Nikkor 135mm 2.8?

[Xmas]

I had a 135mm but I think it was a little slower f/? that bought in Japan in 1967 and subsequently lost with my Nikon F Photomic T and a 50mm F/1.4 on a NYC Subway a few years later. Ouch. I "replaced" it with a Nikormat FT with a 50mm f/2 which I still have but don't use.

Nikon did a /3.5 135 same asymmetric style as the 105 and later /2.8 135. Good performer but not much smaller than the /2.8.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

And as a curiosity both the Series E 100mm and 135mm have the same optical construction of 4 elements in 4 groups, which is also shared by the Nikkor AIS 135mm f3.5.
See: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/emfgfg20/eserieslenses/htmls/100135mm.htm and http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/135mmnikkor/135mm35.htm

 

[JW PHOTO]

Nikon did a /3.5 135 same asymmetric style as the 105 and later /2.8 135. Good performer but not much smaller than the /2.8.

I believe I also have the 135mm f3.5 you talk about here. Mine says, Nikkor-Q 135mm f3.5 with Nippon Kogaku on the front also. It's an early non-AI version with the fluted focusing ring and no built-in hood. It's shaper wide open than the f2.8, but that's at f3.5. shoot both lenses at f3.5 and I'll take the 135mm f2.8 version since it's just as good and I still have great performance at f2.8. Of course the 135mm f3.5 lens is smaller if size is a problem. Either lens is very good. JW

 

[Mick Fagan]

I have the 105 2.5 Nikkor and the 135 2.8 Nikkor. The 105 is brilliant as a single portrait lens, landscape lens and general 105mm lens; I've had mine for about 23-25 years and used it endlessly and never been let down.

Since the last 23 years I have generally travelled light when flying overseas with a 28mm - 50mm and the 105mm.

A few years ago I picked up a mint 135 AIS 2.8 Nikkor. It is pretty much as good as the 105 lens but has a slightly better pulling power and of course a better close focus out of focus background compared to the 105mm.

I am currently sitting in a Spanish house in Priego (Cordoba) and I am travelling for a few months in Europe with the 28mm, 50mm and for the first time, the 135mm.

I decided to take the 135mm as it has more pulling power for buildings and/or landscape features one often meets in Europe. Tesdting last year told me the 135mm was as good as the 105mm as far as I could figure out. The 105mm Nikkor has been the best lens I have owned in the Nikkor range. The 135 AIS 2.8 Nikkor is, from my experience, equal in all things the 105mm 2.5 AIS Nikkor is. Both lenses have built in lens hoods, take 52mm filters and are both reasonably compact.

The 135 fits inside my jacket pocket, as does the ever so slightly smaller 105.

If you have the opportunity to pick up a good specimen of the 2.8 135 AIS Nikkor at a price you can afford and are hankering for a reasonably compact and reasonably fast 135mm lens, then do so, I don't believe you will be disspointed.

Mick.

 

[dynachrome]

At last count I have two Qs, two QCs and a 'K'. All of these have very nice out of focus rendition. I have not used the later AI and AIS f/2.8 models. I also use the Vivitar 135/2.8 Close Focusing and the Vivitar 135/2.3 Series 1 in Nikon mount. In addition to the f/2.8 models I have a number of f/3.5 135mm Nikkors from a CM to the AI. These are good performer too.

 

[Mick Fagan]

My first 135mm lens for a Nikon was the vivitar series 1 135 2.3 lens. It was a quite good lens but is not quite in the same league as the Nikkor 135 2.8 AIS lens. One of it's two drawbacks for me was the rather long twisting required to focus the vivitar, the other drawback was the filter size, which from memory was 72mm and made for a fair sized and really heavier lens; making it a bit harder to slip into a jacket pocket.

I bought my Vivitar series 1, 135 2.3 brand new in the seventies, it served me well until I finallyh found a Nikkor 105 2.5 and was hooked with the smaller filter size, far easier and quicker focusing. From that moment onwards I lost interest in the Vivitar and eventuallyh moved it on to another person.

Nonetheless, the vivitar series 1 135 2.3 lens is quite good.

Mick.

 

[dynachrome]

The 135/2.3 Vivitar Series 1, like the 135/3.2 Konica Hexanon, focuses down to three feet. This was close when compared to other 135s at that time. The combination of the speed and close focusing is what I like about it. The 135 lens I started to use more was the f/2.8 Vivitar Close focusing. It's a little slower than the Series 1 but goes down to 1:2. It's a good performer and is very handy for close shooting when you need some distance from the subject. The longer 200/3 Vivitar Series 1 focuses down to four feet and its close focusing is often more useful than its speed.

 

[roos]

I had the old really heavy cast iron tank model with the worse looking home ai-conversion i have ever seen. Optically it was very good, mechanically too for its age. However i never took it out. I had lighter options that was equally good, so i sold it.

 

[250swb]

I've recently been using a 135mm Nikkor Q f/2.8 via an adapter on my Leica M and the image quality is extremely good. In terms of outright image quality it does fall down at the widest and smallest aperture compared with a 135mm Tele Elmar, which is a stop slower anyway, so in real terms it is on a par most of the time. For the price you can buy them on EBay I think they are one of the best lens bargains around.

Steve

 

[budrichard]

I have the 135mm f2.8 series E which seems to be good. Is there much difference optically between this and the real thing (Nikkor)?


Steve.

Yes, one is a Professional lens and one was designed for the amateur market.
You get what you pay for!-Dcik

 

[budrichard]

I've recently been using a 135mm Nikkor Q f/2.8 via an adapter on my Leica M and the image quality is extremely good. In terms of outright image quality it does fall down at the widest and smallest aperture compared with a 135mm Tele Elmar, which is a stop slower anyway, so in real terms it is on a par most of the time. For the price you can buy them on EBay I think they are one of the best lens bargains around.

Steve

The Leica 135 f2.8 with eyes for the M is a TANK of a lens compared to the Nikkor 135mm f2.8.
I have both and if I have to use 135mm focal length, then its a Nikon body for me.
The Leica lens just sits in its box!-Dick
BTW early Nikkor 105 f2.5 had removable lens hoods.

 

[Xmas]

Yes, one is a Professional lens and one was designed for the amateur market.
You get what you pay for!-Dcik

Yes the pro lens was designed to tolerate a high speed motor drive day in day out, full of Teflon bushed shafts etc.

The E was to a different build standard, probably better than a current zoom though.

But optically the E is going to have better MTF cause it used a later optical catalogue.

Saying that my E 5cm /1.8 seems to be tolerating my motor drive ok.

Id say no detectable difference.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Yes the pro lens was designed to tolerate a high speed motor drive day in day out, full of Teflon bushed shafts etc.

The E was to a different build standard, probably better than a current zoom though.

But optically the E is going to have better MTF cause it used a later optical catalogue.

Saying that my E 5cm /1.8 seems to be tolerating my motor drive ok.

Id say no detectable difference.

Um. You may wish to get out your screwdrivers and have a look inside a pre-AI 135.2.8. You won't find any shafts, maybe one piece of Teflon/delrin/whatever.
The "E" series lenses were often optically very good, but made to a lower standard for 'prosumers' who just wouldn't use the lens very much, most likely replacing (or getting bored with) their camera outfit long before they'd used up even 5% of the service life of a pro-grade lens/camera. The full-on professional grade lenses are astonishingly durable. I have a late 60s 35/2 that went through two working pros- say 25 years of use- before I got it, every corner on the focusing ring is rounded off, lots of bright Al. showing, but the focusing is still tight and silky smooth; the aperture mechanism likewise.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Right, I just arrived home with a brand new, boxed, never used Series E 135mm F2.8. It is a delightful lens and the focusing is silky smooth.
The Series E were an economy effort from Nikon to fight the cheap 3rd party lenses that flooded the market in the 70s. It was a way of Nikon saying: "here is a lens with about the same optics as the Nikkor, but cheaper". They were made with cheaper materials, but quality, especially optical one wasn't compromised.

I gave above, in another post, the differences between the Series E and the Nikkor 135mm F2.8.

 

[Steve Smith]

Yes, one is a Professional lens and one was designed for the amateur market.

Yes... but that doesn't answer my actual question!

Right, I just arrived home with a brand new, boxed, never used Series E 135mm F2.8. It is a delightful lens and the focusing is silky smooth.

Excellent. Did you do the trade you wanted?

I gave above, in another post, the differences between the Series E and the Nikkor 135mm F2.8.

Indeed you did. Thanks.


Steve.

 

[Steve Smith]

Nonetheless, the vivitar series 1 135 2.3 lens is quite good.

As was the Hanimex 135mm f2.8 I used to own (hard as that might be to believe).


Steve.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Excellent. Did you do the trade you wanted?

Yeap, I did! And I am now digital free!

 

[ToddB]

Update: After the great help on the issue with the being NON AI. I shot a practice roll yesterday and shot a co-worker that brought her little boy in for Bring your child into work day. I put FE on Auto and depressed DOF lever to check exposure. The negs came out awesome!! exposure was consistant all the way through and great dinsity. I love this lens.

ToddB

 

[narsuitus]

Does anyone have the Nikkor 135mm 2.8 lens? What do you think of it?

The 135mm f/2.8 Nikkor lens is one of the best Nikon lenses that I have never owned or used for the following reasons:

1. I prefer the 105mm f/2.5 and the 105mm f/2.8 micro Nikkors for head and shoulder portraits.

2. I prefer the longer 180mm f/2.8 and 80-200mm f/2.8 Nikkors for sports and tight face portraits.

3. I I had to buy a 135mm lens, I would get the faster 135mm f/2 because it would be a better fit between my 105mm f/2.5 and my 180mm f/2.8 lenses.

4. I rarely need to carry the very useful 28mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 135mm f/2.8 lens combo, but when I do, I have those focal lengths for my Pentax Spotmatic backup cameras.


https://www.flickr.com/photos/11336821@N00/6095358701/