What is your favorite 105?

[robert_bouknight1]

Nikon’s 105 has to be the focal length most uniquely associated with the brand.  I bought an AI new in the late 70’s as the first lens to supplement the 50/1.4 that came with my FM.  Sadly, that FM & 105 were stolen.  Curious to hear input from others.  Sorry for the long post.

I have too many 105’s now.  In thinking about writing this this post, it occurred to me that I don’t have a stand out favorite, maybe that’s why I have too many. I don’t have the new 105 S Micro (yet), but may get one if it is small/light enough to displace one of my favorites in the bag.  So here it goes:

Favorites:

The 105/1.4E is easily the best performing variant I have, sharp and great bokeh.  Why is it not my overall favorite?  It may be too sharp for portraits, it won’t (usefully) work on any film camera, and it is a little large and heavy.  So, I keep others around.

So, which to list second?  105/2.5 P.C. from the early 70’s converted to AI.  This version has the later optical formula and coatings and the earlier (nicer, IMO) metal focusing ring construction with slower “throw” for more precise manual focusing.  So, the best classic variant?  These early 70’s lenses are the nicest manual lenses to use, IMO.  Probably listed 2^nd here just due to flexibility across all Nikon cameras, maybe the RF model should be 2^nd.

Almost second:  105/1.8 AIS.  This lens works very well on a Z6 and film cameras.

Also, nice to use:  105/2.5 PC rangefinder lens in LTM (or Nikon RF).  These have a great feeling long throw focusing ring.  Optical performance might be better than the F mount Sonnar type that supposedly was slightly recomputed to clear the F SLR mirror.  Nice round multi blade iris so no stop signs in the background at f/4.  Though small, they are heavy for the size, no shortage of brass and glass in the construction.  These RF lenses have a new life adapted to the Z, though the Z7 might show limits of the optics.

Canon 100/3.5 LTM rangefinder.  Sorry, I can’t resist adding it here.  My choice when packing a Z kit with smallest/lightest lenses possible.  It’s tiny and weighs nothing, performance is good enough though not as good as the 105/2.5 RF from the same era.  I do prefer it to the small/light Leica 90’s I have.  The uncommon Nikon 105/4 “T” also seems good but has not earned a spot in my bag.

 

Less Favorites:

Surprise: 105/2DC.  The DC probably has the best portrait face rendition of all of the short tele’s I have.  But, manual focus is too difficult on a Z, the throw is too “fast” for enough precision with moving subject camera distance.  For me, anyway.  I have had some issues with AF focus precision using DSLRs.  It always seems that the image with best facial expression from a series is ever so slightly out of focus.  Maybe I should stop down a little more and use the defocus control to increase background blur.  Hmm, a new project, I am not ready to give up on the lens yet.  I have had better luck with 105DC AF vs 135DC.

105/2.8G AFS VR.  Maybe I don’t have a good sample.  I am always underwhelmed with results when I use it, though nothing seems “wrong”.  So, I don’t use it. 

Others:

Screw drive micro 105’s.  They might be good, but I have not tried one.  Any suggestions?  I have a 105/4 AI micro that seems fine if I need a 105 for close up work.

The Nikon 100/2.8E AIS is light and performs well.  Old rangefinder lenses have a more round iris, so I prefer those on Z cameras.

Edited November 19, 2022 by robert_bouknight1

[Dieter Schaefer]

I still have the 105/2.5 Ai version, purchased as my first lens back in 1979. If I were to use that focal length more, I'd probably go for the Ai-S 105/1.8. A close second might be the Leica-R Summicron 90mm f/2 pre-ASPH. Owned the M-version but didn't like it much.

[James Bryant]

I have the 105/2.5 ais which is my favorite general purpose 105. I also have the 105/2.8 micro which is good for close ups but not as good at infinity.

[Sanford]

I use a 50 f1.8 on a D300 which gives me a 75mm equiv. Slight cropping gets it to around a 105mm equiv. Super sharp and F1.8.

[SCL]

The 105/2.8D micro has given me some incredible nature shots. Big, heave, but nothing I can't handle, even in cold weather.

[dennisbrown]

I still keep a 105mm f/2.5 Ai-S on my lens shelf, just in case.  That stated, I have two Micro Nikkors in the same focal length;  105 f/2.8, one in F-mount (G), the other in Z.  They are my "go-to" 105's.  They're superb macro lenses, as well as short telephotos.

In my film days, especially manual focus, I did some stringer work for a daily newspaper.  One of the full-time pros there used a non-AI 105 on one of his Nikon F's.  His reason was that since he pushed Tri-X, he could afford the extra focal length so he didn't have intrude as much when he needed close-ups.  I bought an Ai version for my Nikkormat, and I've used one since (ca. 1978).  A couple of years later, I traded it for the Ai-S version.

[ShunCheung]

For me, the Z 105mm/f2.8 VR S should be the one to get, but for now, I am staying with my 105mm/f2.8 AF, pre-D, and 105mm/f2.8 AF-S VR. Had the 105mm/f2.5 AI from 1978 but sold that when I switched to AF in 1989.

[Niels - NHSN]

I have come to prefer the Nikkor-P Auto 10.5cm (the Sonnar derived design) for reasons I cannot really put my finger on. Maybe it is just the touch, feel and look of the lens. I certainly wouldn't be able to pick which of the two had taken a photo in a blind test.

Sonnar derived to the left, Xenotar derived to the right.

 

Edited November 19, 2022 by NHSN

[Mary Doo]

I have the 105mm Z (which was hard to get when I ordered).  One would think that the Z model would be compact but it's bulkier than past models.  It works well, though I have not used it a lot. 

As a side note, many photographers (including me) are bypassing macro/micro lenses these days and, instead, use a sharp super tele, especially the ones with shorter minimum distance requirement.  Naturally this may not be suitable for all macro situations. 

[ilkka_nissila]

Of the ones which give a modern rendering, the Z 105 MC is my favorite. Can't find any significant fault in that lens, it's very lightweight and produces gorgeous images. Initially the manual focus was infuriating but now it supports different speeds of manual focusing that the user can select from the menu (with reasonably new bodies and the latest firmware). This makes manual focusing much easier for me.

 

Of the older ones, the 105 DC has always been a lens that produces beautiful images that are to my liking, but with high-resolution cameras the maximum aperture is soft if one looks at the image all the way zoomed in. It can be tricky to focus. However, I still feel it makes people subjects look really good. 

 

However, the 105/1,4 is the one I use most often although I have some issues with its out of focus rendering (cat's eyes and swirly bokeh). The large maximum aperture, good autofocus accuracy and a sharp and reasonably aberration free image wide open makes it highly practical for indoor available light photos.

 

Edited November 19, 2022 by ilkka_nissila

[robert_bouknight1]

I dusted off the 105/2DC yesterday and tested it on a very high mileage D850.  Thinking about the last time I regularly used the lens, it was on a D800 that seemed very "needy" of AF fine tune for every lens mounted for whatever reason.  I think that camera must have had something a little loose inside maybe.

On this D850, the pairing seemed to be fairly consistent at arriving at the same focus plane at close range for each refocused test.  I did give it a +3 tune.  Looking forward to trying the lens again in a shoot, I will use the 105/D850 pair and compare to the 105/1.4 on a Z7.  The 105/1.4 will be a little sharper, but that is not everything.

Even at 2.8, the DOF is very narrow viewed at 45MP 100%.

I piddled with the defocus control.  Setting to correspond to f/2.8 aperture, the bokeh was slightly better, but the plane of focus seemed to shift slightly and focal plane resolution seemed a little less.  I probably won't experiment with the defocus, too many variables.  Also makes one question the point of more than 45MP, or in reality 24MP+/-.  But, yes, sometimes it is good to have more MP for cropping or tripod nature shots with everything just right.

Edited November 21, 2022 by robert_bouknight1

[ilkka_nissila]

The 105 DC was poorly behaving on my D800; basically shots near infinity needed fine tune of -20 and at portrait distances optimal fine tune was around 0. So it was impossible to use this lens with that camera. The D810 sorted those problems out and the focus was consistent at a fixed fine tune setting. I have to say that the D800 really tested my patience; I was so happy they resolved those issues in the next model. The 105 DC wasn't the only problematic lens on the D800 but it was one that I really wanted to use.

[mike_halliwell]

1 hour ago, ilkka_nissila said:

The 105 DC was poorly behaving on my D800; basically shots near infinity needed fine tune of -20 and at portrait distances optimal fine tune was around 0.

That highlights the often undervalued benefit of mirrorless Z bodies...😉

[ilkka_nissila]

16 minutes ago, mike_halliwell said:

That highlights the often undervalued benefit of mirrorless Z bodies...😉

Well, selling the poorly performing body and getting a better camera did the trick for me. Z cameras do not autofocus the 105 DC at all.

Edited November 20, 2022 by ilkka_nissila

[mike_halliwell]

19 minutes ago, ilkka_nissila said:

Z cameras do not autofocus the 105 DC at all.

Well, there is that!  😱

Guess that FTZ ii AFD isn't forthcoming.

Although there is one of those adapters that has some fore and aft movement to focus non AF lenses. Can't remember the name!

[rodeo_joe1]

The Ai-S 105mm f/1.8 Nikkor is almost indistinguishable from the f/2.5 version at like-for-like apertures, but greatly softens contrast at its wider apertures. Effectively it lightens shadows when used wide open, which is great for artificial low-light use where lighting contrast is usually quite high.

However the f/2.5 version marginally wins out when the subject contrast is lower and there's more light. 

Neither can compete with Sigma's 105mm f/2.8 'Art' macro for sheer resolution and lack of Loca - right from maximum aperture. The Sigma also, obviously, focuses much closer than those other 105s.

I've never used the 105mm D.C., but I imagine that it also has unique characteristics. 

So IMO it's a case of 'horses for courses' and there's no absolute best 105mm lens, but is very much dependent on the application. 

P.S. I owned an old scallop-ringed pre-Ai f/2.5 105mm lens for a while, and hated it. Sorry, but could not see the attraction of that old single-coated thing. 

Edited November 20, 2022 by rodeo_joe1

[sjmurray]

The only 105 I've ever used is the Nikkor P 2.5 that I purchased in the late 1960's. I had it Ai'd by John White.   It's still in mint condition!  Mine is very sharp and has wonderful bokeh.  Some of my most commented on photos (portraits) were with this lens (on film).

[nick_davis]

On 11/20/2022 at 12:12 PM, mike_halliwell said:

Well, there is that!  😱

Guess that FTZ ii AFD isn't forthcoming.

Although there is one of those adapters that has some fore and aft movement to focus non AF lenses. Can't remember the name!

I really wish Nikon would consider making an FTZ with a focus motor. I have a ton of AF-D lenses and I don’t plan to upgrade them. 

[ShunCheung]

2 hours ago, nick_davis said:

I really wish Nikon would consider making an FTZ with a focus motor. I have a ton of AF-D lenses and I don’t plan to upgrade them. 

I think an FTZ with AF motor is going to be unlikely, because it probably be difficult to make one that works well. If you don't plan to upgrade those AF-D lenses, just use them on a DSLR. The D6, D5, D850, D780, D750, and D500 ... all have an AF motor built into the body.

Essentially if there are lenses you don't want to upgrade, just don't upgrade the matching body. Using very old lenses on the latest body (or vice versa) will be challenging. E.g. all of the latest Z lenses are totally useless on the Nikon DSLRs.

[brian_niemi1]

I have had an AF Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D for around 20 years.  I used it on my D200 and my D750 with very good results.  I now have the MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S which I use on my Z7ii.  I would have to say the new Z lens is my favorite 105 lens.  I have made some metal prints with both lenses and the Z lens is noticeable better.

I have used the D lens on the Z7ii and I found that it is rather easy to manually focus it.  In general, manually focusing a Z body is pretty easy, especially when I think way back to focusing my FM or F3 with the split screen, trying to find a vertical line on the subject to get it in focus.

[Sandy Vongries]

53 minutes ago, brian_niemi1 said:

I have had an AF Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D for around 20 years.  I used it on my D200 and my D750 with very good results.  I now have the MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S which I use on my Z7ii.  I would have to say the new Z lens is my favorite 105 lens.  I have made some metal prints with both lenses and the Z lens is noticeable better.

I have used the D lens on the Z7ii and I found that it is rather easy to manually focus it.  In general, manually focusing a Z body is pretty easy, especially when I think way back to focusing my FM or F3 with the split screen, trying to find a vertical line on the subject to get it in focus.

Since I have avoided the Z thing, the Micro Nikkor 105 2.8 D Still rocks.  I have an ancient AI 105 2.5. Great for portraits, something I don't do much anymore.

[Rick Helmke]

I won’t be looking into mirrorless at all since I still just don’t see the need. That said I realized years ago that many lenses have qualities unique to them and I can usually look at four images of the same thing and pick out the one done with a specific lens. The earlier 105/2.5 manual focus lens is one of the best portrait lenses in existence and was also loved by photojournalists for good contrast, razor sharpness and in at least one case I know of, it’s ability to keep working well after being used as a self defense item. I don’t think that photographer ever got around to cleaning off all the blood from that lens and no, I’m not making that up. The 135/2.8 is another good lens but I can pick out the 135/2 because it can have the narrowest depth of field but give good sharpness and tends to render less contrast. The 85-250/4.5 zoom is ancient, huge and heavy but has a look all its own, especially b&w. The point is, decide what you need from a given focal length and get the lens that provides it. You may find, as I have, that you have several lenses that don’t get used as often but offer the perfect look you’re after when that look is exactly what you’re after. 
 

Rick H.
 

 

[Rob Davies]

I had both the 105 f2.5 and the 105 f1.8 over the years, genuinely wished I'd never sold either.

The Z 105 is my most recent purchase. Excellent as a close up lens and lovely as a general purpose short (ish) telephoto.

Edited November 24, 2022 by robert_davies2

[mike_halliwell]

The Z6ii's Focus Peaking has given my old Tamron Adaptall 105mm f2.5 a new lease of life...🙂

I hated my 105mm 2.8 VR macro. Way too much Chromatic nonsense and unpleasant rendering of OOF areas. Sold it.

 

[c_watson1]

Still think the little 100/2.8E is the equal of the manual 105/2.5. Cheaper, smaller, lighter and great adapted on my Fuji MILCs. Seems to get dissed lots by non-owners echoing received wisdom.