Fun, aren't they... I got a 55mm 1.2 SC about a month ago... all I can say is Bokeh... Bokeh... Bokeh... It's been with me just about the whole time... even with it being MF!
When it stops down to f/2, its sharpness is already at peak performance. However, I would say Zeiss Planar T* 50 1.4 has better color rendition, and better bokeh at f/2 for subject that is not to close to the lens.
Haven't shot with the Zeiss, I'm sure it's awesome. The Nikkor is probably my all-time fav lens (MF or AF) - endearingly soft wide open (w/ the distinctive football shaped bokeh), and ridiculously sharp by f/2.
The 105 and 200 are great lenses, but I hardly ever use them and I either have another close prime (85/1.8D and 135/2AIS and 180/2.8AF) or have it duplicated via a couple of zooms (70-300VR & 80-200/2.8AFS).
I'd be using the funds to get the 17-35/2.8 AFS if I can bring myself to actually fork over the $$ for one.
Sure about your choices? The 200 and 105 are real classic and the 17-35? Owned one for about a year; great color, contrast, rock-solid build but starting to show it's age with FF sensors...needs to be stopes down to f8 or even 11 to extend sharpness into the corners. For an APS-C sensor, it's a whole other story. You should know that the AF motor on it reportedly has a relatively higher rate of failure and is a pricey repair if you're buying it used.
I am still kicking myself for selling my $20 200/4 AI, and I would be sad to lose my 105/2.5, but with the redundancy in your kit, I can certainly see giving them up.
TBH, the one lens that I would want to hold onto the most is the 40/2. But unlike most, I'm a sucker for the 40-42mm focal length as my normal walkaround.
j.liam wrote:
Sure about your choices? The 200 and 105 are real classic and the 17-35? Owned one for about a year; great color, contrast, rock-solid build but starting to show it's age with FF sensors...needs to be stopes down to f8 or even 11 to extend sharpness into the corners. For an APS-C sensor, it's a whole other story. You should know that the AF motor on it reportedly has a relatively higher rate of failure and is a pricey repair if you're buying it used.
Yes, yes I know - they are great lenses. But I use them occasionally. I'm keeping my 135/2AIS, 400/5.6 ED-IF, 50/1.2AIS, and 16/3.5 AI MF glass.
I'm looking for something wider than my 20mm AF-D and the 17-25/2.8 AFS seems to be very good at 17mm and mostly better than my 20/2.8D and on par with my other lenses at 24 and 35mm. I've only tested one 17-35AFS sample, so I don't know if I got a good one or a bad one. The 16-35/4 AFS looks good, but it's a little too big and expensive.
It's hard letting go of these MF gems, but if they rarely get used, then someone else might as well enjoy them.
Jorge, you are a bad influence. Being inspired by your photos, I just bought one of these off the buy-sell board. Perhaps you could post some more photos to tide me over while I wait for mine to arrive.
