Having used all of the following lenses (often multiple samples),
I cannot resist adding my experience to Grover Larkins' useful
and valuable summary of performance. (Please see his summary,
article no. 24178 in rec.photo.advanced for a description of the
subjective rating system, and for lenses not rated here.) To his
"O" through "5", I will add two more levels: "6" - darn near perfect lens, and "7" - perfect lens in every respect, all apertures, all distances, center-to-corner. You will find no "6" or "7" in the list below, but I want to place real-world optics in the context of a scale running from completely terrible, unable to form an image ("0"), to absolutely perfect, able to form an image with no defects under any conditions ("7"). Please remember that these are SUBJECTIVE ratings,
not mathematical, and that differences of 1/2 point are quite subtle. Smaller differences are included to try to differentiate quality among similar-performing lenses, but please do not get hung-up on them
(the area between "4" and "5" is crowded with many fine lenses).
This rating system does not allow for details of performance,
like variations in sharpness with distance, or the particulars
of wide vs. mid-aperture performance. It is too general, but it
is still a good rough guide to relative lens quality.

In this updated listing, you will find some notes on outstanding
particulars on some lenses, and you will find some additional
lenses I had forgotten in my first listing. Also, I have dropped
Grover Larkins' evaluations, and have reorganized the listing to
go from shortest to longest focal-lengths, including some
non-Nikkors. I have also dropped the mechanical ratings, since
all the lenses listed are fine in that respect, with manual-focus
lenses being somewhat superior mechanically to the auto-focus lenses.

BTW, I am a photographer, and do use lenses, not just test them -
but I am also an equipment nut, and prefer to use fine lenses,
the performance characteristics of which are familiar to me.
Poor lenses can be used to make fine photographs, but how much
more fun it is to use good lenses and not need to find ways around
their shortcomings.

Hope this helps, AND DO NOT TAKE IT TOO SERIOUSLY! (photography
should be fun!): ^^^



LENSES: RATINGS: NOTES:
(NIKKOR, MANUAL-FOCUS, (number of samples tried,
unless otherwise noted) in parentheses)

- 6mm f5.6 -------------- 4 (1) (no TTL viewing)
- 7.5mm f5.6 ------------ 4 (1) (no TTL viewing)
- 8mm f2.8 -------------- 4.6 (2)
- 8mm F4 Sigma ---------- 4.4 (1) (c. 165o, better in color than B & W)
- 15mm f5.6 ------------- 3-4.8 (several samples, somewhat variable)
- 15mm f3.5 ------------- 4 (2)
- 16mm f3.5 ------------- 5.5 (3) (wonderful lens, works well w. TC14A)
- 16mm f2.8 ------------- 4 (3) (works well w. TC14A)
- 18mm f3.5 ------------- 4.4 (2) (better in color than B & W)
- 20mm f3.5, f4 compact - 2.8-3.5 (many samples, avoid these)
- 20mm f2.8 ------------- 5 (3) (design is same as AF)
- 24mm f2.8 ------------- 4.5 (many samples, one bad, design same as AF)
- 24mm f2 --------------- 4 (1)
- 28mm f4 PC ------------ 5 (3)
- 28mm f3.5 PC ---------- 4 (3)
- 28mm f3.5 AI ---------- 5 (4)
- 28mm f3.5 non-AI ------ 3 (3)
- 28mm f2.8 early ------- 3.8 (2)
- 28mm f2.8 AIS --------- 5 (4)
- 28mm f2.8 E ----------- 2.8-3.5 (of several tried, one good stopped- down, others poor - avoid these - the AF design may be the same)
- 28mm f2 --------------- 4.5 (many samples)
- 35mm f3.5 PC ---------- 3.5 (1)
- 35mm f2.8 PC non-AI --- 4 (3)
- 35mm f2.8 PC AI ------- 5 (3)
- 35mm f2.8 non-AI ------ 3.5 (1)
- 35mm f2.5 E ----------- 4 (2)
- 35mm f2 --------------- 3.5-5 (many samples, somewhat variable)
- 35mm f2 AF ------------ 4.3 (1)
- 35mm f1.4 ------------- 4.5 (3) (good wide-open at mid distances)
- 50mm f2 --------------- 4.3 (several samples)
- 50mm f1.8 AIS metal --- 4.8 (many samples)
- 50mm f1.8 E, AF-------- 4.5 (many samples, design is same as AF)
- 50mm f1.4 non-AI ------ 3.5 (many samples)
- 50mm f1.4 AIS --------- 4.8 (many samples, design is same as AF)
- 50mm f1.2 ------------- 5 at 4 to 12 feet or so, otherwise 4 (several)
- 55mm f1.2 ------------- 3 (3) (avoid these)
- 55mm f3.5 Micro ------- 5 close, 3 infinity (several samples)
- 55mm f2.8 Micro ------- 5 at infinity, 4 close (sev. samp., AF same)
(this lens has a tendency to acquire oil on the diaphram leaves)
- 58mm f1.2 ------------- 3 (1, pos. defective, wide apertures poor)
- 60mm f2.8 Micro ------- 3 at infinity, 5.5 close) (1)
- 85mm f2 --------------- 5 (several samples)
- 85mm f1.8 AF ---------- 5 (1)
- 85mm f 1.4 ------------ 5 (4)
- 90mm f2.5 Vivitar Ser I 4.8 (3) (flares easily near infinity, is the best of the macros have tried for magnifications near 2x)
- 90mm f2.5 Sigma macro - 4.7 (2) (odd center flare spot with some
converter-tube combinations - the acromat that comes with this lens is excellent and works well with standard lenses [Sigma acromat + 200mm f4 Nikkor compact non-macro lens at f11-16 + TC200 makes great macro at about 3.5X magnification])
- 100mm f2.8 E ---------- 4.5 (2)
- 105mm f4 Micro -------- 3.5 (2)
- 105mm f2.8 MF Micro --- 5.5 at infinity, 4.5 close (2)
- 105mm f2.8 AF Micro 1:1 4.7 at infinity, 5 close (2) (too difficult
to focus manually near infinity - focus is too fast)
- 105mm f2.5 AI --------- 5 (several samples)
- 105mm f1.8 ------------ 4.8 (many samples)
- 135mm f3.5 ------------ 4.5 (2)
- 135mm f2.8 non-AI ----- 4.5 (3)
- 135mm f2.8 compact ---- 4.8 (4)
- 135mm f2.8 E ---------- 4.5 (2)
- 135mm f2 -------------- 5 beyond 10', 3 at minimum focus (3)
- 180mm f2.8 ------------ 4.8 (1)
- 180mm f2.8 AF --------- 5.7 (1) (this lens is SUPERB all apertures center-to-corner, all distances [even on short tube])
- 200mm f4 older -------- 4 (several samples)
- 200mm f4 compact ------ 4.5 (several samples) (can be great as macro)
- 200mm f4 MF Micro------ 4 (2)
- 300mm f4.5 ------------ 3.4-4.5 (several samples, some variation)
- 300mm f4.5 ED non-IF--- 5 (1) (particularly good with converters)
- 300mm f4.5 EDIF-------- 4.8 (2)
- 300mm f4 AF ----------- 4.8 (1)
- 300mm f2.8 EDIF MF----- 5 (1) (good with converters)
- 400mm f5.6 EDIF ------- 4.8 (1) (good with converters)
- 400mm f5.6 Sigma APO -- 3.4 (2)
- 400mm f3.5 EDIF ------- 5 (2) (very good with converters)
- 500mm f8 mirror, early- 4.4 (3) (good with TC14B)
- 500mm f8 mirror, late - 3.8 (2)
- 500mm f8 Tamron mirror- 3.3 (1)
- 1000mm f11 mirror ----- 3.5 (1)
- 25-50mm f4 ------------ 4.4 (several samples)
- 28-50mm f3.5 ---------- 4.3 (2) (very sharp, but unusually high field curvature near infinity)
- 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 ------ 4.4 (2)
- 28-135mm f4-4.5 Tamron- 4.6 (2)
- 35-70mm f3.3-4.5 ---- 4.2 (several samples)
- 35-105mm f3.5-4.5 MF -- 3-5 (many samples - this is Nikon's most variable-quality lens [sample variability is generally not a problem
with Nikkor lenses])
- 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 MF -- 4 (2)
- 35-200mm f3.5-4.5 ----- 2-2.8 (two samples, both not good)
- 43-86mm f3.5 ---------- 2-3 (2) (avoid all versions)
- 50-135mm f3.5 --------- 5 (4)
- 70-210mm f4 E --------- 4.5 (several samples, works well on TC14A)
- 70-210mm f3.5 Viv. Ser. I - 3.5-4.2 (3, some variability)
- 70-210mm f4-5.6 AF ---- 3.8 (1)
- 75-150mm f3.5 E ------- 5 (many samples, works well on converters)
- 80-200mm f4.5 --------- 4 (several samples)
- 80-200mm f4 ----------- 4.5 (one sample)
- 80-200mm f2.8 AF non-D- 5 (1) (performance under about 8' at 200mm
goes down, becomes poor at min. focus at wide apertures - otherwise this lens is wonderful) (performs very, very well on TC14C)
- 80-200mm f2.8 Tamron -- 4.8 near infinity, 3 close-focus (1)
- 80-200mm f2.8 Tokina -- 4.8 near infinity, 3 mid distances, very
poor at close-focus (1)
- 100-300mm f5.6 -------- 5 (sev. samples, unusually low distortion)
- 100-500mm f5.6-8 Cosina 4.4 (one sample, very good to just over 400mm,
is decent at 500mm - size and slow speed are its drawbacks)
- TC14A ----------------- 4.8 (2) (short lenses only)
- TC14 and TC14B -------- 4.8 (4) (long lenses only, except with tubes on front for macro work)
- TC14C ----------------- 5 (2) (long lenses only, this unusual converter is darn near perfect on some lenses)
- TC200 and TC201 ------- X (4) (works very well on some lenses,
adequately on some, and poorly on some - is excellent for increasing
magnification in macro work when using small stops)
- TC300 and TC301 ------- 3.5-4.5 (results vary with particular
lens designs, works best with 300mm ED non-IF, and maybe worst with
300mm EDIF - both good lenses on their own)

I have tried many Vivitars, Sigmas, Tokinas, etc., and the less said, the better about most of them, though there were a few decent and a few good lenses, listed above. I have also tried some other camera manufacturers' lenses, which makes me appreciate the general high level of design and the sample-to-sample consistency of Nikkor lenses.

In general, Nikkor lenses 35mm and under perform very well center-
to-corner at all distances by f5.6 (some do well wide-open: the 16mm f3.5, 28mm f2.8 AIS, 28mm f3.5 AI[S], 28mm f3.5 PC [centered], 35mm f1.4, some 35mm f2's, the 35mm PC's [centered]); The 50's perform well by f2, except the f1.2 near infinity; lenses 55mm and over perform well even wide-open, except that non-IF lenses in the 85-180mm range without floating elements have reduced quality of performance at minimum focus distance at wide apertures; zooms generally have remarkably good close-focus performance at focal-lengths over about 50mm, and remarkably uniform performance through the zoom range at mid to long distances.
I would like to go into detail with each lens (center-to-corner
performance at each aperture and focus distance, etc.), but.......
Maybe someday if people want to subscribe to a set of newsletters,
I will get busy writing the details.

PLEASE do not e-mail me for specifics on lenses!
Hope this helps.