TANG0F0XTR0T wrote:
There are some fantastic pictures in this thread but I cannot bring myself to accept this oval bokeh. It just seems so pronounced in comparison to the older 105 and 135DC lenses.
I think it looks cool. Not better or worse than round bokeh balls but just different. IMO it and the 200 F2 are tied for the best outdoor portrait lenses iv'e ever used.
agelessphotog wrote:
I think it looks cool. Not better or worse than round bokeh balls but just different. IMO it and the 200 F2 are tied for the best outdoor portrait lenses iv'e ever used.
I’m not talking about portraits or bokeh. I’m strictly talking about lights being turned into pointy ovals. It’s a shame because it’s almost the perfect lens if it wasn’t for this.
TANG0F0XTR0T wrote:
I’m not talking about portraits or bokeh. I’m strictly talking about lights being turned into pointy ovals. It’s a shame because it’s almost the perfect lens if it wasn’t for this.
Bring on the 105 and 135dc replacements!
This lens is not unique in this characteristic, many fast lenses also produce the same off-axis bokeh.
TANG0F0XTR0T wrote:
I’m not talking about portraits or bokeh. I’m strictly talking about lights being turned into pointy ovals. It’s a shame because it’s almost the perfect lens if it wasn’t for this.
Bring on the 105 and 135dc replacements!
Yeah but like agelessphotog said, it's subjective and while you might not like oval shapes, many others either do or are indifferent. The 105 1.4, 58 1.4, Milvus 85, and even the Otus have similar rendering of highlights, so I don't think it takes away from the lens, unless you don't like oval highlights
Usually cat eyes bokeh manifest itself on the periphery of the image with most lenses.
I rarely go beyond f2.5 with the 105E and here are couple of shots against spotlights at f1.8 with the Z7 (ISO100 - 1/125s} without cat eyes or blow out.
Distance to models: 15m approx
Distance to spotlights: 45m approx
I mean your pictures are all great, and you really make this lens shine... But seriously, where do you get all these models? or perhaps clients? Guess we have to move to France
Shameless plug. I have a like new one posted on the B&S forum. Great lens, but I am not really a portrait guy and only used it twice. So, my loss can be somebody’s gain:
cambyses wrote:
I mean your pictures are all great, and you really make this lens shine... But seriously, where do you get all these models? or perhaps clients? Guess we have to move to France
Partially (or perhaps mainly) due to the discussion, opinions and examples on this forum I jumped and got the 105/1.4. I was looking for something to add a difference in look to my images and it seems the 105 is able to offer me that.
(compared to the 20/1.8G, 50mm1.8G, 24-70G, 70-200f4, 28-300G)
Based on my focal length stats I shoot about 25% of my shots in the 70-200 range, but mainly with a zoom. I feel it will take me some time to master and learn using this particular lens but from the first shots I took it meets my expectations in overall "different" look.
Of course I've done comparison shots vs the 24-70/2.8G, 70-200/f4 and 28-300G on a D750.
The 105 absolutely delivers in the "look" department. I simply love it, especially wide open and sharpness is very good. I do think I made the mistake to tell myself that the difference in sharpness would be "that" much better.
-Attached a 3-way comparison in the "eye" sharpness of my 7month old kid. 105/[email protected] vs 24-70/[email protected] vs [email protected] (the 28-300 image was sharpened a little bit)
So all wide open.
Don't get me wrong, looking at the reflections in the eye, I think all three are extremely sharp, but the 105 doesn't jump out I think.
-Attached 3-way comparisons between the 105, the 70-200 and 28-300. All at 105mm, both wide open as well as f8.
Wide open it's of course amazing that the 105 is a bit sharper at 1.4 then the other lenses at f4 and f5.6.
Looking at all three lenses stopped down to f8 then the 105/1.4 isn't that much sharper then the other 2. Or I just have good samples of the other lenses;-)
(Shot with a D750, all shots on a tripod btw, remote and vr as off on the other lenses)
Again, I think the 105mm is certainly sharp, but based on my expectations I had apparantly expected a bigger difference with these other lenses (apart from the overall "look" of course).
Perhaps based on your experience with this lens you can validate that this is proper sharpness to be expected from this lens. (otherwise I have a week to exchange or return it). But I think it's just fine.
And some additional image I shot in the last days. All hand held and at 1.4. The extremely narrow dof of course will take some time to master as I'm not used to it and have shaky hands so I need to work on my technique.
No images with the Z6/7 but I tried something new on my family ski trip this year and shot exclusively with the 105mm on a D500 (I usually shoot a 70-200mm, f2.8 on a FF body for this).
