Home   Donate   New   Search   Gallery   How-To   Books   Links   Workshops   About   Contact

Nikon 200mm f/4
NIKKOR-Q (1961-1976)
© 2005 KenRockwell.com

Please help KenRockwell..com

Nikon Nikkor-Q 200mm f/4. get it used here

 

2005    More Nikon Reviews     Nikon Lens Reviews

Nikon 200mm Lens Center Sharpness Compared

Nikon 200mm Corner Sharpness Compared

 

Other Nikon 200mm f/4 lenses:

200mm Micro-NIKKOR AF-D (1993-today, AF)

200mm f/4 AI-s Micro-NIKKOR (1978-2005) (1978-2005, manual focus)

200mm f/4 AI-s (1981-1996)

200mm f/4 AI (1977-1981)

200mm f/4 Q (1961-1976) (this lens)

 

Introduction

adorama

 
B&H Photo - Video - Pro Audio

Ritz Camera

I personally buy from Adorama, Amazon, Ritz, B&H, Calumet and J&R. I can't vouch for ads below.

 

This lens, introduced in 1961, is a bargain and a great performer.

I got my first one, in really beat up and ugly shape, for $10. No, it wasn't the one you see above. I sold mine before I made this website. This one above was donated to me by Guy Prince in California.

Of course you need to have it converted to AI for about $25 before you can mount it on a modern camera like a D70. The photo above is of a converted one.

The FE, FM and F4 were the last cameras that can use these lenses without modification. The F6 can be modified for these ancient lenses.

The optics are the same from 1961 - 1976. Multicoating was added in 1973, thus the added "C" designation.

 

Specifications

It has four elements in four groups.

This ancient version is a little bigger and heavier than the AI versions. The Q weighs 630g and is 163.0mm long by 72mm in diameter. I measured 6-1/2" long and 18-1/2 oz.

It has a swell built-in telescoping hood (you can't get that on the 80-200 AFS) and takes normal 52mm filters. Of course it's built like they used to: all studly metal.

It focuses down to about 6 or 7 feet; not very close. That's the main optical disadvantage of these old lenses.

This ancient lens only has a six-bladed diaphragm and stops down to f/32, a stop smaller than the 80-200 AF-S that cost me over one-hundred times as much.

 

Performance

Optically I found mine to be as good as the newer AI and AI-s versions, even thought the Q version has only four elements in four groups while the AI versions have five.

It has no distortion, again superior to zooms.

It is single-coated in blue. This probably explains its very slightly warm color balance. I actually prefer this color balance to the neutral balance of most modern Nikkors.

It has slight magenta/green secondary lateral chromatic aberration visible in the lab but not in my photos.

It was reviewed in the May, 1962 Modern Photography magazine, page 79. They found optimum performance at f/11.

By aperture:

f/4: It's sharp all over. There is some of the usual light falloff.
f/5.6: the falloff is gone and it's sharp all over. I didn't see any improvement by stopping down.

 

Recommendations

Optically this is a swell lens. It's not difficult to make a sharp 200mm f/4 lens. The only things that have been improved in the past 40 years have been to make them smaller, focus closer and zoom.

This is a perfectly good lens if you want a very sharp telephoto. Heck, it's a much better performer than the 70-300 ED many amateurs are buying today; it just lacks the convenience.

Go here if you need to have it AI converted for use on modern cameras. John converted my lens and did a very careful job.

 

PLUG         top

I support my growing family through this website.

If you find this as helpful as a book you might have had to buy or a workshop you may have had to take, feel free to help me continue helping everyone.

If you've gotten your gear through one of my links or helped otherwise, you're family. It's great people like you who allow me to keep adding to this site full-time. Thanks!

If you haven't helped yet, please do, and consider helping me with a gift of $5.00.

The biggest help is to use these links to Adorama, Amazon, B&H, Calumet, Ritz, J&R and when you get your goodies. It costs you nothing and is a huge help to me. eBay is always a gamble, but all the other places have the best prices and service, which is why I've used them since before this website existed. I recommend them all personally.

Thanks for reading!

Ken

Home   Donate   New   Search   Gallery   How-To   Books   Links   Workshops   About   Contact