What are the Nikon lens legends?

[Craig75]

nikkor 6mm f2.8 is pretty legendary

 

[ChristopherCoy]

nikkor 6mm f2.8 is pretty legendary

That's the huge fisheye that can nearly see behind itself isn't it?

ETA: Yeah, that's the one I'm thinking about. I don't see a point, or useable image in it, but hey... if it floats your boat.

 

[BradS]

The (non-exotic) Nikon manual focus F mount lenses that come to mind....

• 28mm f/2.8 AIS Nikkor - probably apocryphal but the story I heard was that Corporate management gave design engineers free reign on this design. There are a couple related Nikkors that are as good - the 24mm f/2.8 AIS Nikkor for example.
  
• 50mm f/2 Nikkor-H.C and the later and very closely related K and AI versions - Sometimes called the Japanese Summicron, it is a very good lens but every version of the later manual focus f/1.8 is better.
• 105mm f/2.5 Nikkor-P.C and all of its manual focus decedents. Again, a spectacular lens. Try one and you'll know why it is legendary. I cannot think of anything that even comes close...maybe the contemporaneous Pentax 105mm f/2.8 Super Takumar and Super-Multi-Coated Takumar ?
• 200mm f/4 Nikkor ... pedestrian performance but every Vietnam War era photojournalist had one and a dedicated Nikon F body.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

28mm f/2.8 AIS Nikkor - probably apocryphal but the story I heard was that Corporate management gave design engineers free reign on this design. There are a couple related Nikkors that are as good - the 24mm f/2.8 AIS Nikkor for example.

I've got the 24mm 2.8 D. I've never had the experience of the 28mm, but I wonder what the difference is between them. What did they put into the 28mm with "free reign" that they didn't put into the 24mm?

 

[BradS]

I've got the 24mm 2.8 D. I've never had the experience of the 28mm, but I wonder what the difference is between them. What did they put into the 28mm with "free reign" that they didn't put into the 24mm?

The D is auto focus though...isn't it?

Like I said, the story is very likely apocryphal...for example, there are several related lenses that also have CRC - like the 24mm f/2.
I especially appreciate the 28mm f/2.8 AIS and its 24mm sibling for their amazing performance in a compact and relatively light weight package. The 28/24mm focal length is also my most used small format focal length in urban environments.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

The D is auto focus though...isn't it?

Yeah, it's a screw drive AF. I got rid of all my AF-G lenses and went with D versions so that I could use them interchangeably with my D700 and F5/F100 bodies. I've got the 105 2.8 D and the 24 2.8 D, my 50mm 1.8 is a G lens, but I plan to switch that out with a D lens soon.

 

[BradS]

@ChristopherCoy ....I've never owned an auto focus Nikon...so, it's all greek to me. I did briefly own a Canon EOS Rebel Ti with a 50mm f/1.8...used it like a very fancy and capable point and shoot. Never warmed to the Canon colors though...

 

[ChristopherCoy]

@ChristopherCoy ....I've never owned an auto focus Nikon...so, it's all greek to me. I did briefly own a Canon EOS Rebel Ti with a 50mm f/1.8...used it like a very fancy and capable point and shoot. Never warmed to the Canon colors though...

The first AF lenses (I believe) were the D versions. When they were coupled with the bodies, a screw fell into place that spun either direction and allowed the lens to focus. Later versions of the AF lenses like the AF-S, AF-G etc had the AF motors built into the lenses. I know that the D lenses are backwards compatible with limitations, but I'm not sure about the later versions.

 

[BradS]

I do remember that the first 50mm f/1.8 AF Nikkor (AF-D ?) received high praise at the time of its introduction and may have achieved legendary status.

 

[drkhalsa]

Nikon began producing AF lenses in the mid 80's.

Then the AF-D lenses around '92. The D stands for Distance because the lens could send distance information to the camera for flash purposes.

I have an F5 and it works perfectly with AF-S and G lenses.

 

[Paul Howell]

The first AF lenses (I believe) were the D versions. When they were coupled with the bodies, a screw fell into place that spun either direction and allowed the lens to focus. Later versions of the AF lenses like the AF-S, AF-G etc had the AF motors built into the lenses. I know that the D lenses are backwards compatible with limitations, but I'm not sure about the later versions.

The issue with G and E lens is that they are limited to narrow range of bodies. G lens don't have aperture rings so N90s and like will not work or any MF body. The E lens will not work with some AF bodies and none of the film bodies including the F6. Most Canon EOS the EF mount lens will work with all bodies including film bodies, perhaps some limitations with first generation bodies.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Nikon began producing AF lenses in the mid 80's.

Then the AF-D lenses around '92. The D stands for Distance because the lens could send distance information to the camera for flash purposes.

I have an F5 and it works perfectly with AF-S and G lenses.

As do I. But there's something about the AF-S and G lenses that keeps them from being backwards compatible to a certain point. I just can't remember the details on it at the moment, but I know there was a reason I went for D lenses and nothing newer.

What version of AF lenses came before the D?

 

[drkhalsa]

They were labeled AF Nikkor. For instance, AF Nikkor 50mm f1.8, essentially the same as the newer 50mm f1.8 AF-D except without the distance info for the camera.

If my memory is correct, the AF-S and G lenses lack some functionality on the F4.

 

[MattKing]

As one who has never been all that interested in the Nikon offerings, it strikes me that this thread is basically an offshoot of the thread on religious topics!

 

[ChristopherCoy]

As one who has never been all that interested in the Nikon offerings, it strikes me that this thread is basically an offshoot of the thread on religious topics!

Really? Are we discussing lenses over there as well? I must have missed that.

 

[benveniste]

I'm not sure that any lens rises to the level of "legendary," but I would like to get my hands on a 300mm f/1.4.

 

[MattKing]

Really? Are we discussing lenses over there as well? I must have missed that.

Canon vs. Nikon is surely as important a schism as Shiite vs. Sunni or Protestant vs. Catholic!

 

[BrianShaw]

Canon vs. Nikon is surely as important a schism as Shiite vs. Sunni or Protestant vs. Catholic!

Canon isn’t part of this discussion...

 

[voceumana]

The Apo El Nikkor lenses are legendary.

 

[Oldwino]

I’d have to nominate the reissue 50/1.4 s-mount lens, and the original (and reissue) 35/1.8 (both in s mount and LTM). And the Noct-Nikkor 58/1.2.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

200mm f/2 G ED VRII.
Not sure if it is legendary because not as many have had it as have had the more common ones mentioned here, but it’s one of the best lenses Nikon ever made.

 

[Kyle M.]

That's the huge fisheye that can nearly see behind itself isn't it?

ETA: Yeah, that's the one I'm thinking about. I don't see a point, or useable image in it, but hey... if it floats your boat.

It's not that it can nearly see behind itself, it can see behind itself.

 

[Kyle M.]

I've used nikon lenses from the 24mm 2.8 up to the 135mm 3.5. I have to say the ones I've been most impressed with are the 50/2 and the 35/2. I've shot with Nikon 50 1.2's, 1.4's, 1.8's, and the f2 and I have to say I prefer the 50/2. I like the 35/2 as an all around lens but there are times that a 35mm lens is too wide for my photographic style. I'm one of those people who could go there whole life with just the 50mm focal length and never feel like I was missing something.

 

[davela]

Some notables I would consider in that category from experience:

24mm F2.8 any MF version
35mm F2 any MF version
180mm F2.8 ED any MF version
85mm F2 (Contax, Nikon, or Leica RF mounts)
28mm F3.5 (Nikon or Leica Thread RF Mounts)

There are others of course!

 

[RLangham]

The original 43-86mm was legendary as Nikon's worst lens.

I believe I briefly had one. if I recall right I was irritated by its shortcomings although I did like the rendering of out of focus areas.