The Very Best Cheap (ish) Nikon Lenses

These, in my opinion and experience as a photographer are some of the cheaper (ish) Nikkor lenses I consider to be God-tier.

G'day from Western Sydney

This video is sponsored by my former employer, Endeavour Energy.

[charlesdavis]

Thank you for taking the time to make a video and post for us. I seriously admire that. I'm still trying to get the hang of focal length with regard to how/what I want to shoot. Wish you would have included a sample photo you'd taken with the lenses for us newbies. (Not the usual subjects a/k/a 50mm, etc., but the big guys). Regardless, thanks!

[unclemonkey]

As a budding sports photographer the AIS 300mm was pure gold and cheap.

[victorboucher]

Thank you - I like that you are direct to the point.

[odysseusreturns]

Definitely the 80-200 f2.8 Incredibly heavy and not so slow as mentioned. Well worth lugging that around even if you need a massage afterwards. Not mentioned here, the 105 f2.8 macro. Superb.

[paulfernandez]

I own the 80-200...I agree..awesome lens...shoot sports with it...love the results...

[Mr.Thermistor]

thank GOD for you just getting STRAIGHT into the subject of the video. i am so disgustingly sick and tired of all these bumbling Youtube posers endlessly plugging and advertising their channel or whatever TF at the beginning of every single video for like 3-5 minutes. i despise any channel that constantly does that and takes forever to get to the freaking point

[ET-cjjo]

Thought they are reasonably tough, I have never banged my lenses around like that.

[kiranramachandra]

You are correct. 55 2.8 macro AIS.. the champion of portraits

[catey]

I have most of these myself and will agree with you on them. I dont have the 55mm micro Nikkor, but do have the 60mm AF 2.8 micro lens..its sharp as anything too and goes well on my D2x DSLR as well. the 135mm 3.5 is as good as the 2.8 version, if you dont mind a slightly slower lens, and will cost you less. I have both and cant tell the difference between the apart from speed. as soon as I can afford it I'd love to get one of those 80-200mm ED lenses. great little video.

[clayknowles]

Did you mean to say 105mm f2.5 for the first lens? I can't find a 100mm 2.5. The you referenced Steve McCurry and I think that was the 105mm.

[megadarren]

80-200 versions 1 through 3 have the same optics and all are soft at the extremes wide open, especially at 200. I had to get rid of it for that reason as I shoot a lot of indoor sports. The sweet spot is 135 3.2 though...great for portraits.

[marinelines]

I recently got a Nikon F4 and keen for an AF lens. Recommend any cheap(ish) zoom lenses?

[Warrior_Resisting_Colonialism]

You might want to try a 135mm 2.8 Series E (it's an AI-S too). I tested 2 Nikkor copies against it and it blew them both out of the water. Slightly smaller with less glass and was supposed to be a more affordable, lower end line at the time but it's actually a far superior lens than the Nikkor AI or AIS version.
The contrast and "3d pop" is makes the E shine. The supposedly "excellent" graded AI copy was a total dud, so I knew it wasn't fair, so I tried again, this time getting a good AIS copy and the E still handed it, it's ass. Pixle peeping, wide open down to f3.5 the nikkor had a super, super slight edge in sharpness over the E but even still it looked FLAT as crap compared to the E and by F4, all the way down the E took every advantage. Equal sharpness but totally blew it away in photo quality in every other aspect.
It's no compassion. The lower end grade 135 2.8 E totally destroys the Nikkor head to head. I don't think many people know this at all. I'm the only one posting comments anywhere to claim it being the case. I just don't think people thought to compare them to each other.
Only reason I did, was I bought the E and fell in love with it and since there was a "better" version out there, I was going to trade Well, 2 tries latter, I sold the Nikkors at a loss both times too, but oh well. Least I know.

[MMB.__]

Maybe you could add the 180mm 2.8. I own it and love it. Beautiful portrait lens

[russellwright]

Does the Push-Pull version of the 80-200 have the same optics as the version you have?

[Aki-fv]

I owned the 55 2.8 micro AIS. My copy was not as sharp stopped down to F4 as my Nikon 50mm F1.2 at F4. I also owned the Zeiss 50mm Macro plannar lens and my copy of the Nikon 50mm F1.2 was sharper then the Zeiss macro plannar. So in my case the 50 F1.2 ( note its very dreamy, hazy whatever you like to call it wide open ) is my sharpest MF AI or AIS lens when stopped down to F4. Better then The Zeiss 50 and better then the 55 micro nikon lens.

[bezbd]

Does ai or ais matter? Which one is correct for d 750

[alberte]

There are more and sometime better God-tier Nikon lenses made:
1. 50mm f/1.8 AIS Pancake lens (japan version, not the USA version), much better then the only good 50mm f/1.2.
2. 80mm f/2.8 AF lens (introduced with the F3AF camera, works also on the F4 (Not the F4s or F4e); Superb Optics.
3. 135mm f/3.5 AI lens, optical better then the 135mm f/2.8, with less glass, lighter, cheaper, ...!!!
4. 180mm f/2.8 AIS ED lens, just 20mm less then the AF-S 200mm f/2.0 and a stop slower, but also excellent optical performance for a good price.
Other Macro lenses also excellent:
5. 60mm f/2.8 AFD
6. 105mm f/2.8 AIS
7. 105mm f/2.8 AFD

[tomdelisle]

I have a 24-70 2.8. Great optics but heavy. When going out for a full day I sometimes I switch it out for something lighter end up wishing I had brought the 24-70 along.

[ironrooster]

55mm 2.8 micro is not so God Lens, the 55mm 3.5 micro is waaay better in any aspect.