SUBJECTIVE Lens Evaluations (Mostly Nikkors), version 5a - D. Ruether
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here is a list of all Nikkor lenses made for Nikon SLR bodies (with
thanks to Walter Pietsch for his help in assembling this list), plus
some other lenses that fit Nikon bodies and performed well enough to
evaluate. Having used many of the following lenses (often multiple
samples), I cannot resist passing on my experience with these lenses
in the form of a brief discussion of the general characteristics of
Nikkor lens performance by lens groups, a listing of SUBJECTIVE
performance quality numbers for the lenses used (with the number of
samples of each lens used), and notes about the characteristics of
individual lenses that are not covered by the above. If you have used
some of the lenses evaluated, I hope that you will be able to combine
that experience with what is offered here to get a good idea of how
other evaluated lenses perform.

In general: Nikkor lenses are well matched in terms of color
rendition, contrast, and freedom from flare ("Flare" used here
refers to a spreading or spilling of diffuse light into or across
an image - it does not refer to well-defined reflections of the
lens aperture caused by small bright light sources. Only the very
oldest Nikkor designs flare easily with strong backlight, and
only the 35mm f2 MF design remains in the line.) - and they have
remarkably uniform illumination even wide open (except the 18mm
MF's, 21mm f4, and 35mm f2), and remarkably little sample-to-sample
variation (with the exception of some of the 35mm-to-X zooms); the
extreme wide-angles perform well to the corners by f11 (except the
18mm f4 and some of the 20mm's); the moderate wide-angles perform
well center-to-corner at all distances by f5.6 (some perform well
wide-open); the 50's perform well by f2 (except for the f1.2 near
infinity at the edges); the lenses 55mm and over (except the 58mm
speed lenses and zooms) show no linear distortion and perform well
wide-open (except the 60mm AF macro lens near infinity, and the
non-IF lenses without floating elements in the 85-180mm range near
minimum focus distance); the zooms have very good center-to-corner
sharpness by f5.6 (some are very good wide-open), remarkably uniform
performance throughout their zoom ranges at mid to long distances,
remarkably good close-focus performance at focal-lengths over
about 50mm (except the 80-200mm f2.8 AF near 200mm), and
relatively low linear distortion.

The SUBJECTIVE lens evaluation numbers are:
0 -- unable to form an image
1 -- very poor image quality, a "pop bottle bottom"
2 -- low image quality, usable for snapshots
3 -- fair image quality, perhaps very good at one or two apertures
4 -- very good to excellent image quality at most apertures, a
fully professional-level lens, but with some limitations
5 -- excellent image quality, with minor limitations
6 -- near perfect lens with hard to detect shortcomings
7 -- absolutely perfect lens in every respect

(These numbers may be compared with those in Grover Larkins' useful
and valuable summary of lens performance. His list includes a few
short Nikkors and many long Nikkors that I have not covered, plus
many lenses of other brands.)
You will find no "0", "1", "6" or "7" in the list below, but I
wanted 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"). Any lens rated "4" or above is excellent, capable
of fine, professional-level performance with few reservations.
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 number 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. Use the general
notes on Nikkor lens performance and the notes with particular
lenses to get a better overall understanding of how a particular
lens performs. Hope this helps, AND DO NOT TAKE IT TOO SERIOUSLY!
(Photography should be fun!): ^^^


LENSES: RATINGS: NOTES:
(NIKKOR Manual Focus, (number of samples used,
unless otherwise noted) in parentheses)

(The 6, 7.5, 8, 10, 13, 15 [f5.6], 16 [f3.5], and some mirror
Nikkors have built-in filters.)

- 6mm f5.6 ------------- 4 (1) (no TTL viewing, no accurate v.f.,
fits only on bodies with mirror lock-up, 220 degree circular image -
the 6mm Nikkor is the widest fisheye-perspective lens made for 35mm)
- 6mm f2.8 ------------- (untried)(very large, heavy, and expensive)
- 7.5mmf5.6 ------------- 4 (1) (no TTL viewing, though the
separate v.f. is remarkably accurate, fits only on bodies with
mirror lock-up, 180 degree circular image)
- 8mm f8 --------------- (untried) (first 35mm version of 180
degree circular fisheye, had only a centering finder)
- 8mm f4 Sigma --------- 4.4 (1) (c. 165 degree circular image,
better in color than B & W, good wide open in color, compact size,
good on TC14A by f8 [though the Nikkor 8mm is ultimately better])
- 8mm f2.8 ------------- 4.6 (2) (180 degree circular image,
equally good in B & W and color, not great at wide apertures,
excellent sharpness to edge of coverage by f11, physically big
and heavy, works well with TC14A at f11-16)
- 10mm f5.6 OP ---------- (untried) (orthographic projection, so
finder designed for the 7.5mm lens is inaccurate in perspective)
- 13mm f5.6 ------------- (untried) (large, heavy, very expensive -
the 13mm is the widest rectangular-perspective lens made for 35mm)
- 15mm f5.6 ------------- 3-4.5 (several samples, somewhat variable,
very low linear distortion, even center to corner performance, very
even illumination [in common with all the Nikkor wides except the
18mm MF's, the 21mm, and the 35mm f2 MF at wide apertures], slightly
yellow color cast compared with other Nikkors, best at f11-16, need
to open 1/2 stop from meter reading, corners improve slightly in
B & W using yellow, orange, or red filter)
- 15mm f3.5 ------------- 4 (2) (poor corner performance in B & W,
good in color)
- 16mm f3.5 ------------- 5.5 (3) (wonderful lens, can be used wide
open, works very well w. TC14A by f5.6 for a great people super-wide)
- 16mm f2.8 ------------- 4 (3) (works very well w. TC14A by f5.6,
180 degree full frame image [slightly wider than 16mm f3.5 with 170])
- 16mm f2.8 AF D -------- (same optics as 16mm f2.8 MF?)
- 18mm f4 --------------- 3 (2) (poor edges and corners)
- 18mm f3.5 ------------- 4.4 (2) (better in color than B & W)
- 18mm f2.8 AF D -------- (untried)
- 20mm f4 --------------- 3.2 (2) (tiny)
- 20mm f3.5 non-AI ------ 3.5 (1) (72mm filter version)
- 20mm f3.5 ------------- 3-3.5 (several samples, 52mm filter version,
some sample variation, tiny)
- 20mm f2.8 AIS --------- 5 (3) (excellent performance by f5.6)
- 20mm f2.8 AF D -------- (same optics as 20mm f2.8 AIS)
- 21mm f4 --------------- 4 (3) (no TTL viewing [though the
separate v.f. is remarkably accurate], no linear distortion, very
even center to corner sharpness, some tendency to flare, some
illumination roll-off toward the edges and corners, extremely compact
when mounted on the camera, will fit only the F and F2 bodies)
- 24mm f2.8 non-AI ------ 4 (2)
- 24mm f2.8 AI ---------- 4.5 (many samples, needs shade)
- 24mm f2.8 AF D -------- (same optics as 24mm f2.8 AI)
- 24mm f2 --------------- 4 (1) (low contrast at wide apertures)
- 28mm f4 PC ------------ 5 (3) (better off-axis performance
than 28mm f3.5 PC - all of the Nikkor PC lenses will illuminate
the complete frame, even with the most extreme movement [beyond
the recommended shift limit], but all require f16-22 to sharpen
the far edge of coverage [f8-11 is sufficient to sharpen the top
corners of a horizontal frame with full rise applied] - metering
with all bodies except the F3 must be done with the lens unshifted)
- 28mm f3.5 PC ---------- 4 (3) (better wide aperture performance
with no shift than the 28mm f4 PC, but off axis it is not up to f4)
- 28mm f3.5 non-AI ------ 3 (3) (vignettes with any filter)
- 28mm f3.5 AI ---------- 5 (4) (good wide open, very even center
to corner performance)
- 28mm f2.8 early ------- 3.8 (2) (unusually resistent to flare,
poor corners until well stopped down)
- 28mm f2.8 AIS --------- 5 (4) (good wide open)
- 28mm f2.8 E ----------- 2.8-3.5 (of several tried, one good by
mid apertures, the others were poor)
- 28mm f2.8 AF non-D ---- (same optics as 28mm f2.8 E)
- 28mm f2.8 AF D -------- (untried) (according to W. Pietsch, the
AF D has added a sixth element, which may improve performance)
- 28mm f2 --------------- 4-4.5 (many samples, some sample variation)
- 28mm f1.4 AF D -------- (untried)
- 35mm f3.5 PC ---------- 3.5 (1)
- 35mm f2.8 PC non-AI --- 4 (3) (non-AI PC's generally fit
AI cameras, though they nudge the coupling tab a bit - check the
tab position after the lens is mounted to be sure the tab was not
moved during mounting or exposures will be inaccurate)
- 35mm f2.8 PC AIS ------ 5 (3) (excellent to the corners wide
open shifted up to about 3mm - the best performance of all the
Nikkor 35's at f2.8, good on TC14A with c. 5mm or less shift
[effectively 7mm] when not stopped down beyond about f5.6)
- 35mm f2.8 non-AI ------ 3.8 (1)
- 35mm f2.8 AI ---------- (untried)
- 35mm f2.5 E ----------- 4 (2)
- 35mm f2 --------------- 3.5-4.5 (many samples, some sample
variation - the best are good wide open, though all show illumination
fall off at wide apertures, and have some tendency to flare w. strong
backlight)
- 35mm f2 AF D ---------- 4.2 (1)
- 35mm f1.4 ------------- 4.5 (3) (good sharpness wide open at
mid-long distances, reasonably good contrast and reasonably even
illumination wide open)
- 45mm f2.8 GN ---------- (untried) (aperture can vary with distance
setting for use with manual flashes - guide number is set on lens)
- 50mm f2 --------------- 4.5 (several samples)
- 50mm f1.8 AIS metal --- 4.8 (many samples, very even center to
corner performance at all apertures, good wide open)
- 50mm f1.8 E, plastic AIS, compact metal AIS - 4.8 (many samples,
good wide open, no linear distortion)
- 50mm f1.8 AF ---------- (same optics as 50mm f1.8 E)
- 50mm f1.4 non-AI ------ 3.8 (many samples, low contrast wide open,
though excellent at middle and smaller apertures [wide apertures
can be sharpened with a red filter in B & W, though illumination
fall-off shows until about f4)
- 50mm f1.4 AIS --------- 4.5 (many samples, very good by f2
[short of corners])
- 50mm f1.4 AF D -------- (same optics as 50mm f1.4 AIS)
- 50mm f1.2 ------------- 5 at 4 to 15 feet or so, otherwise 4-4.5
(several samples, excellent center to corners wide open near optimum
focus distance, with declining quality at edges as approach infinity)
- 55mm f4 UV ------------ (untried) (may exist only as prototype)
- 55mm f3.5 Micro preset (same optics as 55mm f3.5 Micro)
- 55mm f3.5 Micro ------- 5 close, 3.5 near infinity (several
samples, noticeable field curvature near infinity, 1:2)
- 55mm f2.8 Micro MF ---- 5 at infinity, 4 close (several samples,
the MF version tends to acquire oil on the diaphram leaves, 1:2)
- 55mm f2.8 AF ---------- (same optics as 55mm f2.8 MF, 1:2)
- 55mm f1.2 ------------- 3.5 (3)
- 58mm f1.4 non-AI ------ (untried)
- 58mm f1.2 Noct -------- 3.5 (1, possibly defective, wide apertures
poor, though performance excellent by f5.6)
- 60mm f2.8 Micro AF D -- 3 at infinity, 5.5 close (2) (poor at
infinity at wide apertures, though excellent by f11 - the best of
the macro lenses in macro range, works very well with converters
in macro range, 1:1)
- 80mm f2.8 AF ---------- (untried) (early AF lens for F3AF)
- 85mm f2 --------------- 5 (several samples)
- 85mm f1.8 non-AI ------ 5 (2) (very good wide open, flares
easily with backlight)
- 85mm f1.8 AF D -------- 5 (1) (slightly better in corners wide
open near minimum focus distance than near infinity, good wide
aperture close focus performance)
- 85mm f1.4 ------------- 5 (4) (good wide open, floating element
maintains good performance down to minimum focus distance)
- 85mm f1.4 AF D -------- (untried)
- 90mm f2.5 Vivitar Ser I 4.8 (3) (flares easily near infinity,
this lens and the 60mm are the best of the macros I have tried for
magnifications near 2X, requires skylight filter to match color
with Nikkors, works well with Nikkor 6T achromat and converters,
1:2 [comes with an optical 1:1 adapter])
- 90mm f2.5 Sigma macro - 4.7 (2) (odd center flare spot with some
converter-tube combinations - the achromat that comes with this lens
is excellent and works well with non-macro lenses [Sigma achromat +
200mm f4 Nikkor compact non-macro lens at f11-16 + TC200 or PN-11
makes a very sharp macro combination for about 3X magnification],
1:2 [comes with an achromat for 1:1])
- 100mm f2.8 E ---------- 4.5 (2)
- 105mm f4.5 UV --------- (untried) (lens designed to pass ultraviolet)
- 105mm f4 preset ------- (same optics as 105mm f4 Micro)
- 105mm f4 Micro -------- 3.5 (2) (not great at wide apertures, 1:2)
- 105mm f4 short mount -- 3.5 (1) (same optics as 105mm f4 Micro)
- 105mm f2.8 MF Micro --- 5.5 at infinity, 4.5 close (2) (the best
center to corner performance at infinity at f2.8 of all lenses have
tried 85mm and over [with the possible exception of the 180mm AF] -
this is a great aerial photography lens, 1:2)
- 105mm f2.8 AF D Micro - 4 at infinity, 5 close (3) (too difficult
to focus manually near infinity - focus is too fast, alignment
problems noted in two samples near infinity, 1:1)
- 105mm f2.5 early ------ 4 (several samples, small rear element)
- 105mm f2.5 later ------ 5 (several samples, large rear element)
- 105mm f2 DC AF D ------ (untried)
- 105mm f1.8 ------------ 4.8 (many samples)
- 120mm f4 Medical ------ (untried) (needs power pack for ring flash)
- 135mm f4 short mount -- (untried) (1)
- 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)
(very sharp center to corner at f2 at mid to long distances with some
very slight field curvature barely noticeable at wide apertures near
infinity, performance is poor near minimum focus at wide apertures)
- 135mm f2 DC AF D ------ (untried)
- 150mm f5.6 Vivitar VHE enlarging lens (actually, a Schneider
Componon-S in Viv. clothes) on PB-4 tilt-shift bellows --- 4 (1)
(needs strong skylight filter to match Nikon color, provides the
35mm user with a mini long lens view camera of good quality, 52mm
filter size, lens press-fits into a BR-2a ring to add a Nikon mount)
- 180mm f2.8 non-ED ----- 4.8 (1)
- 180mm f2.8 ED --------- 5 (1)
- 180mm f2.8 EDIF AF D -- 5.5 (1) (this lens is SUPERB at all
apertures, center-to-corner, all distances [even on short tube])
- 180mm f2.5 preset ----- (untried) (adapted from rf to SLR)
- 200mm f5.6 Medical ---- (untried) (needs power pack for ring flash)
- 200mm f4 older -------- 4 (several samples)
- 200mm f4 compact ------ 4.5 (several samples, can be great
as a macro lens [the best for about 3X that I have used - see
90mm Sigma comments])
- 200mm f4 MF Micro------ 4 (2) (slight sample variation, 1:2)
- 200mm f4 EDIF AF D Micro(untried) (1:1)
- 200mm f3.5 EDIF AF ---- (untried) (early AF lens for F3AF)
- 200mm f2 EDIF --------- (untried) (all of the fast EDIF Nikkors
have good reputations)
- 300mm f4.5 ------------ 3.6-4.5 (several samples, some variation)
- 300mm f4.5 ED non-IF--- 5 (1) (particularly good with converters)
- 300mm f4.5 EDIF-------- 4.8 (2) (good on tubes, but not good with
converters)
- 300mm f4 EDIF AF ------ 4.8 (1)
- 300mm f2.8 ------------ (untried)
- 300mm f2.8 EDIF ------ 5 (1) (very good with converters)
- 300mm f2.8 EDIF AF ---- (untried)
- 300mm f2.8 EDIF AFI D - (untried) (internal focus motor)
- 300mm f2 EDIF --------- (untried) (came with the wonderful TC14C)
- 350mm f4.5 semi-auto -- (untried)
- 400mm f5.6 ------------ (untried)
- 400mm f5.6 ED non-IF -- (untried)
- 400mm f5.6 EDIF ------- 4.8 (1) (good with converters)
- 400mm f5.6 Sigma APO -- 3.4 (2) (decent, but not a great performer)
- 400mm f4.5 non-AI(ED) - (untried) (came as lens head that fit a
standard focusing unit common to 400mm, 600mm, 800mm, and 1200mm
lenses of the time [the 400mm, 600mm, 800mm, 1200mm heads were
available as either ED or non-ED)
- 400mm f3.5 EDIF ------- 5 (2) (very good with converters)
- 400mm f2.8 EDIF ------- (untried)
- 400mm f2.8 EDIF AFI D - (untried) (internal focus motor)
- 500mm f8 mirror, early- 4 (3) (good with TC14B, performs better
near infinity than near minimum focus distance, rate film speed 1/2
stop lower when using this lens, there is a moderate center "hot
spot" as there is with most mirrors [using the TC14 reduces this])
- 500mm f8 mirror, late - 3.6 (2) (very close focus, best
performance near middle of focus range)
- 500mm f8 Tamron mirror- 3.3 (1)
- 500mm f5 mirror ------- (untried)
- 500mm f4 EDIF P ------- (untried) (MF, but contains AF electronics)
- 500mm f4 EDIF AFI D --- (untried) (internal focus motor)
- 600mm f5.6 non-AI(ED) - (untried) (see 400mm f4.5 notes)
- 600mm f5.6 EDIF ------- (untried)
- 600mm f4 EDIF --------- (untried)
- 600mm f4 EDIF AFI D --- (untried) (internal focus motor)
- 800mm f8 non-AI(ED) --- (untried) (see 400mm f4.5 notes)
- 800mm f8 EDIF --------- (untried)
- 800mm f5.6 EDIF ------- (untried)
- 1000mm f11 mirror ----- 3.3 (1) (it is very difficult to use a
lens this long beyond a few hundred feet because the air qualities
have a great affect on the image quality)
- 1000mm f6.3 mirror ---- (untried)
- 1200mm f11 non-AI(ED) - (untried) (see 400mm f4.5 notes)
- 1200mm f11 EDIF ------- (untried)
- 2000mm f11 mirror ----- (untried) (very large, very heavy, very
expensive)
- 20-35mm f2.8 AF D ----- (untried) (not much range)
- 24-50mm f3.3-4.5 AF D - (untried)
- 25-50mm f4 ------------ 4.2 (several samples)
- 28-45mm f4.5 ---------- 3.8 (1) (slow, not much range)
- 28-50mm f3.5 ---------- 4.2 (2) (very sharp, but unusually high
field curvature noticeable at mid to long distances)
- 28-70mm f3.5-4.5 AF D - 4 (1)
- 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 AF D - (untried) (there may be two versions)
- 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 ------ 4 (2)
- 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 AF --- (same optics as 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 MF)
- 28-135mm f4-4.5 Tamron- 4.6 (2) (very even performance center to
corners at all apertures and distances except macro under about 50mm,
very slightly lower contrast over all than Nikon lenses, high linear
distortion near long end, must be used with the large shade made for
it, needs skylight filter to match Nikon color)
- 35-70mm f3.5 (72 filt)- (untried) (not much range)
- 35-70mm f3.5 (62 filt)- (untried) (unusually low distortion)
- 35-70mm f3.3-4.5 ------ 3.8-4 (several samples, slight sample
variation)
- 35-70mm F3.3-4.5 AF --- (same optics as 35-70mm f3.3-4.5 MF)
- 35-70mm f2.8 AF D ----- 3.8-4.2 (2)(some sample variation)
- 35-80mm f4-5.6 AF D --- (untried)
- 35-105mm f3.5-4.5 ----- 3-5 (many samples - this may be Nikon's
most variable-quality lens [sample variation is generally not a
problem with Nikkor lenses, except with the 35mm-to-X zooms], a good
sample is excellent at all apertures center to corners except near
infinity near 105mm, macro is excellent, must be used with the short
shade made for it)
- 35-105mm f3.5-4.5 AF -- (same optics as 35-105mm f3.5-4.5 MF)
- 35-105mm f3.5-4.5 AF D (untried)
- 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 ----- 3.6-4 (3) (not wonderful wide open, but
can be excellent by mid apertures, some sample variation)
- 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 AF -- (same optics as 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 MF)
- 35-200mm f3.5-4.5 ----- 2-2.8 (2) (considerable sample variation,
the two samples were different and both were poor)
- 36-72mm f3.5 E -------- 3.5 (2) (somewhat lower contrast than is
usual for Nikkor lenses)
- 43-86mm f3.5 ---------- 2-3 (2) (late version better than early,
but still poor - Yuck! Pah! Bleah!)
- 50-135mm f3.5 --------- 5 (4) (non-rotating front, good wide
open, useable with converters)
- 50-200mm f3.5-4.5 Sigma APO - 4 (1)
- 50-300mm f4.5 --------- (untried)
- 50-300mm f4.5 ED ------ (untried)
- 70-210mm f4-5.6 AF D -- 3.5-3.8 (3)(corners at short end are below
average for Nikkor zooms in this range, a little sample variability)
- 70-210mm f4 E --------- 4.5 (several samples, good wide open,
works well on TC14A)
- 70-210mm f4 AF -------- (same optics as 70-210mm f4 E)
- 70-210mm f3.5 Viv. Ser. I - 3.5-4.2 (3) (some sample variation)
- 75-150mm f3.5 E ------- 5 (many samples, works well on converters,
is very good wide open and throughout its focus and zoom ranges)
- 75-300mm f4.5-5.6 AF -- 4.5 (1) (good wide open)
- 80-200mm f4.5 non-AI -- 4 (1) (larger than later version)
- 80-200mm f4.5 --------- 4.2 (several samples, lower quality at long
end than more modern Nikkor zooms in this range, but still very good)
- 80-200mm f4 ----------- 4.5 (one sample, good wide open)
- 80-200mm f2.8 ED ------ (untried) (larger and heavier than the AF's)
- 80-200mm f2.8 EDAF non-D - 5 (1) (performance under about 8'
at 200mm declines, becomes poor at min. focus at wide apertures -
otherwise this lens is wonderful even wide open, performs very well
on TC14C, well on TC14B [the length and mass help me hand hold this
lens down to 1/60 at 200mm - something impossible for me with the
200mm fixed, or 70-210mm f4], a heavy lens with no tripod socket)
- 80-200mm f2.8 EDAF D -- (untried)
- 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) (the Tokina and Tamron are older versions)
- 85-250mm f4-4.5 ------- (untried) (very large and heavy early zoom)
- 85-250mm f4 ----------- (untried)
- 100-300mm f5.6 -------- 5 (sev. samples, unusually low distortion
[slight barrel to 135mm, then no distortion to 300mm], good wide open,
not good with converters)
- 100-500mm f5.6-8 Cosina - 4.5 (1) (very good to just over 400mm,
is decent at 500mm - large size and slow speed are its drawbacks)
- 180-600mm f8 ED ------- (untried)
- 200-600mm f9.5-10.5 --- (untried)
- 200-600mm f9.5 ED ----- (untried)
- 200-400mm f4 ED ------- (untried) (has an excellent reputation)
- 360-1200mm f11 ED ----- (untried)
- 1200-1700mm f5.6-8 ED - (untried) (large, heavy, VERY expensive)
- TC14A ----------------- 4.8 (2) (short lenses only, works well
with most lenses it fits that are 200mm and shorter)
- TC14 and TC14B -------- 4.8 (4) (long lenses only, except with
tubes on front of converter for macro work)(TC14 is AI, TC14B is AIS)
- TC14C ----------------- 5 (2) (long lenses only, this unusual
converter is near perfect on some lenses, and out-performs the
excellent TC14B on all lenses they will fit, except the older 500mm
f8 mirror [The 80-200mm f2.8 AF non-D with the TC14C by f4 is as
good as prime lenses, and betters the excellent 100-300mm f5.6 at
similar apertures])
- TC14E ----------------- (untried) (designed for AFI lenses)
- TC16 ------------------ (untried) (designed for F3AF)
- TC16A ----------------- X (1) (adds AF ability to MF lenses
f2.8 and faster, not as good optically as the TC14's)
- TC-1, TC200, TC201 ---- X (4) (works well on some lenses,
adequately on some, and poorly on some - is excellent for increasing
magnification in macro work when using small stops)
(TC-1 is non-AI, TC200 is AI, TC201 is AIS)
- Vivitar 2x Macro Conv.- X (2) (same comments as TC200, and has
a built in focusing mount - and is slightly sharper in center,
slightly less sharp in corners than TC200)
- TC-2, TC300, TC301 ---- 3.5-4.5 (3)(long lenses only, except
with tubes on front of converter for macro work, results vary
with particular lens designs [works best with 300mm f4.5 ED non-IF,
and maybe worst with the 300mm f4.5 EDIF - both good lenses alone])
(TC-2 is non-AI, TC300 is AI, TC301 is AIS)
- TC20E ----------------- (untried) (designed for AFI lenses)

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 that I have tried, 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. (Even the cheaper lenses in the Nikon line are
optically good, though they may be mechanically lower in quality than
the mid and high priced lenses in the line.)

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!

Consider all of the above to be copyrighted material (1996 -
David Ruether) which may be used freely for non-commercial purposes.
If this material is reproduced, reproduce it as is and as a whole
(unexerpted), including this paragraph - and please let me know
where it appears. Thanks.
Hope This Helps
David Ruether ( d_ruether@hotmail.com )