Score? Old Nikon 135mm (Page 2): The 226045 is the first model, yours made ca. 1970; the 854... and 878... the 5th, AI model, made between 1977-1981.

ssymeono Loc: St. Louis, Missouri

Pablo8 wrote:

The three 135mm f/2.8 Nikkors that I have, are numbered...226045...854486...and 878571

The 226045 is the first model, yours made ca. 1970; the 854... and 878... the 5th, AI model, made between 1977-1981.

Joel Stuart

These old Nikkor lenses are gems. I came across a Nikkor 35-70, push pull zoom, that is gorgeous. I think I paid under $100

Daroadar Loc: Lees Summit Missouri

I LOVE THAT LENS!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Nice! I remember those plastic cases.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

I almost purchased a near clone of that lens not long ago. A manual only, Mitakon 135mm f2.8 to f22, Nikon mount, and made in China. Sells brand new for $200. I changed my mind on it though. It is said by some photographers, that it is preferred over the 85mm for portraits. Enjoy your Nikon manual lens. You got a real bargain on it. Only $65.

ELNikkor

I loved the "Q" series, my favorite was the 200 f4 with that shiny chrome barrel. Don't remember when/how I got rid of it. Now have the 135 2.8 "E" series; light-weight, sharp, and goes nicely on my D750 in manual mode for walks along the Erie Canal...

Bill P

What a lot of folks don't realize is that back in the day, most all camera makers made superb lenses. Th ebig difference was that each lens was designed by hand by guys with slide rules, so each design had a different signature as each designer would favor one particular characteristic over the others. The big differences were the bodies. There were the top line ones, Canon and Nikon, and all were good, although there is no doubt that Nikon made better wides. Then there were cameras like Pentax, where poor choices, like retaining the screw mount, set the back permanently. But cameras like Minolta, Miranda and others, while the had a richly desereved reputation for unreliability, had superb lenses.

The sleeper was always Olympus. Their lenses are and were as good as anyone elses, often better.

Bill P

What a lot of folks don't realize is that back in the day, most all camera makers made superb lenses. Th ebig difference was that each lens was designed by hand by guys with slide rules, so each design had a different signature as each designer would favor one particular characteristic over the others. The big differences were the bodies. There were the top line ones, Canon and Nikon, and all were good, although there is no doubt that Nikon made better wides. Then there were cameras like Pentax, where poor choices, like retaining the screw mount, set the back permanently. But cameras like Minolta, Miranda and others, while the had a richly desereved reputation for unreliability, had superb lenses.

The sleeper was always Olympus. Their lenses are and were as good as anyone elses, often better.

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Bill P wrote:

.....The sleeper was always Olympus. Their lenses are and were as good as anyone elses, often better.

Amen. My first digital camera was an Olympus C-4040. I still have it. 4 megapixels. Small, but great little walk around camera. I took hundreds of photos with it. My brother shoots Olympus after leaving Canon line.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Jim Eads wrote:

I often peruse various auction websites and on occ... (show quote)

Very nice, too bad it was messed up with the AI conversion though.
I try to get the non-converted ones for my use.

rmdawson3843

Hi
You got a great deal. I have been shooting Nikon since 1965. The 135mm is a very good longer portrait lens. The 2.8 will give you nice bokeh. I already have one so I won't offer you anything for yours. Happy shooting!

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Architect1776 wrote:

Very nice, too bad it was messed up with the AI conversion though.
I try to get the non-converted ones for my use.

Please educate me. What makes it an AI conversion? How do I recognize that on this and other lenses. Is it the double triangular metal tabs on the aperture ring?

alx Loc: NJ

The "holes" in those tabs do signify that the lens was either an AI design or AI converted lens. Lenses with the tab and no holes were pre-AI. The actual difference was that the AI aperture ring was redesigned with a small tab and larger one on the rear face that engaged a lever on the front of the camera lens mount to convey aperture information to the metering system in the camera.

The slot in the tab was used to engage a pin in the Photomic heads on the F and F2 to provide the aperture information to the head to achieve proper metering.

Bear in mind that with the diaphragm fully open until shutter release to facilitate accurate focus, for the metering to work, the lens had to tell the camera meter system both the MAX aperture and current setting to determine the proper exposure setting whether through match needle or automatic operation.

duck72 Loc: Laurel Ridge, PA

I still have mine! It is an even older version that I liked so much I paid the $40 to have it converted for modern use. I don't know how much of a bargain, but as you said, built like a *tank* and takes excellent images if you do your part. The "snap out" sunshade is a nice feature too!

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Jim Eads wrote:

Please educate me. What makes it an AI conversion? How do I recognize that on this and other lenses. Is it the double triangular metal tabs on the aperture ring?

https://www.nikonimgsupport.com/eu/BV_article?articleNo=000039918&configured=1&lang=en_GB