Nikkor 135 2,8 AI best ever?

[belgiumreporter]

I don't know if any of you ever heard of the angry photographer or seen any of his video clips on youtube. He's a guy who gives tips on what gear to buy and share some secets on hidden trheasures in photoland. In one of his video's he gets all lyrical about the nikkor 135 2.8 manual AI lens, i happened to have one laying around and never used it because i've got lots of other lenses in that range. Still i thought if he thinks it is THAT good why don't i give it a try? And so did on the D300 and the D3 I must admit that it gave pretty good results on both cameras however i didn't have time to do a shootout with my other lenses. Here's the link to youtube for the angry photographer, but be aware the guy seems to have some kind of tourette syndrome or compulsative swearing disorder don't click on it if you can't stand strong language:



And here are some test shots with the D3 and D300 all shot at 1:2,8 (i've put a real focussing screen in my d300 wich helps on critical focussing manual lenses)

I am sure the price of these lenses is so low because there's so many of them around, if they had written zeiss or leitz on the barrel you'd probably pay tenfold for one of these beauty's

[Deleted]

The 135mm lens was sort of a jack of all trades, master of none in the film era. Not really long enough to be much of a telephoto but a little too long to be a great portrait lens. It was one of the first longer than normal lens people got because it was relatively inexpensive. Of course on a D300 the coverage area is mor like a 200mm which makes it a little better. Friend of mine had a 135mm f/2 Nikkor. That was some piece of glass and a heavy sucker, too.

[barbarian]

I would say that those photos are enough to make me pull out my 135 Nikkor and give it a try. My wife's Olympus E-410 has a Nikon adapter; it worked well on another Nikkor, so that's what I'll be doing this weekend.