Jump to content

105mm upgrade, worth it?


evannorth

Recommended Posts

<p>i was thinking of upgrading my micro-nikkor 105 af-d to the 105 vr version or the newer sigma 105 os. and am wondering how they compare regarding IQ/CA when stopped down beyond f8, and focus breathing. is it worth the expense? i shoot dx at the moment but will not consider dx only glass in case i move to fx in the future.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Hi Evan,<br>

I have not much experience with 105 af-d but I owned 105 vr version. While is a good lens after I tested Sigma 150/2.8 the non stabilized version I sold it and I purchased Sigma. This Sigma lens has a special character and regarding IQ/CA does much better than Nikon 105 vr. If you need stabilization you can purchase the last version of Sigma 150 which include OS and as a bonus is an apochromatic lens, supposing to act better that the older version. As for me I am perfectly happy with the older version and I don't think to upgrade it.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The first question should be: in which ways do you feel the AF-D lens does not deliver? What are you mainly using this lens for, and how? Upgrading for upgrading sake is an expensive routine, it might be a lot more useful to first define the problem and then see what makes a suitable solution.<br>

According to nearly all reviews I've seen, the AF-D and AF-S VR are a very close match when it comes to optical performance; possibly the 105VR is a slight bit more allround (better at longer focus distances). If used for macro work, well stopped down, I really wonder whether the AF-S is a huge upgrade (worth the expense - to me, it wouldn't be most likely, but it's not my wallet we're talking about). VR is not very useful for macro work either.<br>

So, in short, the newer lens only looks a serious upgrade when used as a normal lens, when VR is of clear added value.<br>

__<br>

P.S. "<em>will not consider dx only glass in case i move to fx in the future</em>." - I'd strongly reconsider this kind of black-and-white statements based on a possible optional maybe move to FX. DX lenses can simply be the better choice, and it's silly to compromise what you use today because of maybe maybe the day after tomorrow. You'd be cutting yourself short. And DX lenses can easily be sold for decent prices if they're decent lenses maintained well.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>If you need AFS and VR, buy the new one. If you don't, don't.</p>

<p>Also, what Wouter said, and if you don't mind being involved in the used market you can easily buy your DX lenses used, so that they're already depreciated, then sell them later if you want to get out of DX without losing any money. That gives you the best of both worlds - the advantages of buying DX (low cost, less weight and selections not available in FX) now and no sunk cost if you want to change later.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The only criticism I could level at the 105mm AF-D would be a <em>tiny</em> amount of CA at 1:1 and <em>ever so slight</em> curvature of field. Otherwise it's a perfectly good macro lens. Whether those minute defects have been corrected in the AF-S VR version, I can't say, but you'd certainly have to pixel-peep quite hard at images from a D800 for example, to see any difference.</p>

<p>PS. Why would "focus breathing" be an issue on a still camera?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I don't think focus breathing is very meaningful when you're talking about a macro lens that's rated for 1:1 magnification. I also think "focus breathing" is a silly phrase for it. Makes it sound like the lens is going to blow air at you.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Focus breathing is an old Cine term. And yes the lens does blow air as it breathes. The lens groups moving back and forth as focus is changed displaces air. Do it fast enough and you can feel it. Also all lenses breath some more then others but they all do it. There is a reason that focal length is measured at infinity. Focus closer and the focal length gets shorter.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>"Focus closer and the focal length gets shorter." - Only with infernal, sorry <em>internal</em> focusing lenses Michael. Lenses that use unit focusing, where the whole lens is moved forward and backward in a helicoid, actually increase in effective focal length as they're focused closer. Such lenses are becoming rarer these days, more's the pity.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I used to have the AF-D and now I have the VR.. IMO it is all up to the amount that will be required for the replacement, IQ wise, it's not much between them (maybe the VR is a tad better), but the VR is IF of constant length that can prove important sometimes and the VR works <em>very well (very well indeed) </em>with ALL the TC-E teleconverters even at full aperture. In addition the VR has ...VR if used as normal tele (it's useless when in micro). I hope this helps... Regards, Theodoros http://www.fotometria.gr</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I find this a very interesting post, I just bought the VR AFS lens, I have the 70-200 and tc 1.7x<br>

but I find I needed to use a monopod and the lens is mighty long with hood. Not that the 105vr<br>

is that much more compact buy on the D7100 using the Carry Speed strap it just seems<br>

a lot more carry friendly. I figured out that in the 1.3 crop mode with the TC I will have EFL<br>

of 357mm at f/4.8 with several stops of VR. We looked at the Sigma 150, its a nice big lens<br>

but really shines for macro. I know the 105vr can be used manually like old style macro lenses<br>

so that should solve focus issues.</p>

<p>I have an old Pentax setup with a Vivitar Series 1 90mm and macro adaptor, I used it<br>

on an old LX body and had the special right angle viewfinder and took my time and measurements to focus. Very exacting work indeed.<br>

With the Nikon I just wanted good 1:2 magnification for macro, so I am sure when I get<br>

around to handholding taking pictures of small objects the 105vr will be great.<br>

Its got to be a very versatile lens for limited macro and carry without even using a monopod.<br>

Nikon has lots of used Macro lenses and I think Tamron makes a 60 f2 that would be good<br>

for both macro and portrait on an APS-C camera. That lens does 1:1 repro.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...