crack-sharp - despite old age

Hello,
the AF 85 / 1.8 is simply my reference to the D5000. It is known that it (D5000 / D3000, etc. for example) must at all Nikon cameras adjust the focus manually without internal drive. Nevertheless, the reason is not far, not to use it. I've owned it for my analog days and am therefore accustomed to ask, focus manually (never had an analog AF camera). The friction is getting used to low because the focus manually goes very smoothly.

The lens is even at full aperture quite well spicy (but I prefer the MF 1.4er), but from Aperture 4 I would say it is absolute top class. It currently represents my reference to the 5000 to compare different lenses so. In the center here is very often a similar result out for example in comparison to various VR zoom lenses. So much difference here is not so, do not tackle at least on the D5000. I consider it as a practitioner still really serious discussion of splitting hairs. But the corners! In the corners you see in panel 4 only very very slightly, at 5.6 already actually no more difference to the center. Wow! Chromatic aberration - what's that? That it can be found easily barreled known, but it's too little to be deducted here appreciably points. It does not even bother me in the last 15 years or would have noticed me negatively.
Sure, if it is sinister, then the camera at ISO 800 and this good piece clamped - Aperture 2.8 when it comes and the world of available light photography is fully in order.

The usual on APS-C cameras extension factor of 1.5 makes it about the 125mm lens. I used to - like to use the 135-focal length (KB) - in contrast to many of my friends. That has not changed to this day. So this lens is still an integral part in my camera bag.

Better photo's in normal telephoto range can not do - technically at least :-) - and also actually very inexpensive, I think. Thus, there is really no reason not to take it with a D200 / D300 etc. into consideration. Looking at the fact that my buddy is usually a very short time spans to its D200 and just goes out when he is with me :-)

For all those who think about the comparison to 1.4er: I prefer the AF 1.8er 1.4er to MF. MF is "out of scope" today - already clear, but I have always preferred the 1.8er mainly due to the lower weight at nearly equal optical power. In addition, the difference in price is so high - even today that there would be no more reason for the 1.4er for me.

My good deal is now 15 years of age or older, do not remember exactly. In 15 years, no failure, currently 3 klitze small speck of dust in Linsenweg, no mold, nothing. Mechanically always properly (distance ring and aperture), the rubber ring is absolutely ok, no service to this day necessary. So must be built and otherwise a Nikon. It came to me then something "cheap" before. The comparison with the MF lenses let's leave before outside. Still, my concerns were unfounded.

Hope, the summary of 15 years of experience has helped.

Greeting, Rounder6