105mm f2.5 Nikkor VS 105mm f4 Micro Nikkor?

[Kino]

I think I screwed up...

I purchased two Nikon primes on the recommendation of a colleague, but failed to notice one of the lenses, the 105 was in fact, a standard prime and not of the close focusing (micro) varitey.

Both are pretty much dead mint; beautiful glass!

Now, I am wondering if I will do as well with this lens in a bellows as I would with the 105 Micro?

I will be shooting 1:1 35mm movie frames (4 perfs high) with a PB5 bellows (not purchased yet) adapted to an Oxberry Optical Camera.

Frankly, I am trying to avoid just yet paying for a 105mm f4 Printing Nikkor for motion picture work, which yet fetch in the $3 to $5K USD region -- not exactly an option at the moment...

So, anyone have any experience with this combo or can make a educated guess as to performance?

In any event, I guess this is going to FORCE me to purchase a Nikon F of some variety -- life is so unfair!

Thanks for the input.

Frank

 

[df cardwell]

Kino

The 2.5 is either a Sonnar or Planar, and one of the MOST lovely lenses ever. Ever. They are different, and lovely,
but NOT macro lenses. Depending on how much the image will be magnified, you might get by on the Oxberry ... stopping down covers a lot !

But I think the best you can do is to shoot the 2.5 out in the world, and scrape up another micro nikkor.

don

 

[Kino]

Don,

Thank you, I feared as much, but your description makes the pain of having to purchase yet another lens bearable!

The 105 f2.5 I have has a serial # of 808476, so I am guessing it places it in the 1980 region. It is so clean, even the PASSED gold sticker shows NO wear. Nice. I don't think it has ever been used...

As to the 105mm Micro Nikkor, I have found one in a 'P' Short-mount and looks like a dedicated bellows lens with 1/3 fstop divisions and yet another varitey more like the 105 I have, only f4 and with the micro designator; any wisdom here?

Many thanks for the advice.

frank

 

[df cardwell]

Great resources:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograph...resources/micronikkor/Bellow-Nikkor/index.htm

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html

Your 105 / 2.5 seems to be the Planar type, and might be just fine for CU

But I'd get the micro ; )

 

[Mick Fagan]

Frank, I have the 105 f/2.5 with a slightly later serial number, if you can keep it and use it as a general lens, do so.

I have some quite tasty Nikkor lenses, and, regardless of their reputation, my 105 is the best Nikkor lens by far, possibly in the top three lenses Nikon ever produced for the F range of cameras.

If it's an AI-S version, which I believe it is, then it was designed for the F3 body and also fitted with the aperture prong for the F2, but will of course work excellently on any of the other F cameras and many others to boot.

An F3 body is really the cheapest (currently) body going and marvelous value.

Having used my own 105 f/2.5 with a bellows (Vivitar copy of the PB5 more or less) I can tell you it isn't too good, mind you, "good", can be subjective!

Mick.

 

[Kino]

Don and Mick,

Thank you very much for the informative posts; I will now attempt to chase down the elusive 105mm f4 "short mount" macro bellows lens for my work. Barring that, I will go for the standard 105mm f4 "long mount" micro.

Frank

 

[dynachrome]

I agree that the 105/2.5 is not suited to macro work. The short mount lens is a collector's item and costs far more than it's worth if you only want to take pictures with it. If fitting the lens isn't a problem you can get a Nikon T mount adapter, a Leica to T adapter and then use an enlarging lens. Last year I bought a 105/5.6 EL Nikkor in mint condition for $20. At f/8 or f/11 it should gove all the sharpness you need for photographing flat surfaces.

 

[dynachrome]

Make that give.

 

[Anupam Basu]

I'd recommend an enlarger lens as a bellows lens, too. But beside the 105/4 macro, there are several other absolutely brilliant budget macro lenses available in the 90-105mm range.

 

[edtbjon]

Just to make it clear, the 105 f/2.5 is a Sonnar type lens. (Not a Planar.) More info on this page: Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 lens
This f/2.5 105 lens was a favourite of mine with a pleasing bokeh and excellent rendering. I havn't got the lens today, but I got both a Planar and a couple of Sonnars for my Hasselblad.

On the original question: While being an excellent general purpose long lens, it's at its best within it's range without extra bellows etc. I.e. from 1 meter to infinity. Nikon makes/have made excellent macro lenses which would suit your needs much better. There are also many other good options given in previous answers.
But if you plan to use a manual focus Nikon camera for general photography in the future, do keep the lens.

//Björn

 

[Kino]

Dynachrome, Anupam and Edtbjon,

Thank you for commenting. I do have a brace of, admittedly older, enlarging lenses I will take a critical look at for suitablity, as I am not wild about paying $350-400 for the short mount lens and if i have one already that will fit the bill, so much the better.

Anupam, I'd be interested in hearing any specific recommendations you may have, as well as any others favorites from other readers as well.

I am not limiting myself to Nikon, although the camera will have a Nikon F mount.

Thank you.

 

[df cardwell]

the 105 f/2.5 is a Sonnar type lens

"In 1971 the lens underwent fundamental design changes..."

"This design is based on the Xenotar-type lens (5 lenses, 4 groups) with thick, convex lenses, rather than the Sonnar type with its many asymmetric components." SATO, Haruo

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/technology/nikkor/n05_e.htm

 

[Anupam Basu]

Anupam, I'd be interested in hearing any specific recommendations you may have

The best 35mm macro lens I have ever used is the Vivitar Series 1 105/2.5 which is that same as the one available from Kiron. The Vivitar S1 90mm is also very good and I have heard great things about the new Tamron 90mm.

 

[PhotoJim]

Yup, you screwed up but the good news is, you got a magnificent portrait lens in the f/2.5. The /4 is not as good a portrait lens, but it is a wonderful macro lens. I'm lucky enough to own both and wouldn't be rid of either.

Get the 105/1.8 for speed (at the expense of size and weight). One day I want to get this lens, but I haven't been able to justify it quite yet.

 

[CRhymer]

This is one great lens. Full stop. I have to edit this. I mean full stop in the British sense. Not as in aperture. Kino, you have done well if you ever want to make a most excellent portrait.

Cheers,
Clarence

 

[Kino]

Prices climbing right now!

Isn't it amazing that sometimes when you start looking for something, the prices seem to start climbing like a balloon?

Maybe I'm just dreaming , but I could SWEAR the Nikon 135 f4 Micro lenses were selling (buy it now) for between $125 and $175 just a few days ago and now they are pushing $350 to $400?

Did I just start a Nikkor gold rush? If so, who do I see to collect my commission? :confused:

PB-4 (really ALL Nikon) bellows seem to climbing as well; what gives or am I just kooky?

Arrrggg... Arrrrrggg... Now the price of F3's will be skyrocketing!

 

[PhotoJim]

BGN grade $159, EX grade $254 at KEH as of the time of this post. Not at all ridiculous.

 

[Kino]

Oh yeah, KEH. I keep forgetting about them! Thanks!

 

[nsouto]

snip...
I will be shooting 1:1 35mm movie frames (4 perfs high) with a PB5 bellows (not purchased yet) adapted to an Oxberry Optical Camera.
snip again...
In any event, I guess this is going to FORCE me to purchase a Nikon F of some variety -- life is so unfair!

the good news as already pointed out: one of the best portrait lenses ever, period.


the even better news: get a reversing ring and mount a 50/1.4 on the end of the 105 and you'll have a very good macro capability with a reasonable distance from the subject and acceptable DOF.


As for being forced to get a Nikon F for it? My heart bleeds...

 

[Anupam Basu]

the even better news: get a reversing ring and mount a 50/1.4 on the end of the 105 and you'll have a very good macro capability with a reasonable distance from the subject and acceptable DOF.

This is the least preferable way of achieving magnification. Cuts down drastically on working distance and takes away from picture quality. The 50/1.4 isn't a good macro diopter reversed. The 1.8 is slightly better, but both will limit you to way beyond life size magnifications only.

And DOF is the same for a given magnification and effective aperture, so how you obtain that magnification doesn't really matter.

 

[Kino]

As much as I hate too, I am going to punt and sell this lens to offset the cost of the micro I need. Can't bring another camera system into the house or .... you know...

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Maybe sometime in the future...

 

[dpurdy]

http://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/pho/779795199.html

Is this what you are looking for? Seems like a good price.
Dennis

 

[Kino]

Dennis, thanks for the heads-up, but I have already purchased a 55mm micro off of Ebay earlier and just bought the 105 micro I have been searching for as well.

Once I get the lens in place and functioning, I'll give a report.

thanks to everyone!

Frank

 

[dynachrome]

My 12th 55mm Micro Nikkor arrived earlier today. It's a 'K' model, the last one before the AI. It came with the PK-3 and the original plastic bubble and is in nice condition. The price? About $26 + s/h.

 

[Kino]

Well, my wife found a Nikon N6006 body in darned near mint condition for $1 at a garage sale, so I guess I'll keep the 105 portrait lens.

My GOD; a Nikon body for $1.

Wonderful and sad.