MC 105/2.8S

Got home from work today and my new MC 105 was waiting on me, So I thought I would do a couple quick shots hand held at 5.6, not bad for my shaky old hands, cant wait to get in the field for a day.

 

 

Glad to see the metal knurling doesn't seem to show the dreaded green/purple highlights that i got with my 105mm AFS VR Micro.

I posted some samples taken with Sigma’s new(ish) Art 105mm f/2.8 macro in this thread.

 

It would be interesting to see a head-to-head comparison with Nikon's Z mount macro. Especially since the Nikon costs over 40% more.

 

And I'm wondering how long Nikon can hold Sigma off from releasing a Z mount version?

Edited July 1, 2021 by rodeo_joe|1

I guess you could use it on a Z body with a Sony E/FE and L > Nikon Z adapter.

I don't think Sigma is being held off by Nikon, it's up to them to develop the products that they want to market and sell. Given that Sigma probably has to develop their future mirrorless lenses according to the most restrictive mount dimensions among the major makers (the longest flange distance from Canon and narrowest mount from Sony) to be able to share the same optical designs across the different mounts, they might end up having a disadvantage against Nikon Z lenses which can be optimized for the shortest flange distance and widest mount. But for a tele macro lens it may not make much difference. So far it seems to be that the 105 MC is living up to expectations and is comparable to the best available lenses of its focal length range with this capability. The 50 mm MC appears to be exceeding expectations and may even be sharper.

I too now am in posession of the 105 MC but unfortunately do not yet have any camera body to use it with. Nikon here don't have any Z6 ii or Z7 ii in stock.

I too now am in posession of the 105 MC but unfortunately do not yet have any camera body to use it with. Nikon here don't have any Z6 ii or Z7 ii in stock.

Do they have any Zfc? :rolleyes:

 

In 40+ years, I don't think I have ever bought a lens without a suitable camera body to mount it on. I do recall that back in 1977, I bought my FT-3 and 43-86mm zoom from two different stores, within a day or two. In 2018, I bought the Z6 with the 24-70/4 S kit lens.

I too now am in posession of the 105 MC b

How did you do that? I don't see it anywhere except for preorder. Can't wait to get mine.

Do they have any Zfc? :rolleyes:

 

No, they had a Z5 and Z50 though. I didn't expect the lens to arrive so quickly given that Nikon indicated there would be delay due to unexpected number of orders. I don't expect the lens to be without camera very long. It is an unusual situation for me too.

I don't expect the lens to be without camera very long.

Just curious, but I wonder if you'll be able to get a usable image on a Nikon 1 series? Only 1mm flange difference. (N1 = 17mm, NZ = 16mm)

 

It would have to be one of those very thin adapters, but the big difference in throat diameters would allow that.....:D

I don't think Sigma is being held off by Nikon, it's up to them to develop the products that they want to market and sell.

It's my understanding that the Z mount and its protocol has to be licensed from Nikon. Whereas the Sony E and Leica L mounts are effectively open-source. With Sony's philosophy seemingly being "the more the merrier" and a plethora of available lenses not hurting their camera sales in the slightest.

 

Nikon seem to be much more protective of their lens sales.

It's my understanding that the Z mount and its protocol has to be licensed from Nikon. Whereas the Sony E and Leica L mounts are effectively open-source. With Sony's philosophy seemingly being "the more the merrier" and a plethora of available lenses not hurting their camera sales in the slightest.

 

Nikon seem to be much more protective of their lens sales.

 

I believe Sony give the basic protocols for lens manufacturers upon agreement, but Nikon and Canon do not. However, in practice what Sigma can do is reverse engineer the mount protocols of Canon and Nikon mounts and then use them in their lenses. They have done so in the past, and Nikon have said this is expected to happen. But Nikon just don't give the protocol because they want a head start in creating their own lenses. In practice courts will generally consider that the benefits of competition in lens manufacturing and inexpensive options provided by third parties are to the benefit of the photography and consumer community, and thus they do not prohibit third parties from making lenses even if the camera manufacturer do not like it. If they were licensing a protocol then I would expect the camera manufacturer to give the full information on how the lenses and cameras communicate without the need for the reverse engineering (with spotty results) but given the problems that third party manufacturers have with compatibility it seems evident that this information has not been shared.

Just curious, but I wonder if you'll be able to get a usable image on a Nikon 1 series? Only 1mm flange difference. (N1 = 17mm, NZ = 16mm)

 

It would have to be one of those very thin adapters, but the big difference in throat diameters would allow that.....:D

 

1 mm sounds like a very narrow space to create an adapter.

 

I don't have a 1 series camera. I am probably going to get a Z6 II to be able to use my new lens.

1 mm sounds like a very narrow space to create an adapter.

The benefit of the C mount is that it will fit right through the Z mount!

 

ie the entire adapter could be within the Z body...:cool: Although the back of the Z mount lens is pretty wide....:(

I have been thinking about getting one. Had planned to get a 105/1.4AFS since my105/2DC does not AF on the Z system, unfortunately. But the new 105MC is tempting. Of course, the 1.4AFS has the potential for more shallow DOF/background blur. But, in actual practice, I usually stop the 105/2DC a little to have enough DOF to get most of a person's nose and both eyes in focus.

 

I have a 105/2.8AFS micro but I just don't seem to use that lens for whatever reasons. It is probably better than the 105/1.8AIS I have been using with the Z system lately. The 105/1.8 is easier to focus manually than the 105/2DC, and has a more circular iris than the venerable 105/2.5. Also, I have a 105/2.5 rangefinder Nikkor that works well on a Z6, have not tried on a Z7 yet.

 

I will probably rent the 105MC and 1.4AFS and do a big 105 shootout before feeding my 105 Nikon lens addiction again.