Comparison : Nikon Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 vs f/1.8
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ส.ค. 2021
- Hello friends,
Today we’re going to compare to legendary Nikon lenses; the Nikon Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 versus Nikon Nikkor 105mm f/1.8.
keywords: 105 f/2.5 vs. f/1.8, 105mm f/2.5 vs. f/1.8, nikkor 105mm f/2.5 vs. f/1.8, nikon 105mm f/2.5 vs. f/1.8, comparison f/2.5 vs. f/1.8, lens comparison, Nikon lens comparison, Nikkor lens comparison, Nikon 105 1.8, Nikkor 105 1.8, Nikon 105 f1.8, Nikkor 105 f1.8, Nikon 105 f/1.8, Nikkor 105 f/1.8, Nikon 105mm 1.8, Nikkor 105mm 1.8, Nikon 105mm f1.8, Nikkor 105mm f1.8, Nikon 105mm f/1.8, Nikkor 105mm f/1.8, Nikon 105 f/1.8, Nikkor 105 f/1.8, Nikon 105 2.5, Nikkor 105 2.5, Nikon 105 f/2.5, Nikkor 105 f/2.5, Nikon 105 f/2.5, Nikkor 105 f/2.5, Nikon 105 f/2.5, Nikkor 105 f/2.5, Nikon 105mm f/2.5, Nikkor 105mm f/2.5, Nikon 105mm f/2.5, Nikkor 105mm f/2.5, Nikon 105mm f/2.5, Nikkor 105mm f/f/2.5, Ais, AI-s, Ai-s, AIS, film, film photography
Some useful stuff (I’ll get a small commission if you order thru any of the links):
Optical cleaning paper: amzn.to/2HXBgYI
Optical cleaning fluid: amzn.to/323HFci
Rubber tools: amzn.to/3mEcdco
Lens spanner: amzn.to/35VCYSL
JIS screwdrivers: amzn.to/3mC06MQ (This set has J000, J00, J0, J1)
DONATION: paypal.me/DiyExtravaganza1?lo...
If you find this video useful, informative and adds value to you (and possibly saved, or made some money by repairing the camera or lens), then consider donating to the channel - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
![เบิ้ล ปทุมราช - อ้ายกินดอง น้องลาบงัว ft. สแน็ก อัจฉรีย์ [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-OK--KaSPcI/mqdefault.jpg)
Another great video, keep them coming!
Thanks, I'll try to keep them coming as long as I have the energy and motivation to do them. Cheers.
Great video. Thanks so much for the great comparison. Keep it up. 👍🏻
Thanks a lot to you for following the channel, please tell all your friends about it !
Thanks for a wonderful comparison. I often pair the 105mm 2.5 with my Nikon d7200. There's quite a bit of purple fringing when shot wide open, but I'm down here in the tropics where the sun is awfully strong. Under normal conditions, it might not be a problem. It's a joy to use, and like all Nikon Ai-Ais lenses, built like a tank.
Hi, thanks, everytime I use the 105 f/2.5, I'm always impressed of the results it delivers, everytime. Cheers.
What a superb video. Must have taken you a long time to prepare and record this so thank you for taking the time to do so. I bought the 105 f2.5 about 3 years ago after trying to get one for some years before that. I've not seen a side-by-side analysis of it like this before, but your video sure makes me feel happy I did buy that one. I can understand even more now how it contributed to the mastery of Mr Curry's shot of the Afghan Girl, combined with his use of Kodachrome of course. Your video interestingly shows how the colour rendition seems to be bolder throughout with the f2.5 as well. I wonder how much the f2.5 was to buy new back in the 80's when Mr Curry had it.
I appreciate a lot your comment, Thanks !, yes I put quite some energy into this video. The 105 f/2.5 has indeed a very beautiful color rendition and at f/8 is simply beyond anything else, a truly legend lens. Keep checking the channel, I'm preparing a lot of very interesting comparisons.
I bought my pre-AI 1973 model in 1985 for about £40, and it still works fine today, with no servicing! My favourite lens of all time.
A very very good instructional and enjoyable video. I have both of these Nikon lenses with my Nikon F3 HP. Thank you. RS. Canada
Thanks a lot.
The nice thing about the f/2.5 is that it is sharp wide open. When the f/1.8 is stopped down slightly, the bokeh becomes distinctly geometric, which is less desirable for certain styles of portraits with a shallow depth of field. Furthermore, in bright light, the narrower maximum aperture of the f/2.5 lens is an asset because one can still shoot wide open without worrying about the camera's shutter speed limitation. Those are the qualities of the f/2.5 that I appreciate when shooting portraits; the f/1.8 has its own advantages in many situations, obviously! Both are incredible lenses, and I thought this was a great comparison.
Thanks a lot, your observations are spot on. And yes, both lenses are great !
Wonderful video. Instructive !! RS
@@richardsimms251 Thanks a lot !
Great review, thanks! Going to pick my 105 f2.5 today!
Thanks to you, enjoy such a great lens.
Great comparison. Thank you for your work.
Thanks to you for supporting the channel, don't forget to share the content with your friends. Cheers
Thank you very much for this in-depth review, with scrupulous attention to detail. I'm guessing the warmer colours of the 105 2.5 in the earlier shots were the result of white balance errors under artificial lighting. At any rate, this was a superb review.
Hi, thanks a lot for the appraisal.
Hi. Thank you for your review. I do have one question, however. Will a lens like this work well with the new mirrorless systems, particularly the 105mm?
Absolutely, as long as the flange distance is respected (43.5mm for Nikkors I think) this lens will work perfectly fine. There are many adaptors out there, but I guess you already know that. Cheers !
Nice review ☺️ But may I please add some useful info😊
The 105mm f2.5 lens you have is Ai-s later version which is so called Gauss type 5 elements 4 groups, production started in 1971... All the lenses before that between 1954 and 1971 are actually completely different design, so called Sonnar type 5 elements 3 groups... Key difference to distinguish the Sonnar older type is a bit longer lens barrel when on infinity, and rare element is smaller in diameter...
Older Sonnar version is a bit softer wide open, a bit less contrasty, with classic Sonnar bokeh, with more 3d pop and colder colour shift, perfect for videography... Newer Gauss type is a bit sharper, with excellent colours and contrast, perfect for stills.😊
Great info, thanks for sharing!
The on-line history is now a bit fuzzy. If you check carefully, I think you will find that the Sonnar-based version of the 105mm 2.5 was significantly updated in 1971, but it remained in production until 1981. In 1981, it was replaced with the Gauss-based redesign. I know for a fact that the Sonnar-based design was still being produced in 1976, as I bought a new one in Japan in December 1976. It was my favorite lens, right up to the point where someone made it their favorite lens. When I replaced it, I elected to get the newer Gauss-based lens.
@@randallstewart1224 Yep, people tend to play with dates and info for these lenses. The most trusted source - look on the original Nikon site "The Thousand and One Night" they put exact history of theirs lenses there, including these two...
In any case both types are beautiful rendering lenses, one best for video and other for stills😉👍
@@randallstewart1224 thanks for the additional information.
Thank you for a superb video on two good lenses. I will try to get the 2.5 for my MFT. Way back I was a member of the Norwegian NIKON Club. l`we had several of the film area Nikon cameras and used Nikkor optics a lot, but after selling my studio I had to let it all go. I will start to rebuild with the 105mm f 2.5. thanks again.
Nikkors never get old. Thanks for the comment and good luck with your collection revival. Cheers.
Excellent upload -- both classics. I recently wanted a 100mm(-ish) full-frame F-mount portraiture lens. I went with the Nikkor 105mm f2.8 Micro AF-D. Reasons: 1. Price (around $150 US for clean sample), 2. Versatility (also an excellent macro lens), 3. Autofocus (screw drive, which I prefer), 4. Close Range Correction (CRC) the "zenith" imo of Nikkor optical design. 5. Close focus capabilities. Unlike other portrait lenses no real constraint on how close you can be to the subject. Although these classics are very tempting, for me I made the right decision. Any 105mm (and beyond) prime is going to give you great portraits.
Hello, I can add very little to your analysis as it is totally spot on. I also have the 105mm AFD, and like it a lot, I usually take it when I need an all rounder. The ones in the video are legendary lenses, the 105 f/2.5 is super sharp and color rendition is fantastic. The f/1.8 eis even sharper and produces great bokeh, the dream would be to have the three merged on a single lens.
I recently got the 2.5 as part of a huge collection of mostly ai-s. It was my main motivation for the purchase.
Your painstaking video has confirmed my choice good. Thank you for so much effort.
Thanks to you, the f/2.5 is probably the only lens that made "wow" when I took my first picture with it. Enjoy it and don't forget to subcribe, like and tell all your friends about the channel. If you don't mind sharing and just for curiosity, I'd be interested in knowing what other lenses you got in that Ai-s collection. If you mind, no hard feelings. Cheers.
@@diyextravaganzaI’m a mess (lens case buried) rearranging my spaces but will list and reply in a bit. It is a little interesting though.
@@gregrobertson2726 no worries, thanks for answering, I'm pretty sure you have some nice findings.
you're always a great connoisseur ! Bravo !
Thanks my friend, all these vintage lenses give something that modern lenses cannot even dream about.
Great Video!
Thanks, feel free to share it with friends!
Thanks for the nice video
I have this on my list for some time, but I already have the 105mm f2.8 AF Micro. I am not sure if this is a completely different lens (macro) or there is some relation?
Hello, Thanks, the Nikkor 105mm AF is also a very good lens, I'll make a comparison with these lenses to see how it fares.
@@diyextravaganza I had the same question, as I have been wanting to get the AF-D 105mm Micro Nikkor, but saw your video about the 105 2.5...
@@silverlightphotoco I'll make a comparison since I have it too. I like a lot 105mm lenses.
Hi, thanks for the donation :)
@Diy extravaganza You're welcome!
Thsnk You for an excellent comparison of these two great lenses. I have been trying to determine which one to purchase. Now I have this excellent info. I will compare with my Nikor 85 mm f1.8 to see if it is worth it to me to purchase a 105mm. Not that much difference in the two focal lenghts. And I will be shooting 90% in a small home Studio. Due to price, I would most likely go witht the older well built lense if I can locate one in near mint condtion. Thanks for all your work in producing this Video , Greatly appreciated.
Thanks for the very uplifting comment :), I prefer older lenses all the time, better construction, and the rendition I find it more charming.
Very nice video.
Thanks a lot ! Don't forget to share it with all your friends.
Great video
Thanks a lot!
1. I really appreciated the thoroughness of your presentation. 2. I was really pleased to be seeing the results in exactly the way that you described - almost like we have the same eyes. Happy days to you - Lkd and Subd.
Hi, glad you appreciated the effort I put in making this video. Hope you like the contents of my channel and please tell all your friends about it. Cheers.
@@diyextravaganza Yep... the effort and thoroughness were clear - cool to see. Unfortunately, I have no friends (probably why I love photography), but I won't miss a chance to bully my enemies into checking out your channel. All the best from a cabin in a swamp in a rain-forest in New Zealand.
@@luzr6613 The cabin in a swamp sounds like a really good plan. Cheers.
your videos are fantastic.
Hey! Comments like this are highly motivating. Thanks a lot!
Hi DIY, do you oil lens and what oil do you recommend? Thx
Hi, I never put oil into a lens. Put only grease and a very little amount, I use SKF LGLT2 most of the time. Cheers.
Excellent video. I have both of these lenses and they’re both great. I love using the 1.8 when I want maximum separation of the main subject from the background plus the nice boke and perhaps less so for close up portraits. Like you I prefer the warmer tones of the 2.5 for portraits.
thanks a lot for your feedback !
You are lucky to have both !!
Loving my old Nikon glass. I have the 135mm F2 and 55mm Micro and 28mm. Now I want to add the 180mm F2.8 and maybe the 85mm F1.4 Ais. I shoot these beauties on my Nikon F3 and D850. The 105mm F2.5 is very attractive to me because of the smaller size. What do you think about the size and weight between these two ?
The first shot I took with the 105mm f/2.5 just blew me away, it is that good. The 1.8 is also very good. The 1.8 is just slightly bigger in diameter, so, I'd no worries there, the weight difference is also marginal, I think that the choice boils down to availability and budget as the 1.8 is not easy to find, and it is also more expensive. Cheers.
I own all of 'em. Just my opinion, but I think the 180mm 2.8, last manual and auto-focus versions, are a perfect compliment to the 105mm 2.5. The 85mm 1.4 is a great lens optically, but whatever it has over the more pedestrian 85mm 1.8 dos not offset its large size and excessive weight, unless you shoot in light where that extra stop or so wide open makes the difference in getting the shot. It is a sexy conversation starter, if that's what you look for in a lens. The 1.4 also costs 2=3x as much.
nikon 105mm f1.8 can use on ff camera ?
any vigneting issues ?
Hello, it can be used on full frame, ni vignetting. Cheers.
Thanks!!!
Thanks to you my friend, do not forget to tell all your friends about the channel. Cheers.
Good job!
Thanks !
What adaptor are you using?
I use Nikon DSLR cameras, no need for adapter.
I have a pair and the color balance between the two is almost identical. The F1.8 is softer wide open. Women LOVE that! The separation is significant. So my 105 f2.5 is not used as much anymore. Both are great, and in most cases none but you will know which you used.
you're right, only the guy behind the lens will know which one was used, and only for a short time I think. Cheers.
I have the Nikkor p auto105mm 2.5 ai lens. The perfect portrait lens.
I have never tried that one, I'll take a look to it, Thanks for the tip.
I like the 105 f2.5 ais. But my favorite by far is the nikkor 105 f2 dc. Its got better subject seporation. And is just incredible for portraits or street photography
That one is also an incredible lens and contemplate comparing it with the 2.5, I can maybe just do that. Thank for reviving the idea. Cheers.
I think I'd agree, if I could afford one.
Nice
Thanks!
2.5 for me anytime, smaller, cheaper and incredible IQ
I simply cannot disagree. Best regards!
The 105 2.5 was changed from a sonar design in about 1969. I have more than one of both versions.
Thanks for the info
Well, Nikon did change the basic design of the 105mm 2.5 from the Sonnar design which went back to when it was developed to use on the rangefinder Nikons, to a double Gauss design, but that was sometime in the late 1970s or early 80s. I bought a new 105mm in Japan in 1976, and it was the Sonnar design. My lens was stolen in the 1990s, and I replaced it with the double gauss design version. The lens was and remains a favorite of mine, although I appreciate loosing the separate lenshood of the early lens for the built-in retractable hood in the later version. The later design is supposed to be better when used at wide apertures and close focus distances, but I've not personally noticed a different in casual use.
Ideally you should use a proper test target for comparison as it provides more and better information about sharpness. They are freely available, just need to search for them either in USA or Europe. Thanks however for your info..
Hello, can you share a link? Best
I'm pretty sure the point of focus is not exactly the same between the two lenses. Look at image @10:00.
Hello, They are almost identical, as i had to restart anew several times to get a satisfying result (although there may be differences still). i think it has more to do with the optical recipe that manages de transition from focused to blurry differently.
Sorry!
Your 105/2.5 derived from the Nikkor-P (same optical design) which was started in 1971 with single coating and changed to multi-coating 2 years later. We call it Gauss type design. 5 elements with 4 groups.
The early one 105/2.5 were made between 1959-1971 with Sonnar type design. 5 elements with 3 groups.
105/1.8 was 1st launched in 1980.
105/1.8 is sonnar too?
I much prefer gauss for portraits - bg looks better, sharpness is good enough for me.
Thanks for the observations.
yes, that's correct. the schematic shown is the gauss version introduced in 1971. and the earlier sonnar schematic was actually introduced in 1954, for the rangefinder nikon already.
@@sternschnupper thanks for the info, this is what I found on the Nikon website.
@@glebmazur9892 The 105/1.8 Nikkor AI-s is derived from the five element Xenotar design (Schneider). From Nikon's "The Thousand and One Nights No. 59": The Xenotar lens released by Schneider in 1951 is said to have become the basis for Xenotar-type optics. It was explained as a sort of hybrid with the front group of Gauss type and the rear group of Topogon type. However, as Zeiss acquired a patent on a similar design prior to World War II, it is difficult to tell which came first. The Xenotar-type optics were used with many mid-level lens-shutter cameras released between 1955 and 1975. While I have also designed some lenses using this type, I much prefer the Gauss type for the balance it provides in making lenses faster and increasing the angle of view. However, the Xenotar type is superior in terms of resolution.
Why would people get these versions, and not choose the Micro-Nikkor 105? Micro is needed anyway, but even for portraiture, close focusing is desirable.
Larger aperture maybe, different color rendition, maybe the micro is too sharp for portraits, who knows. Cheers
Get Both!
Also an option, 😊
Great video, but your voice is barely audible.
Thanks. I'm aware of that, I have improved my voice recording since. Cheers
Thanks u mate
you're welcome
Ahhh yes, this is what everybody wants to know!
Cool, do you have any other ideas about comparisons that you would really like to know about? Cheers.
@@diyextravaganza This might come off as a strange one.. The Nikon Series E 75-150mm f/3.5 against one of the more modern 80-200 or 70-200 Nikkors.
The 75-150 is widely regarded as a great performer. Having owned one, I can vouch for such a statement. Being a f/3.5 lens, it is only half a stop slower than f/2.8 zooms, which often are not truly f/2.8 anyway! The biggest advantage is the size and weight, I would say. The lens is tiny in comparison.
The minimum focusing distance is also 1m, which is significantly closer than that of most telephoto zooms.
Arguably it is better compared against the classic Nikon 80-200 f/4.5 or f/4.0. But I feel enough has been said about them.
@@SunJigglet That's a very good idea and I'd would have never thought about it. I just put it on my list of videos to do, but I happen to have a 75-150 as well as more modern 70-200 or 80-200, so, hardware-wise we're set. I also want to make a comparison between the 80-200 and 70-200, because in my opinion the 80-200 is a great performer and come with a significantly lower price tag. The 75-150 tag is even lower, so, it makes it also a great option.
If you have more ideas for comparisons, feel free to come to me at anytime. I won't promise the video will be up the week after, but it will get done eventually as long as I have access to the gear. Thanks a lot.
@@diyextravaganza :) you have a cool channel! If I had been in my university days I'd pass it along to all the photography friends I know.
@@SunJigglet thanks a lot, you can still share it with whoever may be interested. I'm also trying to save the world from bad photography 🙃
The 105 F2.5 is an extraoridinary lens, in particular considering its age. The F1.8 is magnificent and like the 85 F2 is designed to be rather dreamy @ max aperture. No one used to shoot beautiful models so that they could show their skin imperfctions. This sad mentality of ' critical ' sharpness at all apertures is unfortunately, a byproduct of the digital age. Good comparison, thank you.
Hi, great complementary analysis. Thanks !
This was an excellent video. I'm sure that both lenses are good. The softness of the 1.8 lens at 1.8 is intolerable. Both we did notice the 1.8 lenses being more sharp at the 2.8 setting. If I owned the 105mm 1.8 lens, I am afraid I might forget it was soft at 1.8 and take a bad picture while photographing my grandchildren. Both lenses are excellent and I would be honored to own either one.
Both lenses are very good indeed, the f/2.5 has the advantage of being cheaper and easier to find. Cheers.
You can only test a lens objectively by using a proper lens test chart, not your eyes. Our eyes are all different. Read about how tests are done and the concept of JND's. (Just Noticeable Differences)
I agree and there are other videos that do exactly that. I prefer working with the final result and let people choose what they prefer as you don't see the "vibe" of the lens on standard tests. According to standard tests, the Zeiss 35mm 1.4 is a terrible lens, in real life, it's a wonderful lens. Cheers.
I wish it was payday.
or get one broken and fix it. Go around the channel to check some repairs. Cheers.
The lenses made for shooting heads and not a single head in your test.
I know, I know but it is impossible to get someone to remain absolutely still for 10 minutes or more. Now that I think, next time I'll try to find one of those performers who play statue (I'm not kidding). For me a good comparison means identical scene, lightning and camera. The only different thing being the lens.
@@Koji-888 good
@@Koji-888 Out of line for commenting that it was strange that the most famous focal length for photographing the human head to actually have a persons head in the review. ? And that makes me out of line. ? What a snow flake you are Koji
@@diyextravaganza Not to mention that when your talking about legacy Nikkor's there is always sample variation.
@@gregoryrogalsky6937 I'm very aware of that, actually, I made a video about it .