Questions about the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ais

Jones Longshot · May 12, 2025

I'm intrigued by this lens but have never used one. I have a Nikkor 85mm 1.8 D which I don't hate. Mostly it's a decent lens. The issues I have are the less than smooth bokeh, sharp OOF transitions and lots of CA. When used thoughtfully these can be mitigated enough to satisfy me.

I have read that the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ais has lots of CA.

My questions are probably best answered by those who have used both lenses.

How would you compare the CA from each lense?
Is the Bokeh an improvement on the 105?
Is the 105 a reasonable performer on a 24MP camera (Nikon Z6ii)?

I'm trying not to talk myself into purchasing another lens but I've always been curious about this lens.

BTW, I have searched and read many threads on the 105 on this site. They have been very helpful. None have directly addressed my questions.

I'm also curious about the 105mm f/1.8D Macro but OOF transitions are one of the most important characteristics for me. Of course sharpness is important but not the primary driver for me.

Very interested to hear your experiences.

Parry Johnson · May 12, 2025

Jones Longshot said:
I'm intrigued by this lens but have never used one. I have a Nikkor 85mm 1.8 D which I don't hate. Mostly it's a decent lens. The issues I have are the less than smooth bokeh, sharp OOF transitions and lots of CA. When used thoughtfully these can be mitigated enough to satisfy me.

I have read that the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ais has lots of CA.

My questions are probably best answered by those who have used both lenses.

How would you compare the CA from each lense?
Is the Bokeh an improvement on the 105?
Is the 105 a reasonable performer on a 24MP camera (Nikon Z6ii)?

I'm trying not to talk myself into purchasing another lens but I've always been curious about this lens.

BTW, I have searched and read many threads on the 105 on this site. They have been very helpful. None have directly addressed my questions.

I'm also curious about the 105mm f/1.8D Macro but OOF transitions are one of the most important characteristics for me. Of course sharpness is important but not the primary driver for me.

Very interested to hear your experiences.

Jones Longshot · May 13, 2025

Parry Johnson said:
Jones Longshot said:

I'm intrigued by this lens but have never used one. I have a Nikkor 85mm 1.8 D which I don't hate. Mostly it's a decent lens. The issues I have are the less than smooth bokeh, sharp OOF transitions and lots of CA. When used thoughtfully these can be mitigated enough to satisfy me.

I have read that the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ais has lots of CA.

My questions are probably best answered by those who have used both lenses.

How would you compare the CA from each lense?
Is the Bokeh an improvement on the 105?
Is the 105 a reasonable performer on a 24MP camera (Nikon Z6ii)?

I'm trying not to talk myself into purchasing another lens but I've always been curious about this lens.

BTW, I have searched and read many threads on the 105 on this site. They have been very helpful. None have directly addressed my questions.

I'm also curious about the 105mm f/1.8D Macro but OOF transitions are one of the most important characteristics for me. Of course sharpness is important but not the primary driver for me.

Very interested to hear your experiences.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. Very much appreciated

Parry Johnson said:
I had this lens for my film cameras many years ago, and sometimes i regret selling it. I think there are a couple of things we don't often read about:

First, these lenses were designed for film, but they're being tested and usually used on digital bodies. CA, in particular, is much more random with film grains than it is for a pixel array. That means you might not notice the chromatic aberration with a shot taken on film (think "The Afghan Girl").

Bokeh is affected that way as well, but it may have more to do with the fact that film colours are layers with different frequencies.

Now, that brings us to modern digital bodies. With good post-processing, some of those "problems" can be corrected, at least to the point that most people won't know or care that there's any difference.

I love my 105DC, but I usually don't use f2.0 as I don't always want or need super-shallow DOF, and CA is quite bad (as it usually is on any lens wide open). Bokeh, however is amazing, but that's because I'm controlling spherical aberration with the DC function (which merges any color shifts on a plane before or behind focus).

The 105DC and 135DC are unique in this regard, and that's why used prices are still very high. The only other lens that comes close is the rare Tamron 70-150 SOFT lens from the 80's (which I've never used, but I want to try out sometime).

The 105DC was on my list for a long time but honestly prices discouraged me.

Parry Johnson said:
By the way, the 105 AF-D Macro is f2.8, not f1.8, so bokeh won't be any different than current 105mm macros. They're great at macro distances, but not so good as portrait lenses. (The Tamron 90mm is a bit of an exception -- you might want to try one of those out. I've got the DI non-VC version.)

Yes, I mistyped the aperture. But very good to know that you don't feel it is a good portrait lens. I can cross that one off.

Parry Johnson said:
Finally, you might want to embrace the fact that there are no perfect lenses, but some very good options that will have some problems. One of my favorites this way is a cheap used Vivitar 70-150 f3.5. It's riddled with problems -- slippery, backwards zoom, soft throughout, horrible CA wide open. However, for female portraits (where smoothing out skin imperfections and some dreaminess is often preferred), it's surprisingly good. That's why the similar Series E lens (although much sharper) is a classic.

So, try out the 105 f2.5 AIS and see if it can work for you.

I do have several vintage primes that I use quite often and I'm happy with them for portrait work. Nikkor 180 ED 2.8, Vivitar 135 f/2.8. I have also done a lot with my 85 1.8D. Like you I don't shoot wide open with them as I don't need obliterated backgrounds. I'm not crazy about the look of people floating in a sea of blur. I do think that out of focus areas should not be a distraction and that is one of the reasons the 105 2.5 and the 105 DC interest me.

But I guess I'm trying to convince myself that my interest in these lenses is FOMO and that I don't need another focal length. I'd love to see some comparisons from people that have owned both. If it helps, some of my portraits can be seen here:

Portraits – Jones Hendershot

joneshendershot.com

Stan Disbrow · May 14, 2025

Hi,

Read this thread:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54989533

Everything you ever wanted to know about the 105/2.5....

Stan

Jones Longshot · May 14, 2025

Stan Disbrow said:
Hi,

Read this thread:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54989533

Everything you ever wanted to know about the 105/2.5....

Stan

Thank you! I have actually read this one and it was useful.

--
https://www.joneshendershot.com
https://youtube.com/janeinspain

Stan Disbrow · May 14, 2025

Hi,

I wound up with the early one as it came with an F2 back around 1980. I subsequently swapped out the aperture ring - Nikon offered such back then - and made it AI so I could also use it on my FE without having to flip the tab up.

I later wound up with the later one as well.

Stan

Jones Longshot · May 14, 2025

Stan Disbrow said:
Hi,

I wound up with the early one as it came with an F2 back around 1980. I subsequently swapped out the aperture ring - Nikon offered such back then - and made it AI so I could also use it on my FE without having to flip the tab up.

I later wound up with the later one as well.

Stan

Thanks Stan.

I realized that I'm asking questions that only I can answer by shooting with both lenses. I have looked at hundreds of images on flickr shot with the 105 and generally don't see a significant improvment over my 85mm. Only shooting one for myself will give me the answer I think.

Jones

Parry Johnson · May 14, 2025

Jones Longshot said:
Parry Johnson said:

Jones Longshot said:

I'm intrigued by this lens but have never used one. I have a Nikkor 85mm 1.8 D which I don't hate. Mostly it's a decent lens. The issues I have are the less than smooth bokeh, sharp OOF transitions and lots of CA. When used thoughtfully these can be mitigated enough to satisfy me.

I have read that the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ais has lots of CA.

My questions are probably best answered by those who have used both lenses.

How would you compare the CA from each lense?
Is the Bokeh an improvement on the 105?
Is the 105 a reasonable performer on a 24MP camera (Nikon Z6ii)?

I'm trying not to talk myself into purchasing another lens but I've always been curious about this lens.

BTW, I have searched and read many threads on the 105 on this site. They have been very helpful. None have directly addressed my questions.

I'm also curious about the 105mm f/1.8D Macro but OOF transitions are one of the most important characteristics for me. Of course sharpness is important but not the primary driver for me.

Very interested to hear your experiences.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. Very much appreciated

You're certainly welcome!

Jones Longshot said:
Jones Longshot said:

I had this lens for my film cameras many years ago, and sometimes i regret selling it. I think there are a couple of things we don't often read about:

First, these lenses were designed for film, but they're being tested and usually used on digital bodies. CA, in particular, is much more random with film grains than it is for a pixel array. That means you might not notice the chromatic aberration with a shot taken on film (think "The Afghan Girl").

Bokeh is affected that way as well, but it may have more to do with the fact that film colours are layers with different frequencies.

Now, that brings us to modern digital bodies. With good post-processing, some of those "problems" can be corrected, at least to the point that most people won't know or care that there's any difference.

I love my 105DC, but I usually don't use f2.0 as I don't always want or need super-shallow DOF, and CA is quite bad (as it usually is on any lens wide open). Bokeh, however is amazing, but that's because I'm controlling spherical aberration with the DC function (which merges any color shifts on a plane before or behind focus).

The 105DC and 135DC are unique in this regard, and that's why used prices are still very high. The only other lens that comes close is the rare Tamron 70-150 SOFT lens from the 80's (which I've never used, but I want to try out sometime).

Click to expand...

The 105DC was on my list for a long time but honestly prices discouraged me.

It was on my list for a long time, too, and was still available new when i found mine for $550 CAD. That was about ten years ago now. I would have preferred the 135DC, but i already have similar focal length lenses.

To be honest, my 70-200 VR2 is my main portrait lens. When it comes down to it, you have to please the client first, and that might mean some compromises like size.

Jones Longshot said:
Jones Longshot said:

By the way, the 105 AF-D Macro is f2.8, not f1.8, so bokeh won't be any different than current 105mm macros. They're great at macro distances, but not so good as portrait lenses. (The Tamron 90mm is a bit of an exception -- you might want to try one of those out. I've got the DI non-VC version.)

Click to expand...

Yes, I mistyped the aperture. But very good to know that you don't feel it is a good portrait lens. I can cross that one off.

Jones Longshot said:

Finally, you might want to embrace the fact that there are no perfect lenses, but some very good options that will have some problems. One of my favorites this way is a cheap used Vivitar 70-150 f3.5. It's riddled with problems -- slippery, backwards zoom, soft throughout, horrible CA wide open. However, for female portraits (where smoothing out skin imperfections and some dreaminess is often preferred), it's surprisingly good. That's why the similar Series E lens (although much sharper) is a classic.

So, try out the 105 f2.5 AIS and see if it can work for you.

Click to expand...

I do have several vintage primes that I use quite often and I'm happy with them for portrait work. Nikkor 180 ED 2.8, Vivitar 135 f/2.8. I have also done a lot with my 85 1.8D. Like you I don't shoot wide open with them as I don't need obliterated backgrounds. I'm not crazy about the look of people floating in a sea of blur. I do think that out of focus areas should not be a distraction and that is one of the reasons the 105 2.5 and the 105 DC interest me.

The 180 is a classic, that's for sure. Again, that's within the 70/800-200 type lens range, so it's redundant for me.

I do have a Tamron Adaptall 135 f2.5 that's a sweet little lens, much like your Vivitar.

Jones Longshot said:
But I guess I'm trying to convince myself that my interest in these lenses is FOMO and that I don't need another focal length. I'd love to see some comparisons from people that have owned both. If it helps, some of my portraits can be seen here:

https://joneshendershot.com/project/portraits/

--

Great shots! I've seen the one of the gentleman with the typewriter before.

Jones Longshot said:
https://www.joneshendershot.com
https://youtube.com/janeinspain

Jones Longshot · Jul 23, 2025

A little closure to my questions.

I was gifted a handful of Nikkor pre-Ai lenses and among them was a 105-P 2.5. As far as I can tell it was made about 1970ish. Silver nose Sonnar design, single coated. Very well worn on the outside but pristine glass.

I've only had it a little more than a week but I wanted to give my observations and thoughts on a 50 plus year old classic.

Below are some comparison shots. These were not made to test the lens but rather to observe how it compares to two other similar focal lengths that I shoot all the time. The first image is a Nikkor Z 24-70 f4 S. This is basically my reference because it gets used a lot. Its also the most modern lens I have. It performs well and its characteristics are well known.

Then three images with the 105-P. Wide open, f/4 and then f5.6. And then four with the horribly maligned Nikkor 85mm 1.8D.

I picked a flower pot that was roughly head sized and tried to keep the framing as similar as I could For all of the images the focus is on the Euro coin on the left. I think I missed focus on the 85mm a bit but I know the lens is sharp so don't need to redo these.

Observations

First is that the 24-70 really does a nice job wide open. Careful selection of background and this lens is great.

The 105-P has lower contrast (adjusted here to keep images looking similar.) This is most noticeable in backlit scenes. Firms up nicely in Lightroom so not a big negative. Still the single coating is noticeable.

The 105-P is plenty sharp enough in the central region. It gets mushy in the corners. I read the sharpness described as "rounded sharpness" and I think that is as accurate a description as I can come up with. The sharp details look very natural and balanced. I find the 24-70 can often look gritty and biting. The rendering of the 105-P is welcome.

The 105-P has some bad CA wide open but it cleans up easily.

The shape of specular OOF highlights is not great at anything other than wide open. Even at f/4 you can see the shape of the aperture.

The 105-P has pretty nice OOF transitions. My 85mm is harsh in comparison.

Some weird things happen with tiny OOF highlights as seen below.

Crop from above.

Notice the bright purple center points with green rings around them. Mostly not noticeable unless I zoom in.

I think the characteristics of the 105-P make it most suited to portraiture or images where the subject is generally isolated. The mushy corners just don't hold up for general work and make it really unsuitable for stitching. My Z6 ii works well for manual focus lenses because of the one button 100% zoon. Without that feature focusing might be tough.

Two impromptu images that I think really show the flavor of this more than 50 year old lens.

I will probably be shooting it a lot for a while until the novelty wears off. Right now I'm enjoying it. I need more portrait victims though, and someone to gift me a Plena.

Jones

--
https://www.joneshendershot.com
https://youtube.com/janeinspain

Jones Longshot · Jul 28, 2025

BLX1972 · Jul 28, 2025

Jones Longshot said:
A little closure to my questions.

I was gifted a handful of Nikkor pre-Ai lenses and among them was a 105-P 2.5. As far as I can tell it was made about 1970ish. Silver nose Sonnar design, single coated. Very well worn on the outside but pristine glass.

I've only had it a little more than a week but I wanted to give my observations and thoughts on a 50 plus year old classic.

Below are some comparison shots. These were not made to test the lens but rather to observe how it compares to two other similar focal lengths that I shoot all the time. The first image is a Nikkor Z 24-70 f4 S. This is basically my reference because it gets used a lot. Its also the most modern lens I have. It performs well and its characteristics are well known.

Then three images with the 105-P. Wide open, f/4 and then f5.6. And then four with the horribly maligned Nikkor 85mm 1.8D.

I picked a flower pot that was roughly head sized and tried to keep the framing as similar as I could For all of the images the focus is on the Euro coin on the left. I think I missed focus on the 85mm a bit but I know the lens is sharp so don't need to redo these.

Observations

First is that the 24-70 really does a nice job wide open. Careful selection of background and this lens is great.

The 105-P has lower contrast (adjusted here to keep images looking similar.) This is most noticeable in backlit scenes. Firms up nicely in Lightroom so not a big negative. Still the single coating is noticeable.

The 105-P is plenty sharp enough in the central region. It gets mushy in the corners. I read the sharpness described as "rounded sharpness" and I think that is as accurate a description as I can come up with. The sharp details look very natural and balanced. I find the 24-70 can often look gritty and biting. The rendering of the 105-P is welcome.

The 105-P has some bad CA wide open but it cleans up easily.

The shape of specular OOF highlights is not great at anything other than wide open. Even at f/4 you can see the shape of the aperture.

The 105-P has pretty nice OOF transitions. My 85mm is harsh in comparison.

Some weird things happen with tiny OOF highlights as seen below.

Crop from above.

Notice the bright purple center points with green rings around them. Mostly not noticeable unless I zoom in.

I think the characteristics of the 105-P make it most suited to portraiture or images where the subject is generally isolated. The mushy corners just don't hold up for general work and make it really unsuitable for stitching. My Z6 ii works well for manual focus lenses because of the one button 100% zoon. Without that feature focusing might be tough.

Two impromptu images that I think really show the flavor of this more than 50 year old lens.

I will probably be shooting it a lot for a while until the novelty wears off. Right now I'm enjoying it. I need more portrait victims though, and someone to gift me a Plena.

Jones

Nice work here - especially the portraits
Regarding your comment on the Plena... until someone gift you one

you could give the 135/2 ai-s a go. I got one very cheap, it was a bit beat up but the glass and functions works perfectly...

--

-Morten-

Explore -Morten-’s 6,912 photos on Flickr!

flickr.com

Jones Longshot · Jul 29, 2025

BLX1972 said:
Nice work here - especially the portraits
Regarding your comment on the Plena... until someone gift you one you could give the 135/2 ai-s a go. I got one very cheap, it was a bit beat up but the glass and functions works perfectly...

Thank you.

The Plena is on my someday list, I have no doubt that I would love it. I have considered the Nikkor 135 f2 and used prices have seemed a bit high to me. Especially when considering the Samyang 135 f2 has some exceptional rendering for considerably less.

The biggest thing keeping me from seriously looking for a 135 is that I have a 135 f2.8 Vivitar ($12.) The name might not invoke the same emotions as "Milvus" or "Plena" but it is really hard to find fault with the rendering of this lens and for my portrait style (the examples I posted from the 105 are not the way I typically photograph people) it has been a great fit. The extra fraction of a stop comes a bit expensive. Of course once I shoot with one of these others I probably will wonder why I resisted so long.

Jones

--
https://www.joneshendershot.com
https://youtube.com/janeinspain

BLX1972 · Jul 29, 2025

Jones Longshot said:
BLX1972 said:

Nice work here - especially the portraits
Regarding your comment on the Plena... until someone gift you one you could give the 135/2 ai-s a go. I got one very cheap, it was a bit beat up but the glass and functions works perfectly...

Click to expand...

Thank you.

The Plena is on my someday list, I have no doubt that I would love it. I have considered the Nikkor 135 f2 and used prices have seemed a bit high to me. Especially when considering the Samyang 135 f2 has some exceptional rendering for considerably less.

The biggest thing keeping me from seriously looking for a 135 is that I have a 135 f2.8 Vivitar ($12.) The name might not invoke the same emotions as "Milvus" or "Plena" but it is really hard to find fault with the rendering of this lens and for my portrait style (the examples I posted from the 105 are not the way I typically photograph people) it has been a great fit. The extra fraction of a stop comes a bit expensive. Of course once I shoot with one of these others I probably will wonder why I resisted so long.

Jones

Understandable - if you already have a 135
The Plena is waaaayyyy out of my price range

I collect ai-s lenses for my DF and only buying cheap. Don't mind some wear as long as glass, focus etc is great. Was lucky to find a 135/2 for around €150

Parry Johnson · Jul 29, 2025

Jones Longshot said:
BLX1972 said:

Nice work here - especially the portraits
Regarding your comment on the Plena... until someone gift you one you could give the 135/2 ai-s a go. I got one very cheap, it was a bit beat up but the glass and functions works perfectly...

Click to expand...

Thank you.

The Plena is on my someday list, I have no doubt that I would love it. I have considered the Nikkor 135 f2 and used prices have seemed a bit high to me. Especially when considering the Samyang 135 f2 has some exceptional rendering for considerably less.

The biggest thing keeping me from seriously looking for a 135 is that I have a 135 f2.8 Vivitar ($12.) The name might not invoke the same emotions as "Milvus" or "Plena" but it is really hard to find fault with the rendering of this lens and for my portrait style (the examples I posted from the 105 are not the way I typically photograph people) it has been a great fit. The extra fraction of a stop comes a bit expensive. Of course once I shoot with one of these others I probably will wonder why I resisted so long.

There's absolutely nothing "wrong" with the Vivitar. Some really good results can be made with practically any 135mm lens. My favorite like this one is the Tamron Adaptall-2 135mm f2.5. Like you, I paid nearly nothing for it ($15 CAD, which is about the same). However, like an 85mm lens, they all seem to be pretty good overall -- yes, maybe not as sharp wide open or at the edges, or with a little too much business in the bokeh, but you can do a lot of experimentation for $12., especially if you've got other accessories like extension tubes, filters, etc.

The Samyang has been on my radar for years, but unless I find a good deal, a lens like that won't do enough of a difference for me. I've got the 105DC of i need better than most cam deliver. Another thing is to consider a 200mm prime. Again, most are exellent, and you don't need to shoot at f2 to get similar subject isolation. F4 gives a similar look, and sometimes that extra reach comes in handy. That said, my 70-200 f2.8 VR2 works for almost everything, and it's speed of use (and compatibility with my Z7ii) mean that I usually use that one instead of the other options.

doni · Jul 29, 2025

Jones Longshot said:
I'm intrigued by this lens but have never used one. I have a Nikkor 85mm 1.8 D which I don't hate. Mostly it's a decent lens. The issues I have are the less than smooth bokeh, sharp OOF transitions and lots of CA. When used thoughtfully these can be mitigated enough to satisfy me.

I have read that the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ais has lots of CA.

My questions are probably best answered by those who have used both lenses.

How would you compare the CA from each lense?
Is the Bokeh an improvement on the 105?
Is the 105 a reasonable performer on a 24MP camera (Nikon Z6ii)?

I'm trying not to talk myself into purchasing another lens but I've always been curious about this lens.

BTW, I have searched and read many threads on the 105 on this site. They have been very helpful. None have directly addressed my questions.

I'm also curious about the 105mm f/1.8D Macro but OOF transitions are one of the most important characteristics for me. Of course sharpness is important but not the primary driver for me.

Very interested to hear your experiences.

--
https://www.joneshendershot.com
https://youtube.com/janeinspain

I love the 105mm F/2.5 AIS - it almost never leaves my Nikon FM2N. It's the perfect combo - light, and reliable.

The lens has really good character. It is reasonably sharp while retains a lot of character. The bokeh is pleasing - I would put it just behind of the 200mm F2 and 135mm F2 DC.

I was never a fan of the 85mm - it was too close to the 50mm and the 105mm, and I would choose the 50 or 135 any day. I borrowed one for a week and never fell in love with it.

Here are some samples from the 105mm f/2.5 over the past year or so

Bokeh Transition is smooth and pleasing

It is Sharp, but still has character. Again, bokeh is smooth and not distracting

Foreground out of focus area also renders nicely

Background is smooth and pleasing

I use it for concert/music photography and it gives nice contrasty images

It also excels in outdoors/street photography

As you can tell, it's one of my favorite and most used lenses.

It delivers good results while being light and compact. I highly recommend getting one!

622864ff5a1841a588336dc3863887c4.jpg.png

--
...in matters of grave importance, style not sincerity is the vital thing - Oscar Wilde

Jones Longshot · Jul 30, 2025

Parry Johnson said:
Jones Longshot said:

BLX1972 said:

Nice work here - especially the portraits
Regarding your comment on the Plena... until someone gift you one you could give the 135/2 ai-s a go. I got one very cheap, it was a bit beat up but the glass and functions works perfectly...

Click to expand...

Thank you.

The Plena is on my someday list, I have no doubt that I would love it. I have considered the Nikkor 135 f2 and used prices have seemed a bit high to me. Especially when considering the Samyang 135 f2 has some exceptional rendering for considerably less.

The biggest thing keeping me from seriously looking for a 135 is that I have a 135 f2.8 Vivitar ($12.) The name might not invoke the same emotions as "Milvus" or "Plena" but it is really hard to find fault with the rendering of this lens and for my portrait style (the examples I posted from the 105 are not the way I typically photograph people) it has been a great fit. The extra fraction of a stop comes a bit expensive. Of course once I shoot with one of these others I probably will wonder why I resisted so long.

Click to expand...

There's absolutely nothing "wrong" with the Vivitar. Some really good results can be made with practically any 135mm lens. My favorite like this one is the Tamron Adaptall-2 135mm f2.5. Like you, I paid nearly nothing for it ($15 CAD, which is about the same). However, like an 85mm lens, they all seem to be pretty good overall -- yes, maybe not as sharp wide open or at the edges, or with a little too much business in the bokeh, but you can do a lot of experimentation for $12., especially if you've got other accessories like extension tubes, filters, etc.

Agreed. I have no complaints about the Vivitar. I think the desire for a 135 f/2 or a Plena comes more from the the little doubts that creep into the back of my mind. "What would it be like to have a ..."

Parry Johnson said:
The Samyang has been on my radar for years, but unless I find a good deal, a lens like that won't do enough of a difference for me. I've got the 105DC of i need better than most cam deliver. Another thing is to consider a 200mm prime. Again, most are exellent, and you don't need to shoot at f2 to get similar subject isolation. F4 gives a similar look, and sometimes that extra reach comes in handy. That said, my 70-200 f2.8 VR2 works for almost everything, and it's speed of use (and compatibility with my Z7ii) mean that I usually use that one instead of the other options.

I do have a 200 f/4 Nikkor. Very nice lens but it kind of competes with my 180 f/2.8 so it doesn't get used. I'm always on the lookout for a deal on the Samyang. I really can't find fault with the Vivitar but I'm always happy to get a little bit more of that something special that I imagine these lenses provide. I have never been unhappy to have better gear.

Jones Longshot · Jul 30, 2025

BLX1972 said:
Jones Longshot said:

BLX1972 said:

Nice work here - especially the portraits
Regarding your comment on the Plena... until someone gift you one you could give the 135/2 ai-s a go. I got one very cheap, it was a bit beat up but the glass and functions works perfectly...

Click to expand...

Thank you.

The Plena is on my someday list, I have no doubt that I would love it. I have considered the Nikkor 135 f2 and used prices have seemed a bit high to me. Especially when considering the Samyang 135 f2 has some exceptional rendering for considerably less.

The biggest thing keeping me from seriously looking for a 135 is that I have a 135 f2.8 Vivitar ($12.) The name might not invoke the same emotions as "Milvus" or "Plena" but it is really hard to find fault with the rendering of this lens and for my portrait style (the examples I posted from the 105 are not the way I typically photograph people) it has been a great fit. The extra fraction of a stop comes a bit expensive. Of course once I shoot with one of these others I probably will wonder why I resisted so long.

Jones

Click to expand...

Understandable - if you already have a 135
The Plena is waaaayyyy out of my price range

Mine too.

BLX1972 said:
I collect ai-s lenses for my DF and only buying cheap. Don't mind some wear as long as glass, focus etc is great. Was lucky to find a 135/2 for around €150

vockman · Aug 5, 2025

I have both and at different times over the decades used them a lot.

The 105 2.5 with the large rear element has more character and is a very valid lens, for portraiture or landscape, especially on a Z body where it can be focused precisely. When Nikon moved on from the split prism viewfinder as a result of the transition to Auto Focus it became very difficult to maually focus the 105 accurately wide open on AF bodies with mat screens.

The 85 1.8D is much easier to use with the AF surprisingly precise wide open (better than the G primes) even though it feels like a janky screw drive mechanism. But you want to use it on a Z body, so you won't get the AF function and the manual focus ring is kinda lousy and loose. It is a sharp lens at all apertures, with some degradation in back lighting at open stops. The rendering is a little harsher and more grainy and nervous than today's smoother rendering lenses. But it makes it ideal for B&W photojournalism giving digital images a sort of Tri-X look.

chambeshi · Aug 7, 2025

Refer to Roland Vink's Photosynthesis website for serial numbers of the different versions. The diaphragm blades also varied, particularly in earlier AI models of this prime, which influences the bokeh.

This site has some shared information

https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=628.0

https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=3766.0

Lens portraits with the Nikon Df

nikongear.net

chambeshi · Aug 7, 2025

NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights No.5 | NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights | Nikon Consumer

NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights No.59 | NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights | Nikon Consumer

Questions about the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ais

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts