I received mine today but have only just been able to try it out late in the day on our pet rabbit that doesn't like to pose for the camera. Nothing ground breaking here, other than to say so far is that from wide open it is idiotically sharp and has great bokeh.
Lance B wrote:
... from wide open it is idiotically sharp and has great bokeh.
At distances where the widest aperture is f/3, the same holds for AF-S 105/2.8 VR, although my Zeiss 100/2 Makro-Planar is better
I have pictures taken with 105 VR and TC-14 E II which are impressively sharp. The 105 Z MC doesn't work with TCs, unfortunately.
P.S.: a comparison between 105 MC and similar lenses that AF on Z cameras would be helpful.
D700 w/AF-S 105/2.8 ED VR & TC 14 E II, f/8, 1/320 s, 1600 ISO
At close focus (1:1) it should be an f/5.6 lens, but most likely will be faster due to the decreasing focal length, e.g., f/5. Has anyone determined the FL at 1:1? How does it compare with other 1:1 105mm micro-Nikkors?
Nice and sharp picture. I would love to see an example picture using the lens for portrait as well.
Over here, it won't be released until July 9th eventhough it is manufactured 76 km away from where I live
Ripolini wrote:
At distances where the widest aperture is f/3, the same holds for AF-S 105/2.8 VR, although my Zeiss 100/2 Makro-Planar is better
That depends on your desires. At wider apertures, your DOF is so low that your plane of focus is too small for most macro applications.
I have pictures taken with 105 VR and TC-14 E II which are impressively sharp. The 105 Z MC doesn't work with TCs, unfortunately.
I have also used the 1.4x TCIII on my Nikon 105 f2.8G Micro and they are impressively sharp but the new Z macro is simply much, much better, especially wide open and that is comparing both lenses bare.
P.S.: a comparison between 105 MC and similar lenses that AF on Z cameras would be helpful.
I do not generally do comparison shots as they are open to dispute about testing procedure and possibly accusations of bias. Suffice to say that for me, the new Z 105 f2.8 Micro is much sharper than the old Nikon 105 f2.8G Micro, especially wide open. You can either take me at my word or you can wait and see comparos by Youtubers and test sites when they become available. So far, when I have praised the Z lenses (or any lens for that matter) that I have purchased, the resultant reviews have agreed with my assessments.
suteetat wrote:
Nice and sharp picture. I would love to see an example picture using the lens for portrait as well.
Over here, it won't be released until July 9th eventhough it is manufactured 76 km away from where I live
I agree. My 105mm f/2.8 macro is one of my favorite portrait lenses. I would expect the same from this new Nikon.
As much as I do not do comparisons, it was not about sharpness but more about bokeh. So, this is a comparison of sorts between the Z MC 105mm f2.8S and the 105 f1.4E at similar apertures. As this was more for bokeh comparisons than for sharpness, I did end up cropping as best I could to give a reasonable comparison of sharpness. The only trouble is, the macro ended up being f3 wide open at this distance and not f2.8 and the nearest I could have the f1.4E lens was at either f2.8 or f3.2 and I have provided bothfor the f1.4E lens. Also, the focal length of these lenses is slightly different at this focus distance, the f1.4E lens seems to be slightly longer than the macro lens. So, I cropped the macro lens full size shots to match as best i could the f1.4E lens, it was only a small amount, maybe 4-5%. The cropped shots at 100% for the macro are therefore slightly smaller magnification. I also tried to adjust exposure etc in post so that they at least looked similar in the end.
All shot with the Z7II on a tripod.
I will compare each lens at similar apertures with full photo and then compare each lens with cropped photo and similar apertures.
105 f1.4E @ f2.8
Z MC 105 f2.8S @ f3, the lowest aperture at this focus distance
Just got mine today... Plan to put it to the test tomorrow, but things look promising. Probably need to find a home for the 85/1.8 as I don't anticipate using it much anymore. I know they both are different, but for what I shoot, I can use the 105. Glad to see people are getting these.
Interesting to me is how well the 105/1.4 holds up to the new macro at these closer focus distances! At first I was going to say the macro seems a wee bit sharper, but on closer inspection it appears to me they are pretty close in sharpness while the macro perhaps shows a bit more contrast.
As for bokeh, I'd give a slight nod to the 105/1.4 for a little less "edge-lining," though they both are quite excellent IMHO.
I guess one can make a good argument for owning either -- or both! One if you want macro, the other if you want paper thin DoF and pronounced bokeh at normal shooting distances...
Interesting to me is how well the 105/1.4 holds up to the new macro at these closer focus distances! At first I was going to say the macro seems a wee bit sharper, but on closer inspection it appears to me they are pretty close in sharpness while the macro perhaps shows a bit more contrast.
As for bokeh, I'd give a slight nod to the 105/1.4 for a little less "edge-lining," though they both are quite excellent IMHO.
I guess one can make a good argument for owning either -- or both! One if you want macro, the other if you want paper thin DoF and pronounced bokeh at normal shooting distances... ...Show more →
I pretty much agree with you although the little less "edge-lining" may just be the f1.4E at f2.8 but the macro is at f3 and they become almost indistinguishable when the f1.4E is at f3.2 - at least that's how it seems to me. Whatever the case, they are so close in this particular comparo as to be almost indistinguishable. I love the 105 f1.4E for it's f1.4 ability, but when shooting portraits etc, I would rarely ever use it that wide, generally going at least f2 but more likely f2.8+. I only use f1.4 for longer camera to subject distances if I am really trying to isolate and even then it is sometimes overkill.
One good thing about the macro is that it is quite light in comparison to the f1.4E and therefore is more likely to be in the bag all the time rather than only when I think I actually need it for a specific task. Sometimes when you go out with a set of lenses, you leave something at home not thinking you will use it and then something pops up and you wish you did take it. The 105 f2.8S Micro is more likely to go in the bag than the 105 f1.4E.
Should have my 105 and 50 tomorrow, can't wait to get my hands on these things.
Ghostinz wrote:
Just got mine today... Plan to put it to the test tomorrow, but things look promising. Probably need to find a home for the 85/1.8 as I don't anticipate using it much anymore. I know they both are different, but for what I shoot, I can use the 105. Glad to see people are getting these.
That's a good point, I may have to rethink keeping my 85. Only thing that might grab me is if the 85 f/1.2 is as amazing as every other S lens.
EB-1 wrote:
At close focus (1:1) it should be an f/5.6 lens, but most likely will be faster due to the decreasing focal length, e.g., f/5. Has anyone determined the FL at 1:1? How does it compare with other 1:1 105mm micro-Nikkors?
EB-1 wrote:
At close focus (1:1) it should be an f/5.6 lens, but most likely will be faster due to the decreasing focal length, e.g., f/5. Has anyone determined the FL at 1:1? How does it compare with other 1:1 105mm micro-Nikkors?
EBH
Just tried mine and it seems to be f4.5 at minimum focus distance which is 0.29mt and 1:1
