"T
P" <tp@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:7vitfvcm1l57m7rbpam4rgo96ae4a6o145@4ax.com...
>
"Joseph Kewfi" <Joe_Kewfi@iol.ie> wrote:
>
>Not being a Nikonian from the manual focus era (I was shooting Canon FD
>
>then), I don't know if these lenses are available or where ever made. I
>
>would like an old school Nikonian to enlighten me as to the existence of
>
>20mm and 24mm Series E AIS lenses, please ?
>
There were neither 20mm nor 24mm lenses in the Nikon Series E range.
>
During the time of Series E, they were only available as AIS Nikkors.
>
>
From memory, the Series E lenses were:
>
>
28mm f/2.8 *
>
35mm f/2.5
>
50mm f/1.8
>
100mm f/2.8 **
>
135mm f/2.8
>
>
36-72mm f/3.5 *
>
75-150mm f/3.5 ***
>
70-210mm f/4 **
>
> *
= optically good
> **
= optically very good
>
*** = optically outstanding
>
>
The fixed focal length lenses were all coated, but did not have the
>
full Nikon Integrated Coating (NIC) applied. Later versions, with the
>
AIS-style chrome ring around the lens barrel, were multi-coated but
>
still not up to full NIC standards.
>
>
The zooms were all multi-coated from the outset. All the zooms had a
>
constant maximum aperture throughout the zoom range. The sublime
>
75-150mm is probably one of the very best zoom lenses ever to bear the
>
Nikon brand.
Ummm,
my experience with multiple samples of most of the "E"
lenses
would indicate the following averages:
28mm
f/2.8 x (most samples, with some few exceptions o and *)
35mm
f/2.5 o (mixed results, different samples ranging from x to *)
50mm
f/1.8 **
100mm
f/2.8 ***
135mm
f/2.8 **
36-72mm
f/3.5 **
75-150mm
f/3.5 ***
70-210mm
f/4 **
x =
optically mediocre to poor
o =
optically OK
* =
optically good
** =
optically very good
*** =
optically outstanding
And I
would place the 80-200 f2.8 a bit ahead of the 75-150,
particularly
wide-open...
For
more, see: www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/slemn.html
--
David
Ruether
d_ruether@hotmail.com
http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com
Hey,
take a gander at www.visitithaca.com, too...!