Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/08/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks, Doug - I wasn't sure from reading the Nikon doc Feli pointed to which version was really which. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of telyt@earthlink.net Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 4:45 PM To: lug@leica-users.org Subject: 105/2.5 Nikkor (was: RE: [Leica] Lenses without digital Bodies,Anyone?) B. D. Colen <bdcolen@earthlink.net> wrote: > Damn! That raises a really interesting question concerning nostalgia > v. reality. I remember the classic Nikon 105 2.5 as an absolute killer > of a portrait lens, a lens so outstanding I have been tempted over the > years to buy one of the old silver barrel ones. Does anyone know what > tests of the lens might suggest? Is it as good as I remember it - or > was it just outstanding in its day IIRC the silver barreled version is the first optical design, and when it was re-designed there was much hand-wringing from people who liked the earlier lens' performance. Tests and comparisons at the time revealed that the distance and mid-distance performance of the new version was just as good as the old, and close-range performance was better. So if you get the silver barreled version you can expect somewhat weaker performance at close range. Also if the lens is single-coated expect more flare and ghost images than modern lenses. Even with these weaknesses it's still a well-liked lens. Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information