105mm MF f2.5 v AF f2.0 (non-micro)

Hello everyone,

Has anyone studied the optical differences between

the classic MF 105mm f2.5 and the AF 105mm f2.0

(non micro) lenses? The glass appears quite

different in

both lenses. Does this difference affect the image,

the colour rendition, or the sharpness?

May both be used on both the F3 and the F100 camera

bodies, or are there difficulties in using the MF

lens with the AF body and the AF lens with the MF

body?

Many thanks for the help.

Regards,

Mark Heseltine

An AI or AIS lens on an F100 will work fine. You won't get matrix metering (if you have it set for matrix, it will switch to CW on its own). You won't get Program or Shutter Priority. You won't be able to see what aperture you have set in the viewfinder, so you'll be 'counting clicks'. Fancy flash modes like 'Matrix Balanced Fill Flash' won't work, because the lens lacks the electronic chip to communicate all that stuff. Basic shooting, it works great.

<p>

Using an AF lens on an F3: no problems. It will work just fine, in all the ways that an F3 works. Some will complain about how the focus ring 'feels different', but that varies lens to lens.

<p>

The AF 105 2.0 is a bit of a special beast, boasting a feature called 'Defocus Image Control'. In a nutshell, this allows you to change the 'spherical aberration' of the lens between over-corrected and under-corrected. This means the lens can be adjusted to give 'creamy out of focus' backgrounds, 'creamy out of focus' foregrounds, or even 'soft focus' effects (do a websearch on 'bokeh' and read all sorts of opinions on the subject). You can also ignore all that stuff and just use it as a really good high-speed portrait length lens, but you will have paid for the capability in cash (I have the 135/2.0 DC and use it almost solely for available darkness sports).

Hi Todd,

Many thanks for the answer. But from the lack of responses about the difference between the new 105 f.2 DC and the old 2.5MF suggests the new DC lens is not well used. But I've dug around the net and found a subjective review by a fellow from Norway who rates it a 5. So from your answer and that review sounds like a very good lens.

Thanks Todd!

Regards,

Mark