Excellent presentation. I appreciate the honesty about listening to TAP - I take his recommendations seriously as well and have not been disappointed, whether concerning camera bodies or lenses. Beautiful example images to demonstrate your point. Cheers!
I would add that the Nikkor AI/AIS 200mm f/4 is on a par with this lens, both optically and in its superb build quality, as is the Nikkor 105 f/2.5 AI/AIS. These lenses are built like Leicas, are magnificent in every way, other than handling!
@@alexverbeke2228 I see Ken Rockwell describes that specific lens as a "masterpiece". Mr Angry clearly prefers the later AF-D version. He's oddly coy about the 180 f/2.8 AIS ED - maybe he wants to buy them all up!
@@AntPDC I own both, even if they are equal at f/5.6-f/8, I find the AIS better wide-open. But I can understand how tough it is to choose between the AIS and the AF-D, both are masterpieces and it may depends on whether you find a good or bad copy. But for me the AIS has a more beautiful aesthetic too. The 180 AIS is one of the few lenses you have really good reasons not to take the AI version :) .
There is a Nikkor 105 2.5 pre ai that is a sonar lens that you can sometimes find with an factory ai coversion that is a real good version of that lens.
Take it from me, if you are a serious Nikon portrait photographer, there are two lenses you must own. The 105mm f2.5 AIS and this lens. These are $300 bargains. The 135 DC is also stellar but expensive. The other is the 180mm 2.8 AIS. Serious commercial portrait photographers do not use zooms. They shoot from 12 -15 feet away, carefully control light and use these lenses. This lens is also amazing on a crop sensor because it gives you the equivalent of a 180mm 2.8 prime. And that is the focal length portrait sweet spot for many legendary pros like Annie Leibovitz. Did I hear someone mention sharpness? It's sharp. It's sharp enough to outresolve a 36MP sensor. But in portraits, sharpness is not necessarily your friend. This and the 105 were designed specifically to resolve skin texture perfectly without showing the inside of every hair follicle or that acne scar blemish. It's there, but muted. So overcome your new and expensive is best disease and use what Nikon spared no expense in producing for professionals.
Thank you for sharing TM! Yes, I have the 135 DC also, and it is an amazing lens, even if you don't use the DC. I am not very big in portrait photography, but for some strange reason, the portrait focal lengths seem to fit my shooting (landscape, street, products) very well. All the best!
I buy only used gear, As a result I have an obscene amount of Pentax and Nikon equipment. Ken Wheeler TAP has been a bad influence on me in a good way but when it comes down to it you have to be the judge. My first camera, serious camera was a Pentax K1000 with a 50mm and a 135mm lens. To this day I love the 135mm. I picked up a Pentax 135mm f3.5 20 years ago and have yet to see a sharper lens. I am on the look out for a Nikon 135mm f2.8 or 3.5 Nikkor or E Series so thank you for the info on the f2.8.
Watching Your most excellent Video, I ordered the Nikor 135mm f2D today,,, and excited that promised arrival is in 2 days. I have a couple of D lenses 24mm & 35mm which I really enjoy, and both are very sharp compared to other newer lens, and zooms I onw. Thank You for your excellent Video's, and knowledge imparted to us.
Fantastic video, I’ve watched this and your 180mm 2.8 video.. Now I don’t know which to buy for portraits as both look great, unless you have a favorite having tried both.. Thankyou for producing excellent content
Hi, in terms of portrait photography, the choice is usually down to 85, 105 or 135 mm lenses. I have not heard of portrait photographers using a 180mm lens for portrait photography! The longer the lens gets, the further away from your model you need to be, and I would think that unless you shoot outdoors or have a very large studio, the 180mm would require too much distance. Between the 3 classic focal lengths 85, 105 or 135, it is personal preference imho. If you go for the longer lens, then you get more compression and that some prefer because they find the model simply looks better. The shorter lenses on the other hand enables you to be closer to the model and for some photographers who give a lot of instructions or just appreciate being close to the model, this is key and more important than the compression. Hope this helps!
@@frederikboving it certainly does, thank you for taking the time to reply 👍👍. Keep making great videos, yours is certainly one of the best channels on you tube 👍👍
Some words to thank you for the video. Maybe some more of your samples would have been nice (you asked for suggestions). I just found a good deal on this lens and I'm only hoping it's in good condition as stated by the seller. Recently "inherited" a Nikon F2 with Nikon 28 and 50mm + Takumar 70-210 all in mint condition. I was indeed looking for something like this to use it with said body and a Canon EOS-M hacked with Magic Lantern. Tests with the Nikon AI glass have been promising and now I can't wait to test this one out too. I wanted a cohesive glass family for the EOS-M for quality video shooting but I'll be diving into analog photography with the F2 I guess. I'm now in love with that camera 😅 Again thanks for the video. Really helped watching it.
Than you for your kind words and suggestions - yes, portrait examples would have made the video better, agreed. Good to hear the video was of some use still 🤗
@@MH-ir7ep As I understand it, the E stood for economy. Nikon was cutting corners on the build of the lenses to allow the hoi polloi into the game. However, they did NOT cut corners with the glass. And the build wasn't cheap so much as efficient. These things will outlive us all. And the fidelity of the colour is just [whatever emoji would do a chef's kiss]! I was outside just now shooting pussy willows with the 100mm. It borders on therapeutic to use these lenses. The manual focus is smooth. The construction is solid. Just a joy to shoot with.
I like this lens. It offers a good balance of image IQ, build quality, compactness, good ergonomics. I think its star status is a bit exaggerated though, and I find the price generally to high. The Mamiya SX 135/2.8 for example is sharper wide open and can be had for garbage prices (needs a small configuration though to be properly adapted on M42). The Canon nFD 135/2.8 is much cheaper than the Nikkor and image IQ is similar (Nikkor build quality is better though). Minolta MD Rokkor 135/2.8 is also very good. Still, the Nikkor is one of my favorites, but I bought mine for 80€, which I think is a reasonable price for what you get. If I don't need the f/2.8 speed, I prefer to use my Aus Jena MC 135mm f/3.5. It shares a lot of the strong points of the Nikkor (built in hood, excellent build quality) but adds in half-stop aperture control, slightly better contrast, more vibrant colors and softer bokeh despite having 1 blade less. I can also recommend the Takumar 135/3.5, which is generally dirt cheap and build like a Leica.
Great video! It is a wonderful lens indeed. I was lucky enough to get one minty copy for $70. It’s a bit complicated to use at first due the tight focal length but the image quality it’s outstanding.
Reminds me of the Asahi Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135mm f/3.5. My fav lens that I own. I have just jumped on board the NIKON train so I will have to grap one of these lenses. The optical quality is superb.
What I like about this lens more than anything is the look and feel. It is so much glass crammed into that metal barrel. It is truly a tunnel of light that this lens provides!
I also bought many of Ken Wheeler's recommendations, but it is easy to fall into the lazy trap and use the zooms. The zoom to get, according to him I think, is the 18-35mm f3.5-4.5. And the ûber-lazy lens according to Ken Rockwell is the 28-300mm f3.5-5.6. I find myself often just walking around with these two :-)
The nikkor auto QC 135 2.8 with a factory ai conversion is also a good version of this lens if you can find one or the non ai version if you have mirrorless camera with adapter.
@@nevvanclarke9225 I do. I have tested it here: th-cam.com/users/edit?o=U&video_id=0SJ96k3Q-BY (I think I concluded it was the sharpest I have ever seen!) Also see the 35-70; one of my favourite lenses: th-cam.com/video/wew6khDKl5w/w-d-xo.html
Hi! No, I have not unfortunately but the word on the street is that the 105 and 135 versions of the DC lens have the same design behind the scenes, so I think you are spot on here 👍
This lens is perfect on a body with focus peaking and IBIS. So mirrorless systems like Sony and Fujifilm (X-H1 / X-T4 etc). On these systems it even works 10 times better than on Nikon DSLRs. Highly recommended.
A side note. Back then, 105mm was a very popular portrait lens for Nikonians because of the legendary 105mm f/2.5 AI-S. Steve McCurry used it for his "Afghan Girl" photo and I used it often for portraits. Another 105mm lens was the innovative 105 f/2 DC.
@@bfs5113 Done with Fuji. Been there, seen it, done that. GR is definitely an option but it seems like a tool you need to really get to know before it delivers. Not sure I want to work that hard. Actually shoot street with my z6. Works fine 🙂
@@frederikboving I was just thinking about a Fuji, the Instax Mini Evo. That leads me into thinking/dreaming of a X-S10 + Instax Link Wide printer as an instant camera.
Great video! Do you have any experience with lenses like this on film SLR cameras? I'm trying to learn how to use them and I think this length may be harder to focus than your standard focal lengths?
I would think that focusing on a SLR and a DSLR is very similar and that the mechanics involved overlap very much. I mainly shoot with 50mm on my SLR, so I have not experience with longer lenses unfortunately, but my best guess is that focusing would be equally difficult on a SLR and a DSLR. In my experience, the focus issues really shows if you shoot with a fast lens wide open.
@@frederikboving Thanks for your reply! Because I'm worried about actual usability of the 105, I'm going to have to see how it goes with my current lenses before I invest.
@@frederikboving There are a few copies on the internet but mostly worn and quite pricy. 300 Euro or so. I think I will try it at the thrift store where they sale stuff for a couple of bucks. Found a 100-300mm f4.5 Ais once for 10 euro. One of the sharpest Ais lenses I have.
Yes it does. And it is manual focus, so the fact that the D5300 has no built in AF motor is no problem. Not sure if the D5300 has all the pins for correct metering, but other than that, it should work fine.
Great deductive breakdown. One question though. This lens was supposed to be used for film and not digital sensors. Would it still be ok on low to high resolution sensors? Thank you
Hi Alfredo, I think many many photographers use vintage lenses on both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras and enjoy every bit of it. I have used this lens on both Nikon D750 and Sony R7ii (48MP) with (for me) good results. But I have to make the reservation that I am not big on pixel peeping, and therefore I do not know if you can spot differences if you zoom in 800% and start to look for flaws.
Nev Van Clarke Many Nikon bodies will meter with this lens: D1 / D2 / D3 / D4 / D5-series, Df, D8XX, D7XX, D6XX, Df, D500, D200, D300 series, D7000, D7100, D7200. Great news! In addition, focus assist is available for these lenses with: Nikon D1 / D2 / D3 / D4 / D5-series, D8XX, D7XX, D6XX, Df, D500, D7XXX.
Hi Amine, yes, will do going forward. Just for the fun of it, I shot this with the 135 sitting on my Fuji XT20 with a speedbooster, and I think it worked well. The sharpness of the birds in the top of the trees is really impressive: flic.kr/p/2hWVxMi
Excellent Frederik! 135 is not for everyone, but I love this length. It makes the photographer ‘think,’ and choose his/ her framing carefully. Great for portraits, and food and still life as you said, and a great Landscape lens. Stay safe and Healthy my friend! Oh, btw, the 14-24 is a great lens, albeit very heavy as you say. I’m really leaning towards the 16-35 f4.0 VR lens. 👍👍👍👍✌🏻🙏😀🇩🇰🇺🇸📷
Hi Art, thank you! I have a video on the D5600 and how it is done. It is only 3 minutes long, and if I understand your question right, the answer is 2 minutes into the video (the D5600 in this regard works the same way as the D750): th-cam.com/video/sszfxADchRE/w-d-xo.html If your question is more related to how you get an object like a flower in focus when shooting with a wide aperture where the DoF is paper thin, then we are more into layer blending in post processing. In that case I can recommend this video: th-cam.com/video/uf4C9AJ7gB4/w-d-xo.html Hope this helps, otherwise get back to me and I will see what I can do. All the best!
Hi Steve, I don't own a copy of the f/2, nor have I ever tried shooting with one, but reading the review from Ken Rockwell + comments on e-bay, the f/2 is probably as good as it gets. It comes with both a weight and a price penalty - I think the f2 (used) is 3-4 times as expensive as the f2.8! So it sounds to me like we are way beyond the point of diminishing returns with the f2. My guess is that Nikkor made the f3.5 as a good and budget friendly version, the f2 as the ultimate lens and the f2.8 as the really good compromise between the two.
Steve I own both lenses and the f2 is a different animal used for different jobs. While you certainly can use the f2 out of studio it is a large heavy lens and doesn't lend itself to mobile use even though it has AF, or at least as much as the f2.8 does. Learning to manual focus is a matter of practice and in short order you won't miss the AF and the fact that the f2.8 is small and light makes it very handy. For casual mobile photography I shoot a d750 with an old 28-105 AF-D mounted which is about the size of the 135 f2.8 which I have in my pocket when I want to reach out a little farther. Everything is small, light, and handles quickly. The primary thing you sacrifice is tele video. For general video I set the lens at 35mm f9 auto ISO and focus by hand. It works well. Indoors the 135 f2 can hammer the bokeh just that much more and is worth the difference on a tripod.
@@jamesoliver6625 I'm using it for a fairly uncommon purpose it seems. It would be used as a taking lens to build an anamorphic lens. I'm more interested in the size of the front element for corner sharpness when stretched 2x. I fix the focus to infinity on the taking lens and focus with the a focus diopter. I would probably not be shooting wide open often. F2.8-8 usually.
@@Holtenstein Probably not worth the expense for the f2 then since the only reason to get it is that you want that gape-ing hole to let light in. The lens has low distortion but so does the f2.8 and it's fewer elements.. I love both lenses but they have distinctly separate applications. I lucked into my f2 because I ran into a guy on FB that sold his essentially new one for around half price because he needed the money pretty badly.
Hi Sotto, if the lens is to work in a Z6 then you will need the FTZ adapter made by Nikon (www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/mirrorless/lenses/ftz.htm). Notice that there is not AF in this lens, nor CPU contacts, so you will need to tell the camera which lens it is you are mounting. 50 EUR seems very cheap - I looked to e-bay and found copies many times more expensive. It all comes down to what condition your lens is in, but if you found a good copy for that price, then it is very cheap. If you cannot test the lens before you buy, make sure your can return the lens should you not be happy with the condition of it.
In general the AIS versions allows the aperture increments of an AI-S lens to be controlled more precisely by the camera than with an AI lens (found on the Nikon home page). In the case of the 135 mm f/2.8 I believe the glass construction is very much the same and that the main difference specifically for this lens is that the AI version has a significantly longer focus throw.
Thank you for your kind words! I also have a blog that is in its early days (only 2 posts so far): new2photogrphy.blogspot.com/ - hope you find it useful!
Holly Sehorn Hi Holly - the short answer is: yes! But I have to make the reservation that I do not own an e-series lens, but reading a few articles on the subject, it seems to me that many of the e-series lenses were budget friendly in a way where Nikon often did not compromise the glass construction. I found this article by a very happy 135 e-series owner: www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/emfgfg20/eserieslenses/htmls/100135mm.htm#135mm
Just a small but important correction. The lens you show in this video is not a D lens. (Thats actually what caused me to click on the video. I was thinking, "what, Nikon never made an af-d 135 f2.8). Your lens is an AIS lens, (based on the minimum aperture being orange on both the aperture ring and the adr readout). If they were not both orange, that would be an AI lens.
I've read here, mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/late70nikkor/telephoto/135mm.htm#f2.8 that there is even a pre or non AI lens -same 5 elements in 4 groups, same 1.3m minimal focus distance, f32 in blue- that started from nº 730001 (01/76 - 1977). I picked one today for 95€ plus shipping. The copy was not dirty, the lens clean and the temptation was too great.
This was the best show of this lens I've seen so far. It was so thorough and described everything pretty well. I bought this lens without knowing what I got into but this made me feel good about my purchase haha it has yet to arrive in the mail and in proud to say it only cost me $40!! Also, I need to buy an adapter for this lens for my Sony A7ii but I dont know what adaptor to buy.. any advice?
Heduardo Suchilt Hi Heduardo, yes that sounds like a fantastic deal you made there! I went for the Metabones one, but I think it is overpriced (although a safe choice) so I would go for a cheap Chinese alternative. Make sure to get one with aperture control if you need to fit lenses without an aperture ring! Was it Tony Northrop that had a video where he had tested a lot of manual lens adapters and concluded the were all equally good with huge price differences? So I would pick anyone cheap and google it for reviews and if decent reviews, simply go for it. Hope this helps!
I thought your video was pretty good. However, I do take exception with describing the 135mm lens as an odd length lens to work with. I don't understand your point. All the major camera manufacturers through the 1970s and 80s made 135s and the list is long: Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Olympus and Mamiya all had 135s for their 35mm cameras and I am certain some of the odd and exotic brands had them also. The 135mm was usually considered an ideal lens for head and shoulder photos. It gives the subject of the photo desired space away from the photographer and many say the optics of that length are beneficial to facial features in portraits. I've had a chance to use old Canon and Minolta lenses extensively and a lesser amount of use with Olympus and Nikon lenses. Yes, there are some differences, but the differences in value quality are really not dramatic. It is very tough to look at a group of photos and accurately identify what brand lens was used to take the individual photos. Now, third party lenses often do not measure up. Look at Flickr for examples of different lenses. It is tough to predict what major brand of lens was used.
Hi Brant, thank you for taking the time to give feedback. My remark regarding the 135mm being odd was a ment relative to the 85mm lenses. I came from a 85mm lens and found myself walking backwards (and stumbling over stuff and hitting walls) when I started to use the 135mm. So my remark was ment more lighthearted than how it came across. I think you are right about the big lens brands being very similar in quality and performance - I seem to remember a video by Tony Northrup where he does blind test of the color science of different manufacturers and the conclusion is that people cannot tell the difference (my version of the gist of it). I have never shot with canon glass, but I have a hunch they are a little bit more warm (brown?) when it comes to color rendition, but it is just a hunch I have - nothing scientific or tested. I have recently started to use my 135mm - with extension tubes - for flower photography, and it is also for this purpose an excellent lens and the manual focus throw is one of the best among the lenses that I have. Love this lens, more every day!
@@frederikboving Many thanks for your reply! I will have to look for the Northup video. I've discussed the differences in the various lenses for many years and except for third party lenses (which often are not good), the lenses of the major manufacturers from the 70s and 80s were quite similar. Color reproduction from some lenses may be very slightly richer due to differences in the composition of the glass. Some people say the radioactive glass may be responsible for that and I understand their point. I got interested in cameras in the 70s and I got to see the whole list of brand names being used for various things in and out of school. For those who understood how to use their equipment there often was not much difference in work product. I was glad to sample the different brands of lenses for myself when mirrorless cameras came to the market and opened up the spectrum of usable lenses. I used Canon FD lenses on older Canon film cameras for many years and was usually pleased with the results from the primes. When I used certain polarizers and neutral density filters the brown cast (I assume from the filters?) was quite obvious. I did notice that certain Canon FD lens models were better than others. I have a FD 20mm which is incredible and a 35mm which is dreadful. Oddly, I've heard similar things about 35s from other brands. Maybe I don't understand the best use of the 35mm? Again, thank you for your reply!
@@brantmorrison3704 Brant, I am so glad that i named my channel "new to photography" when you say that you got interested in photography in the 70s! I have only been serious about photography for 1.5 year! :-D
@@frederikboving You might not be familiar with these, but the first camera I got to use was a 120 film camera (using 2 1/4 inch wide medium format film) with a couple rolls of black and white print film for a school trip to an outdoor museum around 1968. The camera had no meter, it was all manual, no electric components at all and I don't recall if there was a way to focus it. Lens aperture could be adjusted by rotating a control ring on the lens to accommodate for sunny, partly cloudy, or overcast conditions.
@@brantmorrison3704 I seem to remember medium format. My old man had a medium format camera - if I remember correctly the film rolls were thin and tall. I think there were no more than 12 pictures (or less) on a roll. He used to shoot pictures from his plane (a piper colt) long before anyone invented a drone!
I am having fun using Nikon MF glass on the new Z cameras, I enjoyed the video but would like to have seen more images rather than words on the powerpoint presentation sheets. I plan to pick up a couple of lenses from the 85-135 range over the next few months, using a MF lens on these new Mirrorless cameras is wonderful, the lenses are very tactile and the actual focus throw is so smooth compared to an AF lens in manual mode. Oh, nearly forgot, these old MF lenses bring their own unique character to an image, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Hi Martin, thank you for your feedback. Much appreciated. In hindsight, I should probably have made two videos (1) about buying vintage lenses in general and (2) one about the 135mm. Maybe this one is more to your liking: th-cam.com/video/L2a4XSPuSnU/w-d-xo.html Or this one (but I think you know most in this video already): th-cam.com/video/kiKACT5ttuw/w-d-xo.html If you get fed up listening to my voice (they say I sound like Arnold Schwarzenegger), my blog is an alternative: new2photogrphy.blogspot.com/2019/04/nikon-nikkor-50mm-14d-af.html Plan to do one about the Asahi Pentax f1.4 50mm Super-Takumar M42 lens as soon as it hits my mailbox. Cheers.
It should work. The Nikon D610 has an F-mount (www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d610/2) and hence it fits this lens. However - notice that there is no auto focus nor EXIF information. It is a completely manual lens in all aspects - it is only glass. But always see if you can test the lens with your camera before you buy!
the 135mm f3.5 Ai is even more value it is not sharper it simply has less element inside thus a slight increase in micro-contrast and depth i have been using it for the past 3 years in my studio and just bought another copy this month as they are getting rare on ebay
@@frederikboving keep it well both version are incredible only outmatched in the bokeh department by the 135mm f2 dc but this one cost around 700 usd second hand
@@wildflower1542 i never said it is not sharp but simply intended that there are lens that are sharper than this one, my 50mm f1,8 Ai is sharper than my 135 but for portrait the 135 does everything better at f5.6 you still get nice background blur, but the real deal is the micro contrast, the shadow to highlight transition, the 3d pop and also the face compression, i use this lens in the studio at 5.6 and f8 only but to be honest sharpness is not important for me you can add it in post and working with the 135 i always reduce the sharpness in post so my portrait become softer, finally that little gem cost only 150-200 usd on ebay mint condition, that allows me to save money for more important investment than lenses ( c-stand roller-stand beauty dishes parabolic octaboxes flags etc )
You are doing good. Be little more active while talking. Add more pictures in between the video. It was really helpful. My 135 2.8 is on the way from Japan. I got it for 45 usd and courier charge is 15. Let's hope it's in good shape
Hi Lonnie, all my audio is set to yield -2 dB in in max peak, so level should be ok. Some of my older videos were too low in audio, so I have really tried to improve this part. If I crank up the audio further, I believe distortion and noise levels will be problematic. So I am not sure I can do so much more, unfortunately.
Excellent presentation. I appreciate the honesty about listening to TAP - I take his recommendations seriously as well and have not been disappointed, whether concerning camera bodies or lenses. Beautiful example images to demonstrate your point. Cheers!
Thank you Old Film Guy 😊
I bought it many many years ago for my first camera. A nikon Fm. I still use it today with my D200 and D7100. I love it
Thanks for sharing
Did built in af on d7100 works with this lens?
@@edinmasovic975 Unfortunately not, the lens is this video is manual focus.
I would add that the Nikkor AI/AIS 200mm f/4 is on a par with this lens, both optically and in its superb build quality, as is the Nikkor 105 f/2.5 AI/AIS. These lenses are built like Leicas, are magnificent in every way, other than handling!
And the AIS 180mm f/2.8 ED! ;)
@@alexverbeke2228 I see Ken Rockwell describes that specific lens as a "masterpiece". Mr Angry clearly prefers the later AF-D version. He's oddly coy about the 180 f/2.8 AIS ED - maybe he wants to buy them all up!
@@AntPDC I own both, even if they are equal at f/5.6-f/8, I find the AIS better wide-open. But I can understand how tough it is to choose between the AIS and the AF-D, both are masterpieces and it may depends on whether you find a good or bad copy. But for me the AIS has a more beautiful aesthetic too.
The 180 AIS is one of the few lenses you have really good reasons not to take the AI version :) .
There is a Nikkor 105 2.5 pre ai that is a sonar lens that you can sometimes find with an factory ai coversion that is a real good version of that lens.
Take it from me, if you are a serious Nikon portrait photographer, there are two lenses you must own. The 105mm f2.5 AIS and this lens. These are $300 bargains. The 135 DC is also stellar but expensive. The other is the 180mm 2.8 AIS. Serious commercial portrait photographers do not use zooms. They shoot from 12 -15 feet away, carefully control light and use these lenses.
This lens is also amazing on a crop sensor because it gives you the equivalent of a 180mm 2.8 prime. And that is the focal length portrait sweet spot for many legendary pros like Annie Leibovitz.
Did I hear someone mention sharpness? It's sharp. It's sharp enough to outresolve a 36MP sensor. But in portraits, sharpness is not necessarily your friend. This and the 105 were designed specifically to resolve skin texture perfectly without showing the inside of every hair follicle or that acne scar blemish. It's there, but muted. So overcome your new and expensive is best disease and use what Nikon spared no expense in producing for professionals.
Thank you for sharing TM! Yes, I have the 135 DC also, and it is an amazing lens, even if you don't use the DC. I am not very big in portrait photography, but for some strange reason, the portrait focal lengths seem to fit my shooting (landscape, street, products) very well. All the best!
I buy only used gear, As a result I have an obscene amount of Pentax and Nikon equipment. Ken Wheeler TAP has been a bad influence on me in a good way but when it comes down to it you have to be the judge. My first camera, serious camera was a Pentax K1000 with a 50mm and a 135mm lens. To this day I love the 135mm. I picked up a Pentax 135mm f3.5 20 years ago and have yet to see a sharper lens. I am on the look out for a Nikon 135mm f2.8 or 3.5 Nikkor or E Series so thank you for the info on the f2.8.
Thank you Dominic, and thank you for sharing! I think you will be very pleased with the results from the 135 f/2.8 lens.
Very nice review ! Thank you. (I actually own one of these, coincidentally with a D750 too!)
Glad it was helpful! 🤗🙏🏻
Watching Your most excellent Video, I ordered the Nikor 135mm f2D today,,, and excited that promised arrival is in 2 days. I have a couple of D lenses 24mm & 35mm which I really enjoy, and both are very sharp compared to other newer lens, and zooms I onw. Thank You for your excellent Video's, and knowledge imparted to us.
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
good perspective on why to buy the classic glass..very much why I have 5 now..lol.. just got the 135mm so this year I will go play with it.
I enjoy this lens! I use it on Dx Nikon and full frame Sony to different effect. Great in low light.
Angry Photographer also suggest the Tokina 100mm 2.8 macro, I owned both of them. I think this one beat the Tokina as at in Chromatic Abberation.
Thanks for sharing this 👌
Fantastic video, I’ve watched this and your 180mm 2.8 video..
Now I don’t know which to buy for portraits as both look great, unless you have a favorite having tried both.. Thankyou for producing excellent content
Hi, in terms of portrait photography, the choice is usually down to 85, 105 or 135 mm lenses. I have not heard of portrait photographers using a 180mm lens for portrait photography! The longer the lens gets, the further away from your model you need to be, and I would think that unless you shoot outdoors or have a very large studio, the 180mm would require too much distance. Between the 3 classic focal lengths 85, 105 or 135, it is personal preference imho. If you go for the longer lens, then you get more compression and that some prefer because they find the model simply looks better. The shorter lenses on the other hand enables you to be closer to the model and for some photographers who give a lot of instructions or just appreciate being close to the model, this is key and more important than the compression. Hope this helps!
@@frederikboving it certainly does, thank you for taking the time to reply 👍👍. Keep making great videos, yours is certainly one of the best channels on you tube 👍👍
Very much appreciate your logic approach and presentation. 👍
Thank you Josh!
Some words to thank you for the video. Maybe some more of your samples would have been nice (you asked for suggestions).
I just found a good deal on this lens and I'm only hoping it's in good condition as stated by the seller. Recently "inherited" a Nikon F2 with Nikon 28 and 50mm + Takumar 70-210 all in mint condition. I was indeed looking for something like this to use it with said body and a Canon EOS-M hacked with Magic Lantern.
Tests with the Nikon AI glass have been promising and now I can't wait to test this one out too. I wanted a cohesive glass family for the EOS-M for quality video shooting but I'll be diving into analog photography with the F2 I guess. I'm now in love with that camera 😅
Again thanks for the video. Really helped watching it.
Than you for your kind words and suggestions - yes, portrait examples would have made the video better, agreed. Good to hear the video was of some use still 🤗
Very well presented.
Thank you kindly!
I picked up the Nikon Series e 135mm for $12.99 Canadian. I love this lens. I would only sell it if I had two of them.
Also, "criteria" the plural of criterion.
What's the MAIN difference(s) between series e vs non-series e. Could you enlighten me? Please.
@@MH-ir7ep As I understand it, the E stood for economy. Nikon was cutting corners on the build of the lenses to allow the hoi polloi into the game. However, they did NOT cut corners with the glass. And the build wasn't cheap so much as efficient. These things will outlive us all. And the fidelity of the colour is just [whatever emoji would do a chef's kiss]! I was outside just now shooting pussy willows with the 100mm. It borders on therapeutic to use these lenses. The manual focus is smooth. The construction is solid. Just a joy to shoot with.
@@mistuhgeeThanks. Appreciate the feedback. Happy shooting!
@@mistuhgee FYI
photographylife.com/why-i-love-the-nikon-e-series-aka-really-cheap-lenses
I like this lens. It offers a good balance of image IQ, build quality, compactness, good ergonomics. I think its star status is a bit exaggerated though, and I find the price generally to high. The Mamiya SX 135/2.8 for example is sharper wide open and can be had for garbage prices (needs a small configuration though to be properly adapted on M42). The Canon nFD 135/2.8 is much cheaper than the Nikkor and image IQ is similar (Nikkor build quality is better though). Minolta MD Rokkor 135/2.8 is also very good. Still, the Nikkor is one of my favorites, but I bought mine for 80€, which I think is a reasonable price for what you get. If I don't need the f/2.8 speed, I prefer to use my Aus Jena MC 135mm f/3.5. It shares a lot of the strong points of the Nikkor (built in hood, excellent build quality) but adds in half-stop aperture control, slightly better contrast, more vibrant colors and softer bokeh despite having 1 blade less. I can also recommend the Takumar 135/3.5, which is generally dirt cheap and build like a Leica.
Wow! You certainly know your 135mm's! Thank you for sharing!
Great video! It is a wonderful lens indeed. I was lucky enough to get one minty copy for $70. It’s a bit complicated to use at first due the tight focal length but the image quality it’s outstanding.
Reminds me of the Asahi Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135mm f/3.5. My fav lens that I own. I have just jumped on board the NIKON train so I will have to grap one of these lenses. The optical quality is superb.
Asahi SMC Takumar 135mm f/3.5 Pros
Inexpensive
Very good sharpness
Very low CA
Very low distortion
Ultra smooth handling
Light and compact
135mm for street photography I prefer over the nifty 50. I dont have to get so close to the subject.
What I like about this lens more than anything is the look and feel. It is so much glass crammed into that metal barrel. It is truly a tunnel of light that this lens provides!
I also bought many of Ken Wheeler's recommendations, but it is easy to fall into the lazy trap and use the zooms.
The zoom to get, according to him I think, is the 18-35mm f3.5-4.5. And the ûber-lazy lens according to Ken Rockwell is the 28-300mm f3.5-5.6. I find myself often just walking around with these two :-)
Thanks for sharing Kim!
I use the 135mm f2.8 on my D700 for portraits. It is great.
Thank you for sharing Bob!
Another well done video!
Thanks again!
Great video. I have to pay import taxes as I am Canadian. Thank you very much.
RS. Canada
Thank you Richard for sharing! Yes, import taxes can really be a pain and make an otherwise good deal turn bad.
The nikkor auto QC 135 2.8 with a factory ai conversion is also a good version of this lens if you can find one or the non ai version if you have mirrorless camera with adapter.
Thank you for sharing!
Own the 3.5 Ais of this lens...Tack sharp, No complaints. Good presentation!😊
🙏🏻
I have both the 135mm f/2 & f/2.8. The difference is negligeable.
Thank you for sharing- much appreciated!
I have just bought the Nikon nikkor 2.8 ..eBay $200 ...can’t wait for it to arrive...Great video thanks
Thanks! Hope you will enjoy the lens as much as me :-D
New2Photography I’m a lense freak lol ...do you have a 50mm “pancake” lens. That’s my next lens.
@@nevvanclarke9225 I do. I have tested it here:
th-cam.com/users/edit?o=U&video_id=0SJ96k3Q-BY
(I think I concluded it was the sharpest I have ever seen!)
Also see the 35-70; one of my favourite lenses:
th-cam.com/video/wew6khDKl5w/w-d-xo.html
Hi Frederik, I'm wondering if you've tried the 105mm f2.5 from NIKKOR. I love mine and it seems somewhat similar to this lens you've reviewed.
Hi! No, I have not unfortunately but the word on the street is that the 105 and 135 versions of the DC lens have the same design behind the scenes, so I think you are spot on here 👍
Great video - I'm picking one up tomorrow!
Hope you enjoy it!
This lens is perfect on a body with focus peaking and IBIS. So mirrorless systems like Sony and Fujifilm (X-H1 / X-T4 etc). On these systems it even works 10 times better than on Nikon DSLRs. Highly recommended.
Thank you for sharing!
A side note. Back then, 105mm was a very popular portrait lens for Nikonians because of the legendary 105mm f/2.5 AI-S. Steve McCurry used it for his "Afghan Girl" photo and I used it often for portraits. Another 105mm lens was the innovative 105 f/2 DC.
Thank you for sharing 🙏🏻
@@frederikboving You must be bored...get a GR or X100 and go out to shoot some street photography instead. 🤣
@@bfs5113 Done with Fuji. Been there, seen it, done that. GR is definitely an option but it seems like a tool you need to really get to know before it delivers. Not sure I want to work that hard. Actually shoot street with my z6. Works fine 🙂
@@frederikboving I was just thinking about a Fuji, the Instax Mini Evo. That leads me into thinking/dreaming of a X-S10 + Instax Link Wide printer as an instant camera.
Great video! Do you have any experience with lenses like this on film SLR cameras? I'm trying to learn how to use them and I think this length may be harder to focus than your standard focal lengths?
I would think that focusing on a SLR and a DSLR is very similar and that the mechanics involved overlap very much. I mainly shoot with 50mm on my SLR, so I have not experience with longer lenses unfortunately, but my best guess is that focusing would be equally difficult on a SLR and a DSLR. In my experience, the focus issues really shows if you shoot with a fast lens wide open.
@@frederikboving Thanks for your reply! Because I'm worried about actual usability of the 105, I'm going to have to see how it goes with my current lenses before I invest.
@@Nickporter17sounds like a plan 👍
thanks. thumbs up. It would have been great if you talked about this lens vs 135 f/2s
Noted. I only review gear that I have and unfortunately a 2.0 currently is not on my stock. Will revert if that changes of course 🙏🏻
Great video but I would have loved to see some sample portraits. Thank you.
Thank you for giving feedback 🙏🏻
Wonderful channel...pl keep posting
Thank you, I will
great lens i had the 3.5 version as well beautiful smooth bokeh
👌
Nikon made also a 105mm f1.8 Ais. Still searching for a good copy.
I hope you'll find a good copy! the 105 and the 135 I understand are very similar except for the obvious difference.
@@frederikboving There are a few copies on the internet but mostly worn and quite pricy. 300 Euro or so. I think I will try it at the thrift store where they sale stuff for a couple of bucks. Found a 100-300mm f4.5 Ais once for 10 euro. One of the sharpest Ais lenses I have.
Hi there. Thanks for the video!
Do you know if the lens fit on the D5300?
Yes it does. And it is manual focus, so the fact that the D5300 has no built in AF motor is no problem. Not sure if the D5300 has all the pins for correct metering, but other than that, it should work fine.
Thank you very much! 😊
Picked up 1 used & it's surperb. You'll learn to focus or love blurry pictures. Good video.
Is it also good for video?
Great deductive breakdown. One question though. This lens was supposed to be used for film and not digital sensors. Would it still be ok on low to high resolution sensors?
Thank you
Hi Alfredo, I think many many photographers use vintage lenses on both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras and enjoy every bit of it. I have used this lens on both Nikon D750 and Sony R7ii (48MP) with (for me) good results. But I have to make the reservation that I am not big on pixel peeping, and therefore I do not know if you can spot differences if you zoom in 800% and start to look for flaws.
Light delivery is light delivery, doesn't matter what type of sensor(film or digital) it ends up at!
This lense is the incredible
Yes it's totally manual focus with no light meter..so it's old school to the max..
But the bokeh is unbelievable
Old school to the max is not difficult.
Nev Van Clarke Many Nikon bodies will meter with this lens: D1 / D2 / D3 / D4 / D5-series, Df, D8XX, D7XX, D6XX, Df, D500, D200, D300 series, D7000, D7100, D7200. Great news!
In addition, focus assist is available for these lenses with: Nikon D1 / D2 / D3 / D4 / D5-series, D8XX, D7XX, D6XX, Df, D500, D7XXX.
More photos please thank you
Hi Amine, yes, will do going forward. Just for the fun of it, I shot this with the 135 sitting on my Fuji XT20 with a speedbooster, and I think it worked well. The sharpness of the birds in the top of the trees is really impressive: flic.kr/p/2hWVxMi
Excellent Frederik! 135 is not for everyone, but I love this length. It makes the photographer ‘think,’ and choose his/ her framing carefully. Great for portraits, and food and still life as you said, and a great Landscape lens. Stay safe and Healthy my friend! Oh, btw, the 14-24 is a great lens, albeit very heavy as you say. I’m really leaning towards the 16-35 f4.0 VR lens.
👍👍👍👍✌🏻🙏😀🇩🇰🇺🇸📷
Thank you George - glad you have considered the 14-24 so you choose the 16-35 with open eyes! Stay safe and healthy in these days of Omicron variants!
Excellent analysis. How do you focus a manual lens w thin depth of field on a D750?
practice
Hi Art, thank you! I have a video on the D5600 and how it is done. It is only 3 minutes long, and if I understand your question right, the answer is 2 minutes into the video (the D5600 in this regard works the same way as the D750):
th-cam.com/video/sszfxADchRE/w-d-xo.html
If your question is more related to how you get an object like a flower in focus when shooting with a wide aperture where the DoF is paper thin, then we are more into layer blending in post processing. In that case I can recommend this video:
th-cam.com/video/uf4C9AJ7gB4/w-d-xo.html
Hope this helps, otherwise get back to me and I will see what I can do. All the best!
frederikboving Excellent videos. Especially I had no idea about the align function - that is a revelation!! Thanks!
Bought it today. 50 Britis Pounds it cost. Sharpness is outstanding !
Agreed. It is an amazing lens 🤗
I'm curious if the 135mm f2 is any better than the f2.8? The f2 looks a bit larger with a 72mm thread.
Hi Steve, I don't own a copy of the f/2, nor have I ever tried shooting with one, but reading the review from Ken Rockwell + comments on e-bay, the f/2 is probably as good as it gets. It comes with both a weight and a price penalty - I think the f2 (used) is 3-4 times as expensive as the f2.8! So it sounds to me like we are way beyond the point of diminishing returns with the f2. My guess is that Nikkor made the f3.5 as a good and budget friendly version, the f2 as the ultimate lens and the f2.8 as the really good compromise between the two.
@@frederikboving The f2.8 is more available and less than half the price.
Steve I own both lenses and the f2 is a different animal used for different jobs. While you certainly can use the f2 out of studio it is a large heavy lens and doesn't lend itself to mobile use even though it has AF, or at least as much as the f2.8 does. Learning to manual focus is a matter of practice and in short order you won't miss the AF and the fact that the f2.8 is small and light makes it very handy. For casual mobile photography I shoot a d750 with an old 28-105 AF-D mounted which is about the size of the 135 f2.8 which I have in my pocket when I want to reach out a little farther. Everything is small, light, and handles quickly. The primary thing you sacrifice is tele video. For general video I set the lens at 35mm f9 auto ISO and focus by hand. It works well. Indoors the 135 f2 can hammer the bokeh just that much more and is worth the difference on a tripod.
@@jamesoliver6625 I'm using it for a fairly uncommon purpose it seems. It would be used as a taking lens to build an anamorphic lens. I'm more interested in the size of the front element for corner sharpness when stretched 2x. I fix the focus to infinity on the taking lens and focus with the a focus diopter. I would probably not be shooting wide open often. F2.8-8 usually.
@@Holtenstein Probably not worth the expense for the f2 then since the only reason to get it is that you want that gape-ing hole to let light in. The lens has low distortion but so does the f2.8 and it's fewer elements.. I love both lenses but they have distinctly separate applications. I lucked into my f2 because I ran into a guy on FB that sold his essentially new one for around half price because he needed the money pretty badly.
You think it will works on a Nikon Z6?
And I found one used for 50eur is it a good price?
Hi Sotto, if the lens is to work in a Z6 then you will need the FTZ adapter made by Nikon (www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/mirrorless/lenses/ftz.htm). Notice that there is not AF in this lens, nor CPU contacts, so you will need to tell the camera which lens it is you are mounting. 50 EUR seems very cheap - I looked to e-bay and found copies many times more expensive. It all comes down to what condition your lens is in, but if you found a good copy for that price, then it is very cheap. If you cannot test the lens before you buy, make sure your can return the lens should you not be happy with the condition of it.
@@frederikboving hi fred, thanks for answer. If no cpu, no af then ftz adapter is not necessary. Cheap adapter that do f mount to z mount are ok, no?
Hi Sotto, I would say yes to that. But find an adapter with a good review - it would be sad if a cheap adapter would ruin your expensive camera.
Very good video.
I have NIkkor 135mm 2.8 and it really is a very good lens for a very low price!!
Thank you! Yes, access to nikon/canon legacy lenses in my mind makes those two brands worth considering for that reason alone!
Hi there any tips on buying the 3.5 AI/AIS version for my d5300?
Hows the 135 f2.0 compared to the 135 2.8?
sorry, dunno.
Great video I finally found someone who wasn't trying to cute and no information thank you thumbs up and subed
Thank you! Much appreciated! Take care!
Nice video
Thank you!
What is the difference between AI and AI -S.?
In general the AIS versions allows the aperture increments of an AI-S lens to be controlled more precisely by the camera than with an AI lens (found on the Nikon home page). In the case of the 135 mm f/2.8 I believe the glass construction is very much the same and that the main difference specifically for this lens is that the AI version has a significantly longer focus throw.
Excellent video! Nicely done! Now a subscriber 😊 Thanks so much!
Thank you for your kind words! I also have a blog that is in its early days (only 2 posts so far): new2photogrphy.blogspot.com/ - hope you find it useful!
I've just bought this though its the E series, how does it compare to this? Its cost £50 so worth a go I thought?
Holly Sehorn Hi Holly - the short answer is: yes! But I have to make the reservation that I do not own an e-series lens, but reading a few articles on the subject, it seems to me that many of the e-series lenses were budget friendly in a way where Nikon often did not compromise the glass construction. I found this article by a very happy 135 e-series owner: www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/emfgfg20/eserieslenses/htmls/100135mm.htm#135mm
Just a small but important correction. The lens you show in this video is not a D lens. (Thats actually what caused me to click on the video. I was thinking, "what, Nikon never made an af-d 135 f2.8). Your lens is an AIS lens, (based on the minimum aperture being orange on both the aperture ring and the adr readout). If they were not both orange, that would be an AI lens.
Bill Gorum Thanks Bill - Will fix. Feedback much appreciated. Fully agree your remarks is important.
I've read here,
mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/late70nikkor/telephoto/135mm.htm#f2.8
that there is even a pre or non AI lens -same 5 elements in 4 groups, same 1.3m minimal focus distance, f32 in blue- that started from nº 730001 (01/76 - 1977).
I picked one today for 95€ plus shipping. The copy was not dirty, the lens clean and the temptation was too great.
This was the best show of this lens I've seen so far. It was so thorough and described everything pretty well. I bought this lens without knowing what I got into but this made me feel good about my purchase haha it has yet to arrive in the mail and in proud to say it only cost me $40!! Also, I need to buy an adapter for this lens for my Sony A7ii but I dont know what adaptor to buy.. any advice?
Heduardo Suchilt Hi Heduardo, yes that sounds like a fantastic deal you made there! I went for the Metabones one, but I think it is overpriced (although a safe choice) so I would go for a cheap Chinese alternative. Make sure to get one with aperture control if you need to fit lenses without an aperture ring! Was it Tony Northrop that had a video where he had tested a lot of manual lens adapters and concluded the were all equally good with huge price differences? So I would pick anyone cheap and google it for reviews and if decent reviews, simply go for it. Hope this helps!
th-cam.com/video/zE9p-4gUQPs/w-d-xo.html (13 minutes in)
@@frederikboving thanks bud!!
I thought your video was pretty good. However, I do take exception with describing the 135mm lens as an odd length lens to work with. I don't understand your point. All the major camera manufacturers through the 1970s and 80s made 135s and the list is long: Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Olympus and Mamiya all had 135s for their 35mm cameras and I am certain some of the odd and exotic brands had them also. The 135mm was usually considered an ideal lens for head and shoulder photos. It gives the subject of the photo desired space away from the photographer and many say the optics of that length are beneficial to facial features in portraits.
I've had a chance to use old Canon and Minolta lenses extensively and a lesser amount of use with Olympus and Nikon lenses. Yes, there are some differences, but the differences in value quality are really not dramatic. It is very tough to look at a group of photos and accurately identify what brand lens was used to take the individual photos. Now, third party lenses often do not measure up. Look at Flickr for examples of different lenses. It is tough to predict what major brand of lens was used.
Hi Brant, thank you for taking the time to give feedback. My remark regarding the 135mm being odd was a ment relative to the 85mm lenses. I came from a 85mm lens and found myself walking backwards (and stumbling over stuff and hitting walls) when I started to use the 135mm. So my remark was ment more lighthearted than how it came across. I think you are right about the big lens brands being very similar in quality and performance - I seem to remember a video by Tony Northrup where he does blind test of the color science of different manufacturers and the conclusion is that people cannot tell the difference (my version of the gist of it). I have never shot with canon glass, but I have a hunch they are a little bit more warm (brown?) when it comes to color rendition, but it is just a hunch I have - nothing scientific or tested. I have recently started to use my 135mm - with extension tubes - for flower photography, and it is also for this purpose an excellent lens and the manual focus throw is one of the best among the lenses that I have. Love this lens, more every day!
@@frederikboving Many thanks for your reply! I will have to look for the Northup video. I've discussed the differences in the various lenses for many years and except for third party lenses (which often are not good), the lenses of the major manufacturers from the 70s and 80s were quite similar. Color reproduction from some lenses may be very slightly richer due to differences in the composition of the glass. Some people say the radioactive glass may be responsible for that and I understand their point.
I got interested in cameras in the 70s and I got to see the whole list of brand names being used for various things in and out of school. For those who understood how to use their equipment there often was not much difference in work product.
I was glad to sample the different brands of lenses for myself when mirrorless cameras came to the market and opened up the spectrum of usable lenses.
I used Canon FD lenses on older Canon film cameras for many years and was usually pleased with the results from the primes. When I used certain polarizers and neutral density filters the brown cast (I assume from the filters?) was quite obvious. I did notice that certain Canon FD lens models were better than others. I have a FD 20mm which is incredible and a 35mm which is dreadful. Oddly, I've heard similar things about 35s from other brands. Maybe I don't understand the best use of the 35mm?
Again, thank you for your reply!
@@brantmorrison3704 Brant, I am so glad that i named my channel "new to photography" when you say that you got interested in photography in the 70s! I have only been serious about photography for 1.5 year! :-D
@@frederikboving You might not be familiar with these, but the first camera I got to use was a 120 film camera (using 2 1/4 inch wide medium format film) with a couple rolls of black and white print film for a school trip to an outdoor museum around 1968. The camera had no meter, it was all manual, no electric components at all and I don't recall if there was a way to focus it. Lens aperture could be adjusted by rotating a control ring on the lens to accommodate for sunny, partly cloudy, or overcast conditions.
@@brantmorrison3704 I seem to remember medium format. My old man had a medium format camera - if I remember correctly the film rolls were thin and tall. I think there were no more than 12 pictures (or less) on a roll. He used to shoot pictures from his plane (a piper colt) long before anyone invented a drone!
I am having fun using Nikon MF glass on the new Z cameras, I enjoyed the video but would like to have seen more images rather than words on the powerpoint presentation sheets. I plan to pick up a couple of lenses from the 85-135 range over the next few months, using a MF lens on these new Mirrorless cameras is wonderful, the lenses are very tactile and the actual focus throw is so smooth compared to an AF lens in manual mode.
Oh, nearly forgot, these old MF lenses bring their own unique character to an image, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Hi Martin, thank you for your feedback. Much appreciated. In hindsight, I should probably have made two videos (1) about buying vintage lenses in general and (2) one about the 135mm.
Maybe this one is more to your liking:
th-cam.com/video/L2a4XSPuSnU/w-d-xo.html
Or this one (but I think you know most in this video already):
th-cam.com/video/kiKACT5ttuw/w-d-xo.html
If you get fed up listening to my voice (they say I sound like Arnold Schwarzenegger), my blog is an alternative:
new2photogrphy.blogspot.com/2019/04/nikon-nikkor-50mm-14d-af.html
Plan to do one about the Asahi Pentax f1.4 50mm Super-Takumar M42 lens as soon as it hits my mailbox.
Cheers.
Great.
I just have a nikon z6 you confirm that this lenses works good? Also for video?
I don t have the ftz afapter just an adapter with no contact.
Can it work on a D5200
Yep. But notice: No AF. No metering. No EXIF. Just glass. All manual.
Help please!!!!
Will I have a problem in mounting it in d610???
It should work. The Nikon D610 has an F-mount (www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d610/2) and hence it fits this lens. However - notice that there is no auto focus nor EXIF information. It is a completely manual lens in all aspects - it is only glass. But always see if you can test the lens with your camera before you buy!
the 135mm f3.5 Ai is even more value it is not sharper it simply has less element inside thus a slight increase in micro-contrast and depth i have been using it for the past 3 years in my studio and just bought another copy this month as they are getting rare on ebay
Thanks for sharing Gilbert, duly noted. I am very happy with my AIS copy, it is one of my favorite vintage lenses, the focus throw is butter smooth...
@@frederikboving keep it well both version are incredible only outmatched in the bokeh department by the 135mm f2 dc but this one cost around 700 usd second hand
@@GilbertCarosinPhotography Duly noted. I'll hold on to my copy :-D Thanks!
Just wandering what do you like about the Nikon 135mm f3.5 Ai knowing that it's not sharper & don't have a wide aperture !
@@wildflower1542 i never said it is not sharp but simply intended that there are lens that are sharper than this one, my 50mm f1,8 Ai is sharper than my 135 but for portrait the 135 does everything better at f5.6 you still get nice background blur, but the real deal is the micro contrast, the shadow to highlight transition, the 3d pop and also the face compression, i use this lens in the studio at 5.6 and f8 only but to be honest sharpness is not important for me you can add it in post and working with the 135 i always reduce the sharpness in post so my portrait become softer, finally that little gem cost only 150-200 usd on ebay mint condition, that allows me to save money for more important investment than lenses ( c-stand roller-stand beauty dishes parabolic octaboxes flags etc )
You are doing good. Be little more active while talking. Add more pictures in between the video. It was really helpful. My 135 2.8 is on the way from Japan. I got it for 45 usd and courier charge is 15. Let's hope it's in good shape
kevin scaria Hi Kevin - thank you for feedback. Will give your points some serious consideration 👍
Change the background colors in between 😉
The audio is too low. Please project your voice.
Hi Lonnie, all my audio is set to yield -2 dB in in max peak, so level should be ok. Some of my older videos were too low in audio, so I have really tried to improve this part. If I crank up the audio further, I believe distortion and noise levels will be problematic. So I am not sure I can do so much more, unfortunately.
Ebay prices are nuts. I have just bought one in very good condition for EUR 100 locally…
I'm sure e-bay will say local prices are nuts 🤗 - congrats on your new lens!