AF DC-Nikkor 105mm f/2.0D and AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D lenses:

<p>That is another thing I meant to say. You are not supposed to select a DC value higher than your current aperture. If that's the look you're after, by all means, go for it, but that's not how the DC ring is meant to be used and Nikon says this in the manual of the lens as well. You will get a soft image, and it's not a malfunction of the lens. I actually notice that I can easily get a soft image even when the DC setting exactly matches my aperture, so I will not move the DC ring wide open. I might move it to 2 once I am stopped down, but will only move it to 4 once the aperture is stopped down <em><strong>beyond</strong></em> that. This is just my personal habit though, and according to Nikon, you are supposed to get the best results (probably meaning smoothest bokeh with a sharp image in the focal plane) when the setting on the DC ring matches your selected aperture.</p>

<p>Bill, sorry if I offended you, it's just that that's where I first read this, and I find it unlikely that someone else would come up with the same incorrect explanation independent of him. To be fair, I almost believed his version too at first. Even though we know what that symbol is for, I am still curious what the number "10" signifies in it. I do live in China, and a lot (but not all) of my electonics have that symbol on them.</p>

<p>Ilkka, it takes time for these whiskers to develop. No, I don't have any photos of Nikkor lenses with this problem but it's inherent in lead-free solder. Proper coatings are one solution and are discussed in the link I previously provided. </p>

<p>What we don't know is to what extent manufacturers of consumer goods are taking preventive measures, nor can we rely upon manufacturer-affiliated repair shops to accurately report on this sort of problem when it crops up. On the other hand, after over 9 years there is certainly no epidemic of lens electronics failures to point to, which suggests the problem may be fairly limited in scope in that arena. </p>

<p>All the sources I've seen (including the one I linked) state that the reason for lead-free solder is to keep lead out of landfills out of concern for possible groundwater contamination. Some of these sources also claim that concern is misplaced due to lead's relative insolubility, but such explanations that I've seen are relatively qualitative and don't actually work out likely consequent microdoses for a substance that poisons in subtle but harmful ways even in very small amounts.</p>

<p>I apologize for my original post which was simplistic and inaccurate. I actually had done some online research on this issue years ago, but by the time I wrote that post I was operating mainly off memory and without adequate updated research.</p>

<p>Michael said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>You do realize that as you make the DC affect stronger with out stopping the lens down it turns into a soft focus lens.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah . . . I think it's a cool effect (especially when back-lit), one that's difficult to replicate in software. I also used to own the Mamiya soft-focus lens for my RB67, many years ago, which I really liked.</p>

<p>Oliver said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>That is another thing I meant to say. You are not supposed to select a DC value higher than your current aperture.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, I'm aware of that. I deliberately set the R-value past the aperture setting in the posted images to demonstrate the exaggerated spherical aberration possible with this lens. For normal photography with this lens, I typically match the R-value to the aperture value. According to my initial tests when I first bought my DC-105 several years ago, it's sharpest at R-2 when wide-open.</p>

<p>By the way, that was the first time I mounted my DC-105 on my Df. I had to dial in a +15 AF correction on that body (now, it's spot-on). The DC-135 seemed to need an out-of-range +25 correction on my Df. Weird that you had the exact opposite experience with your 105/135, Oliver, but, I guess not all that surprising, given the idiosyncratic nature of these lenses. I do, however, also have a lower AF hit-rate on my DC-105 than, say, my AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G.</p>

<p>Ralph, I shoot the 135 dc on a d700. Yes there is some CA. Post usually takes care of it. I can always convert to b&w. But the oof is worth it to me. Sharp, mine is sharp as a tack. For head/torso shots, I need to stop down to 2.8-3.2 to get both eyes sharp when head is turned. That corrects most of the CA. When I back up for full length, Like most lenses, it isn't at it's best wide open but the bokeh is spectacular and the dc ring goes to 5.6. Match the aperture with the dc ring. I don't feel I have to shoot it wide open to get the great bokeh and not alot of change as you move up to f/4. As Alton Brown of Good eats likes to say, your patience will be rewarded. If I have room to use this lens, I will use it. My other preference is the 85 1.4 G. I often add a vari nd to get wider apertures in full daylight. I also tend to shoot slower shutter speeds and light my subject and the bg's are stunning. When I up grade to a higher resolution body, I will keep the d700 for this lens and hopefully, before the d700 becomes a paper weight, Nikon will have updated this lens. VR, would be nice, coatings and sealing would be nice as well. Just recharged the dessicant tin I keep with it. But right now, it is my lens of choice. Shots with this lens consistently produce oohs and aahs from clients. Beauty is in the eye of the checkbook holder as Bambi Cantrell says. If it is acceptable with a d810 36mp, I would prefer to shoot this lens and crop than lug that 70-200 beast all day and zoom. </p>

<p>Ralph, here's an example, f/4 hand held 1/20 sec. Shoot through umbrella right. </p><div></div>

<p>Ralph, in the original the subject is tack sharp. Perhaps reduced this too much?</p>

<p>Test #3: Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D +20 AF correction.</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-TEST4-Df-2.png" alt="" width="700" height="466" /><br /> Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-0; +20 AF correction.</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-4-1-100.png" alt="" width="701" height="468" /><br /> [100% crop]</p>

<p>Test #3: Nikon D800E + AF DC-Nikkor f/2.0D +15 AF correction.<br>

<br /> <img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-TEST4-D800E-4-700.png" alt="" /><br /> Nikon D800E + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-0; +15 AF correction.</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-4-D800E-1.png" alt="" /><br /> [100%-crop]</p>

<p>Shot this today with my D4 and 135 f/2 DC. No focus fine tune no DC adjustment. This was close to the minimum focus distance but in my experience this lens just works.<br>

Full image<br>

Crop<br>

<p>Michael, those do look sharp. Does everyone agree that the above re-shot sample images from my DC-135 look about as sharp as it gets? I think my earlier DC-135 tests were flawed somehow.</p>

<p>Ralph</p>

<p>I think your second test looks better then the first test. </p>

<p>AF DC-Nikkor 105mm f/2.0D + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D:</p>

<p>More days of random tests, and after shooting static objects in my office, my DC-135 actually appears pretty darn sharp wide-open (LoCA issues aside), so it looks like I'll be keeping it. I've concluded that my initial tests suffered from poor AF-acquisition (for whatever reason), and not a deficiency in the lens' optics. As I said, cosmetically, the lens is really beautiful, and I'm not likely to get another copy in such pristine condition:</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-lens-2-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="467" /></p>

<p>As legend has it, the DC-series lenses have been credited with producing alluring images with unique character, so owning both focal lengths for someone who shoots a lot of people seems a good bet. I was at a 2016 Olympics promotional event last Friday, hoping to snap a pic of the gorgeous Alex Morgan on my set-up after our interview, but I could only manage a picture of my soundman (note that the background is only a few feet from the subject):</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC105-olympics-2-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="466" /><br /> Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 105mm f/2.0D: f/2.0; DC ring @ neutral setting.<br /> Primary key: KinoFlo Diva-Lite 200 (3,200K) + 30° honeycomb.</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-mom-2-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="466" /><br /> Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0; DC ring @ neutral setting.<br /> Primary key: Window light (indirect daylight).</p>

<p>Above is a picture of my mom taken this afternoon. Although the source is super-soft (a large array of indirect sunlit-windows), the uber-shallow depth-of-field helped to effect a much kinder rendition to her skin. My Sigma 150mm f/2.8 was not so kind, revealing a razor-sharp field of unflattering texture. For young models with perfect make-up, it'll be my Sigma 150mm. For others, it'll be the AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D.</p>

<p>Goals and expectations:</p>

<p>My original objective in getting the DC-series f/2.0 lenses was for their shallow depth-of-field capabilities. After some initial struggles with both my AF technique, and dialing in the proper amount of AF-correction, I'm now a bit more sure about their operation. I'm anxious to see the difference in background de-focus on the DC-135, compared with the DC-105, as soon as I can get a willing subject and a suitable exterior location. Short-focus distance tests look great, but the real test will be full-length shots with the lens a few dozen feet from the subject.</p>

<p>As I said, my razor-sharp Sigma 150mm f/2.8 will be reserved for subjects with youthful skin and expertly applied make-up. Also, the Sigma's actual maximum aperture is f/3.0, so it's not as shallow-focus capable as the f/2.0 DC lenses. Although my AF-S Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8G VR I is an excellent portrait lens with beautiful bokeh, it's just too long and heavy for extended handheld work.</p>

<p>While the DC-series may not offer the ultimate in sharpness wide-open, as I mentioned before, they offer other capabilities not easily replicated in software. And, while the LoCA is less noticeable (and sometimes non-existent) on human subjects (though, I have noticed the magenta/green fringes on eyelashes at times), these lenses offer unique capabilities, arguably worth their perceived weaknesses for some, if not most. As an added plus, the DC lenses "feel" right on the Nikon Df, their metal barrels and crinkle-finishes making for a highly pleasing aesthetic match.</p>

<p>I just ordered a set of Tiffen 72mm ND filters for both DC lenses (0.6, 0.9, 1.2), so I'll be able to open up my DC-135 all the way to f/2.0 outside. I also recently bought 67mm and 58mm sets (for my 35mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.4 lenses), plus a Tiffen 77mm variable ND for my AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G (one of Adorama's PhotoPlus specials) for more f/wide-open photography.</p>

<p>Ooo.. with these kind of threads, NAS rears it's ugly head again!<br />Quickly grab my <em>old-n-trusted</em> tools to cure the ache.<br />The 105/2.8 AIS <em>micro</em>, for example.<br />Obviously, no (de-)focus control, other than the basic choices in point-of-view and aperture.<br />Guess what.. At 2.8 I actually very much like the background unsharpness. Few double-edged objects.<br />NAS cured..?</p>

<p>NAS cured? Never. But at least I've finally cured my decades-long NAS for the DC-135 (having first purchased my DC-105 several years ago). I've never tried the much-lauded Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AI, but I did buy a used Nikkor f/1.8 AI-S a while back for cine applications (though I've never actually shot stills with it). I do also love the DC-like spherical aberration of the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-S when shot wide-open, but since none of my bodies have a decent focusing screen for focusing manual lenses, I never use it.</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/studio460/50ais-s-1.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="467" /> <br /> Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-S</p>

<p>Of course, with my luck, I'm guessing Sigma will announce the "perfect" mid-tele portrait lens any day now, and of course, that lens will become my new object of obsession (as has their new Sigma 24-35mm f/2.0 Art lens, which has bested both the AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G and AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.4G primes in recent tests).</p>

<p>But what I've learned through the course of this thread is that sharpness and MTF is not the be-all, end-all of a lens' total assessment, as my tests with my mother proved (see previous page). And, that software alone cannot replicate the nuanced optical characteristics of either vintage lenses or certain "benchmark" optics such as the AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G (why exactly <em>does</em> that lens look so good on people?). That reminds me . . . I still need to set up a shoot to fully exploit the special qualities of Nikon's "worst lens," which I bought specifically for use with my Nikon Df: the pre-AI Nikkor 43-86mm f/3.5.</p>

"I still need to set up a shoot to fully exploit the special

qualities of Nikon's "worst lens,"" funny!

 

 

Just to let you know: it DOES work, fumbling your old

tools. NAS under control for a while, for me. I love micro

lenses .. would never really accept the minimum focus

distances of the DF 105.. and 105/2.5.. Oooff! My

humble 85/2.0 still is a favourite though .. even though

it isn't as close focusing .. and overall quality of the

105/2.8 is better. Back to the DC's..

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-5-2.png" alt="" /><br>

Test #4: Focus distance 7.4'<br>

Nikon D800E + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-<strong>∅</strong> +20 AF-correction<br>

ISO: 50; Tiffen ND 0.6</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-5-1.png" alt="" width="700" height="466" /><br>

[100%-crop]</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-5-3.png" alt="" /><br>

[AF-point]</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-5-7.png" alt="" width="467" height="700" /><br>

Test #4: Focus distance 20'<br />Nikon D800E + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-<strong>∅</strong> +20 AF-correction<br />ISO: 50; Tiffen ND 0.6<br>

<br>

<img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-5-6.png" alt="" width="463" height="700" /><br>

[100%-crop]</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-6-2-700.png" alt="" /><br>

[65% enlargement; mild skin-smoothing]</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-7-2-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="467" /><br>

Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-<strong>∅</strong><br>

Focus distance: 12'<br>

<strong> </strong></p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-7-2A.png" alt="" /><br>

[100%-crop]</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-7-1-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="466" /><br>

Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-<strong>∅</strong><br>

Focus distance: 4.9'</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-7-1A.png" alt="" width="700" height="468" /><br>

[100%-crop]</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-8-2-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="467" /><br>

Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-<strong>∅</strong><br />Focus distance: 9.8'</p>

<p><strong>First "real-world" DC-135 field test:</strong></p>

<p>I took my Nikon Df and AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D to a simulated event this evening: A family Thanksgiving dinner. Focus accuracy was actually much better than in previous static tests for whatever reason, much better than the 50% hit-rate I was attaining in-studio (all images were taken with the Df at an AF-correction setting of +20). Focus was un-assisted since I was using off-center AF-points (even though I was using an SU-800 to control my pole-mounted Speedlight). I feel far more confident now in the lens' AF accuracy than I did prior to this "real-world" test. Due to these results, I now consider the DC-135 to be a viable part of my working lens inventory.</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-9-4-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="467" /><br /> Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-<strong>∅</strong><br />Focus distance: 5.5'<br /> Source: Nikon SU-800/SB-600 + Chimera small pancake lantern + Lastolite pole.<br /> <br /> <img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-9-1-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="466" /><br /> Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-<strong>∅</strong><br />Focus distance: 8.2'<br /> Source: Available-light (mixed-ambient: incandescent, LED, fluorescent).</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-9-5-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="466" /><br /> Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-<strong>∅</strong><br />Focus distance: 7.3'<br /> Source: Nikon SU-800/SB-600 + Chimera small pancake lantern + Lastolite pole.</p>

<p>New DC-135 studio strobe test:</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/DC135-12-1-700.png" alt="" width="700" height="467" /><br>

Nikon Df + AF DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D: f/2.0 @ R-<strong>∅</strong><br />Focus distance: 6.5'<br />Source: Elinchrom ELC Pro HD 500 x2: 39" mini-octa (camera-right key)/24" x 31.5" softbox w/Rotagrid (3/4-kick).</p>

I know this is a two year old thread, but I want to thank you for it anyway. I have been trying to decide between the 105 and 135 DC lenses and have been searching the internet for discussion of just these issues for days. This thread puts all this to rest for me. I started out wanting the 135 but I'm just about to start getting into portraits and shooting people, and I did not know what focal length I need. Your pictures, which include the focus distance, helped me confirm that I probably need to get the 105 for working inside a small studio. Also, the thread has resolved for me issues about sharpness, CA, and focus on these lenses. I'd love to buy both, especially since you finally got good results with the 135, but the 105 needs to be first.

 

Just seeing you go through the process of figuring out how to get the lens to perform for you was an education in itself. And seeing very good images of what sort of image quality qualifies as being "sharp" and how sharp these lenses can get has been educational as well. I can comfortably buy the 105 now when I have the $$.

Thanks.

Jim