patricks Posted December 11, 2002 Share Posted December 11, 2002 I am just about to buy into a Nikon system (coming from rangefinders) and I know I want a 105/2.8 Micro (macro, why does Nikon call it micro?) but I am not 100% sure I need the AF. How does the new AF compare to the old manual focus one? Sharpness? Tonality? Contrast? Color rendition? Approx. how much should one expect to pay for a minty used one? Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markci Posted December 11, 2002 Share Posted December 11, 2002 I only ever owned the MF one, though the AF one is supposed to be a little better optically. The MF is excellent, though and I doubt there's any practical difference. However, the MF one only goes to 1:2 without extension tubes whereas the AF goes to 1:1. The AF lens also has the chip than enables the new AF bodies to compute the effective aperture as you focus closer, which should be useful if you're using manual flash. I have no idea what they sell for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_lofquist Posted December 11, 2002 Share Posted December 11, 2002 I use both the 60 and 105 AF Micro Nikkors. The 60 is great for copying maps and artwork, where the 105 shines for floral and insect photography. The AF feature has very little use, however the continuous focussing to 1:1 is a real asset. The AF lenses are later optical designs with the IF mechanism actually changing the true focal lengths of the lenses. (At 1:1 the relative apertures are f/5.0, instead of the f/5.6 that would occur with the earlier Nikkor designs.) I find them both exceptional tools. Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greglyon Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 A couple suggestions for you. <p> First, Nikon is clearly trying to wean us off of MF lenses. Many of the new cameras will not meter in any fashion with them. (There's a guy here on photo.net who can help you work around that however.) Still, it may be a compelling reason to go with the AF version. <p> On the other hand, the AF version actually achieves its close focusing partly by shortening the focal length which really reduces working distance. This may or may not be a problem depending on your intended subjects. I shoot a lot of bugs, bees etc and the short working distance is frequently a problem. I eventually got a 200 micro to solve the problem. <p> I'm not sure about current prices, but I suggest looking at B&H Photo's Import price as a comparison point. I frequently see stuff on ebay go above NEW Import prices...crazy! Also KEH.com should give you some ideas of used price. <p> Here's a couple Nikon links you'll get some good reading from: <ul> <li><a href="http://www.nikonlinks.com/">www.nikonlinks.com</a> is a bunch of links to all things nikon. <li><a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/">www.naturfotograf.com</a> will answer your questions comparing the two lenses. The author goes into great depth describing many, many nikon lenses, pro and con. Get past the splash screen and find the lens section. </ul> <p>Finally, here's the link to get MF lenses upgraded to work with newer camera bodies. Rolland Elliott puts a 'chip' from a modern AF lens into your older MF lens... <a href="http://home.carolina.rr.com/headshots/Nikonhome.htm">http://home.carolina.rr.com/headshots/Nikonhome.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry n. Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 Whereas you might not autofocusing, keep in mind that the AF lens focuses to 1:1 without any extensions (albeit, it reduces its focal lenght to do so). The MF lens only goes to 1:2. Furthermore, some tests suggest that the AF is better optically. If it were me, I'd skip the 105mm and go for the 200mm AF macro lens: impeccable optics and greater working distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan_mcmorrin2 Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 Patrick, I've had both the 105mm and 200mm AF Micros. I've kept the 200mm without regrets. It's a gem of a performer. Bests, Duncan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricks Posted December 13, 2002 Author Share Posted December 13, 2002 Duncan, I like that advice, especially from someone, like myself, who just sold all their Leica rangefinder gear :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now