105 f2 DC or 105 Micro Nikkor?

[mt4x4]

<p>I am getting closer to my next lens purchase. I want to pick up a 105 prime.<br /> <br /> I am interested in doing some macro with the lens, but am more concerned about sharpness and low-light performance. If I go with the 105 DC I think it will be acceptable for the macro work I would be doing if I used a few extension tubes. However there are some features on the Micro Nikkor that I like too. I'm really not sure which to get at this point.<br /> <br /> So far, here are the advantages I see to each of the lenses<br /> <br /> 105 f/2 DC</p>

<ul>

<li>One stop of aperture over the Micro Nikkor - benefit is more DOF control and also stopping movement in lower light</li>

<li>I have heard that the 105 DC is sharper than the Micro Nikkor</li>

<li>Rounded Diaphragm for more pleasing out of focus areas</li>

</ul>

<p>105 f/2.8 Micro Nikkor</p>

<ul>

<li>Macro capabilities to 1:1</li>

<li>Vibration Reduction</li>

<li>Silent Wave Motor</li>

</ul>

<p>I will mainly use the lens for a Nature walk around lens. Currently my 18-50 is too short (I'm sick of missing shots with it) and my 80-200 AF-D it too bulky for long hikes. I will probably end up also using this lens for some sports and event type photography.<br /> <br /> The price difference between the lenses will not affect my choice. I am just unsure which lens I will enjoy more. In the end, I want the lens that I can produce the best photographs with (consistently).<br /> <br /> I am really unsure which to purchase; I don't plan on purchasing both right now. Does anyone have any input/advice?</p>

[seanbreadsell]

<p>I am interested in this also, I dont have anything to contribute technically but would love to know the best choice...I am suspecting the VR lens for walking around, but there is something about the DC lens that says BUY ME!</p>

[commtrd]

<p>I do not own the 105 f2 so cannot comment on the lens' virtues. I do own the 105VR and I love that lens. Use it for general walkaround and it is excellent for most macro phlotography.<br>

Bokeh on this lens is about as good as that from the 85 f1.4 which is pretty awesome. The lens works well on both formats and is incredible when used with the D700. In my opinion this lens is pretty much one of those must-have lenses especially for those who like close-up or macro photography. Plus the flexibility of having a really nice mid-prime with VR as well.</p>

<p>I also would like to compare a 105 f2 as I am very interested in building a set of fast primes for low-light / selective focus applications.</p>

[josephbraun]

<p>I faced this decision a few months back and bought the VR, only b/c I needed a macro lens. This is a wonderful piece of glass. In the future I would like to get the 135mm DC as well.</p>

[lightsmith1]

<p>If you are shooting subjects smaller than a tennis ball get the macro lens. If your primary shooting is going to be of people get the DC lens. For macro you are going to want a couple small strobes and a small aperture so lens speed is not a concern. For people the DC is a great tool and even at f2 without the DC you will get nice bokeh.<br>

On a DX camera the 105mm is almost too long but on a FX camera it is great. The 135mm is nice still a bit long for indoor use on a FX camera and definitely too long on a DX camera.</p>

[mt4x4]

<p>Well, I'm probably going to go with the Micro. Then possibly an 85 1.4 down the road.<br>

Thanks for the input everyone.</p>

[jackie_muu]

<p>I have the 105 f/2 DC. The auto focusing is not accurate. I'll set the DC at F2.8 and use the aperture of 2.8 or smaller. This gives me the most accurate focusing. In my opinion, if not for close-ups, this one is better for the VR micro lens. I don't change DC settings so I don't know how it affect focusing and the image sharpness. It seems that the DC setting is not critical in most cases. The image is very pleasing. The purple edges may be there in the corners but not always.<br>

In the future, I may try to use it with one 2X telecoverter to see what I will have at 210mm f/5.6.</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>From a system building point of view...</p>

<p>the 85/1.8 is an affordable high quality portrait and short tele-lens (you could also get this right now).</p>

<p>the 135/2 is a high quality telephoto lens, and gives you Nikon's longest f2 lens (we'll leave the 200/2 out of this).</p>

<p>so, at the 105mm length, the Micro fits in beautifully so that is the way I would go.</p>

[rconey]

<p>I just got the 105 f2DC, used from KEH. The first copy the autofocus was bad enough that even "autofocus fine tune" couldn't fix it. I took it back (very smooth operation, thank you KEH) and the second one needed a +5 fine tune and now is very good.<br>

I use it in high school gym conditions mostly-sports. My 80-200 f2.8 sometimes can't capture enough light AND give me fast enough shutter speed to stop action. The 85 1.4 and the 105 f2 are great for this setting.</p>

[mike_bisom]

<p>I have both the VR and the DC. I need the VR for indoor low light (weddings). Which is to say that the DC has less value to me. However, I can't bring myself to sell the DC- my copy is incredibly sharp, sharper than the VR and the Bokeh is great. It is the best portrait lens I have ever used. But, it you need micro, you need micro.</p>

[fraczekp]

<p>"...I have heard that the 105 DC is sharper than the Micro Nikkor..."</p>

<p>not really, they are pretty much head to head. The CA is where you will see more difference than sharpness. I have them both and if you asked me to give one up it would be the DC one. Although way more harsh on bokeh, the micro one seems like it was built for a purpose - and that is to get close to 1:1 with excellent shaprness and little CA. </p>

<p>Go for the micro one!</p>

[mt4x4]

<p>Thanks again everyone. Its very nice to hear from people who own both, and has definately made my decision a lot easier.</p>

[bjørn rørslett]

I had both lenses, but gave quickly up the 105 VR. It simply couldn't live up to the expectations one has of a Micro-Nikkor. The 105 DC is temperamental and you need to learn how to unleash its potential.

 

 

 

These days, the 125 mm f/2.5 Voigtländer APO Lanthar has in practice replaced both 105 Nikkors for my work with D3 and D3X. It unites and improves the best qualities of the 105 DC and 105 VR and delivers the results smoothly and effortlessly, with none of the CA issues that trouble the Nikkors. It even has accepted my CPU modification.