Re: "Official" Nikon 105 f/2.8S Micro Discussion and Image Thread
gear-nut wrote:
No offense, but if you look at the rope gate sweeping down behind the old Nun, you can clearly see the line-fringing in it that Suteetat describes. To me, that's the most obvious part of a busy bokeh.
No offense at all however I don't think that the 105 VR bokeh is "so busy".
Bokeh depends on so many factors, including the apertures (see Thom Hogan review whose link I gave previously).
Then, we should compare same scenes at same aperture to make meaningful comparisons.
For sure, the bokeh of my 100/2 Zeiss Makro-Planar is better than AF-S 105 VR's, and probably 105 MC bokeh is even better. The side-by-side comparison posted here shows more line-doubling in the 105 MC shot.
gear-nut wrote:My take is this new Z 105 is pretty nice -- definitely sharper than the older one, and significantly smoother bokeh.
Significantly? it can't be said without extensive side-by-side comparisons performed looking at many pictures, taken at different distances and apertures. A couple of images of different subjects can't tell the whole story.
Anyway, I have no interest in saying which lens has the best bokeh; simply I don't I like to tell lies (for this reason I post pictures)
I see peripheral onion rings in the 105 MC bokeh; the reviewer call them "outlining": f/2.8 bokeh f/4 bokeh f/5.6 bokeh
Are they due to the rear aspherical element
Jul 14, 2021 at 06:15 AM
Previous versions of Ripolini's message #15649741 « "Official" Nikon 105 f/2.8S Micro Discussion and Image Thread »
