't think that's correct.

The 10.5cm Sonnar was intentionally undercorrected for spherical aberration giving it great bokeh for portraits, but making it a low resolution lens at infinity for any f-stop below f8. See also http://www.nikkor.com/story/0045.

The later Gauss version increases infinity resolution wide open.

Roland.

PS: The 8.5cm has busy bokeh as you say (but is quite sharp even wide open, at all distances). Because the 8.5cm and 10.5cm are so different, I'm keeping both. My 10.5cm Sonnar is probably the best bokeh lens I own.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2015   #38
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferider View Post
I don't think that's correct.
I was just paraphrasing Nikon's own website, Roland. More details in my subsequent comments (to the one you quoted) in this thread.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2015   #39
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
I was just paraphrasing Nikon's own website, Roland. More details in my subsequent comments (to the one you quoted) in this thread.
Cool, Jon.

When I got my 240, I systematically tested all my lenses. And was surprised how "soft" the 10.5cm was at infinity (compared to the 8.5cm) - until then I only had found one reference to the same behavior by another user. I then researched it a bit more systematically. I know you know your Nikkors .... my post is more directed at other users (for example post #22). Basically, the 10.5cm was designed as a portrait lens, a "bokeh machine" with beautiful, painterly blotched background, while the 8.5cm was more general purpose (its resolution convinced DDD to switch to Nikkors, etc). My only other lens that renders backgrounds like the 10.5cm is the 75 Summilux.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:17.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.