Best Nikon Pre-AI or Non-AI lenses

[Ray Hunter]

105/2.5

+1

 

[Ray Hunter]

Either 105/2.5 or 85/1.8 depending on which "looks" the best to your eye, a 50/1.4, and either a 28/2.8 or a 35/2 or 2.8 make a good three lens starter. Then you can adjust as you use them and get a feel for how you like them. Put more effort into shooting with them than thinking or reading about them, which is an easy trap in which to fall

 

[BradS]

Either 105/2.5 or 85/1.8 depending on which "looks" the best to your eye, a 50/1.4, and either a 28/2.8 or a 35/2 or 2.8 make a good three lens starter. Then you can adjust as you use them and get a feel for how you like them. Put more effort into shooting with them than thinking or reading about them, which is an easy trap in which to fall

I'm nodding my head in strong agreement with this excellent advice...all of it....well said.

 

[benveniste]

There are relatively few pre-AI Nikkors which don't have an AI counterpart. They include 4 fisheye lenses, of which the 6mm f/5.6 and the 10mm f/5.6 are perhaps the most interesting. The 21mm f/4 is interesting from a historical perspective, but there are better modern alternatives which don't require using mirror lockup. The 25mm f/3.5 existed as a prototype only. The 45mm f/2.8 GN is a fun little lens if you like Tessars.

The 50mm f/2 mentioned by several people was made as an AI lens, but can be hard to find. The later 50mm f/1.8 modified the double-gauss design by splitting one of the doublets; this reduced coma but some people feel spoiled the character of the 50mm f/2. The 58mm f/1.4 is another lens I put into the historical-interest-but-not-worth-the hassle category. The most controversial switch was from the pre-AI 85mm f/1.8 to the 85mm f/2.0. Personally, I feel it was much ado about very little, but others disagree. You'd have to decide for yourself.

The 105mm f/2.5 Sonnar is perhaps the best loved of the pre-AI-only lenses. I can only suggest you try it and decide for yourself. The 135mm f/3.5 had a slight tweak in optical formula for AI (4/3 to 4/4), but it's not a lens that gets a lot of "ink." The 135mm f/2.8 and 200mm f/4 lenses each added an element late in the pre-AI era, but the reviews I've read seem to think it was for the better. Ditto for the 300+mm designs, but I'm not sure you'd be using those for portraits.

All of these older lenses are well, old. Some have lived a sheltered life in a well ventilated cabinet or bureau. I have one such lens -- an AI-converted 28mm f/2. Others saw heavy professional use and have the wear to prove it. Still others sat in a camera bag at the bottom of a closet and became victims of fungus. I hope you enjoy the "thrill of the hunt," and wish you well in your quests!

 

[flavio81]

There are relatively few pre-AI Nikkors which don't have an AI counterpart.

I disagree. There were many pre-AI that weren't carried over to AI. That is, that the formula was changed.

Some examples: 20mm f3.5 (or f4), 28mm f3.5, 50mm f1.4, 135/2.8, 135/3.5, 200/4. They're all different optical designs (yes, the 28/3.5 is a new computation(

The 58mm f/1.4 is another lens I put into the historical-interest-but-not-worth-the hassle category.

Good, good, they're garbage, please ship them out to my home so I can dispose of them properly.

The 135mm f/3.5 had a slight tweak in optical formula for AI (4/3 to 4/4), but it's not a lens that gets a lot of "ink."

It is an entirely different optical formula, not a "slight tweak". "4/3 to 4/4" doesn't tell much, once you look at the actual diagrams you see they're entirely different.

The 135mm f/2.8 and 200mm f/4 lenses each added an element late in the pre-AI era, but the reviews I've read seem to think it was for the better. !

Again, entirely different optical designs for both. Entirely, radically different. And the 200/4 renders completely different. I owned both versions of course.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Maybe the 85 1.8 (or 1.4, pretty pricey though). A Leica R 90 Elmarit lens stays screwed to my Nikon camera, can't imagine a better portrait lens for any amount of money unless it was an R 90 Summicron.

Let's not forget the 55mm f/3.5 Micro Nikkor; one of Nikon's sharpest lenses.

 

[Timmyjoe]

As mentioned above, the Nikkor 105 f2.5 is outstanding. As it the 85mm f1.8 if you can find a good copy (mine was not so good).

Best,
-Tim

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I'm nodding my head in strong agreement with this excellent advice...all of it....well said.

I also agree that would probably switch the wide-angle lens to the excellent 24mm f/2.8.

 

[BradS]

I also agree that would probably switch the wide-angle lens to the excellent 24mm f/2.8.

Yes, I like that one too. There aren’t too many clunkers in the manual focus Nikkor lineup.

 

[Steve York]

I don't have much experience with old nikkors, but I've had several copies of the 35mm Nikkor-O and OC and they are very good. Sharp w/o being too sharp, even at MFD, nice, smooth bokeh. The one copy of the 5.8cm f1.4 I used had tons of character, and adequate sharpness, even wide open. Every Nikkor-S 50/1.4 I've used has very good with smooth transitions. The 105 is impressively sharp, and at least the Sonnar derivative can have great bokeh. Less impressed with the 55/3.5 and 50/2. Depends how you define "best" though; maybe some aren't the sharpest, most are single coated, some flare more, but great for B&W.

 

[madNbad]

I also agree that would probably switch the wide-angle lens to the excellent 24mm f/2.8.

One of the first wide angle lenses with a floating element. Nikon called it Close Range Correction. One of my favorite Nikkors of all time.

New Hope, PA Auto Show 1975, Nikon F, 24 2.8 Nikkor, TriX, D76 Please excuse the dust spots on the 47 year old negative

 

[abruzzi]

the only AI lenses I have are E series, everyting else on my Nikon shelf is a pre-AI lenses, and I'm pretty sure there isn't a dud among them. Plus, if you have a pre-AI camera,you'll find that unconverted, pre AI lenses frequenlty sell for half what their AI or AIS counterparts sell for. Thats why the F2 is the perfect Nikon camera--full metering flexibility for both pre AI and all the AI and AIS lenses, just by owning a spare prism--one DP3 and one DP12.

 

[flavio81]

I have, or have had...

20/3.5 UD : A very good lens, kept it.
28/3.5 H: It has strong vignetting, corners get very sharp at f11 but before that it's a "center very sharp, corners ok" kind of lens. High contrast, low distortion, nice sunstars, good flare resistance.
28/2.0 N: It's a cult lens but i still can't understand why. I need to use it more , I guess.
35/3.5 PC-Nikkor: Very good although when shifted it needs a ton of stopping down to get acceptable. It's more or less a scaled-up 28/3.5 so it has the same qualities.
35/2.0 O : Wonderful
58/1.4 S: Exquisite rendering, wide open is fuzzy; stopped down at f5.6+ it is as sharp as any modern lens.
50/1.4 S and SC: Great all-around lenses. Note that the design was recomputed in the mid-60s, i got the later versions.
50/2 H and HC: Can't remember anything particular, didn't use them too much. Nice handling, though.
85/1.8 H: Wonderful, exquisite rendering. A true long-focus lens (not a telephoto design)
135/3.5 Q: Very sharp although low in contrast compared to its peers (i.e. Carl Zeiss Jena 135/3.5)
200/4.0 Q: Note that this exists in at least two optical computations. I had the first one, it was OK in sharpness but the bokeh was very nice. Now I have the QC version but haven't tested it.
300/4.5 H: Can't comment, mine had haze.

 

[madNbad]

I bought my first Nikon in 1973. There have been a lot of different cameras and lenses between then and now. Down to a single body, Nikkormat FS and one big piece of glass.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Well, I lucked out not long ago on a nearly pristine early 50/2 H-series already A1 converted. Just what I wanted, superb construction and early single-coating with a slightly gentler rendering than subsequent Nikon 50's, but still dang sharp anyway, yet not "clinically" so (I have a 55/2.8 macro for that kind of role). Reminds me of some of the earlier Pentax lenses, and what I appreciated about those. But that's frankly too short for an ideal portrait lens in my opinion. For that kind of purpose I use a classic 85/1.4 Ai, since the earlier versions of that focal length, as good as they often are, just ain't quite the same thing as the "Cream Machine" itself.

 

[Cholentpot]

Just got an F so my Pre-AI lenses have a home now. It came with a 105 2.5 but it's an AI-S with prongs.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

105/2.5

this lens is a true winner beyond any question!

 

[gone]

I'm kinda interested in the 100 2.8 Series E lenses. The IQ looks good, they're cheap, and it's a small lens. It can't replace the Leica R Elmarit, but might be fun for casual outings w/ a light setup.

The Nikkor 100 2.5's are very sharp lenses at all apertures, although the Sonnar model is slightly better wide open in that regard. Great lenses, but not for portraits, way too sharp.

 

[Cholentpot]

I'm kinda interested in the 100 2.8 Series E lenses. The IQ looks good, they're cheap, and it's a small lens. It can't replace the Leica R Elmarit, but might be fun for casual outings w/ a light setup.

The Nikkor 100 2.5's are very sharp lenses at all apertures, although the Sonnar model is slightly better wide open in that regard. Great lenses, but not for portraits, way too sharp.

I have a 100 2.8 E

It's great for candid's and walkaround if you have room. Street stuff looks great on the lens, yes I know it strays from the orthodoxy of getting into peoples faces but the compression gives the look a different feel.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

One vote here for the 180mm P or P.C with the improved NIC coatings. Still a fine lens and the P 'single' coating version has a lovely character in black and white film.

 

[gorbas]

As for 180mm, latest ED version was way more improved over previous ones. Way better lens in any respect. The same for 2.8/135, 4/200 Q versions, change to Ai models greatly improved those lenses.

 

[Russ - SVP]

105/2.5

The 105 f/2.5 is legendary. And deservedly so!

 

[gone]

This was posted almost 2 years ago. If the op is like most of us, they're probably still looking.

I'd like to nominate the non AI 85 1.8 lens. They're heavy, the minimum focus distance really isn't that minimum, and the bokeh can be un-Leica like at times. But there's something about their IQ that can be really cool.

It wouldn't be my go-to lens for older women, but for a more photojournalist look, they can do people very well, especially w/ Tri-X in D76.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Mmm I tend to disagree; the Non Ai 85mm f/1.8 works extremely well for portraits, you just have to keep the f/stop closer to wide open and here's the kicker; no hood! The slight increase in unshaded flare has a very kind rendition while still keeping a bit of snap for the eyes. A slight backlight will enhance this.

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

I'd like to nominate the non AI 85 1.8 lens.

What's the color rendition like on this lens, especially the single-coated version?