NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: stenrasmussen on July 25, 2016, 11:00:58
-
http://nikonrumors.com/2016/07/25/new-nikon-af-s-nikkor-105mm-f1-4e-ed-lens-to-be-announced-this-week.aspx/
-
Wow, sounds like a very interesting lens and to my knowledge Nikons fastest 105mm ever!!!
-
Finally a 105mm and I am pleased to note it is a 1.4 as long as it is not similar to the 58/1.4 with the Sombrero feature.
I have many 100ish mm lenses Zeiss/Leica/Voigt/Meyer...etc but not Nikon.....except the 135D.
I will be getting this new one and wait for the 135......it will be a screamer if 1.4 but will do nicely with a 1.8.
-
I'm all ears. Looking forward to a test drive as soon as Nikon Nordic can supply me with a review sample.
bokeh ought to be outstanding. I'm more worried about CA, in particular the axial kind. For a lens of this potential calibre, not speaking of price point, these problems should have received full attention from the optical engineers No guarantee the designers have done that, at present, thus a quick test series will define the lie of the [promised] land.
-
If this new 105 is great wide open, it will work out without VR. But new 135 must have VR, coz everyone wants both eyes sharp! LZ
-
I doubt Nikon would make this type of a lens free of LoCA. My theory is that Nikon like to focus the red behind (or is it in front of?) the other two colours so that skin blemishes, blood vessels are blurred, to make people look pretty. Zeiss does make a 135/2 which has very little LoCA. But surely a Nikkor of this focal length will have some.
Admittedly I'm not sure if that approach actually work for a three dimensional subject.
-
LoCA in such a lens may improve quite a bit already at f/2.
Is the next lens line a 135/1.8?
-
Finally a 105mm and I am pleased to note it is a 1.4 as long as it is not similar to the 58/1.4 with the Sombrero feature.
.........
Sombrero feature?
Do you mean distortion?
-
Do you mean distortion?
I think he must be talking about field curvature.
I doubt a 105mm would have this problem, but we'll see how it is. ;-) I prefer to focus with the focus point over the closer eye, so that I don't need to recompose.
-
1.4E .... stunning next generation .... waiting in Awe.
-
Cannot afford that price for another 105mm lens but the size and weight of a new E lens could be an indication of what a 135 f??? or 180 f??? could look like. I will be following closely once you guys and gals buy, and use, it.
Tom
-
The AFS 2300/2 shows Nikon engineers can, if they so wish, make a superfast lens having internal focusing yet not exhibiting the usual optical side effects in terms of CA of the axial kind. However, that kind of performance doesn't come for free: price and weight are the response.
-
The AFS 2300/2 shows Nikon engineers can...
What lens is this? It must weigh 50 pounds. ???
-
typo, Andrea ... read 200/2.
-
typo, Andrea ... read 200/2.
I think typo again Bjorn.... Wouldn't it be the 300mm f/2, the beast?
-
Sombrero feature?
Do you mean distortion?
Field Curvature......in other words focus middle........soft around the middle and somehow focused on the periphery= Sombrero curve
-
Had that one as well, a true boat anchor if there ever was one ...
However it was just a manual lens. I was talking about the AFS 200/2.
-
The AFS 2300/2 shows Nikon engineers can...
What lens is this? It must weigh 50 pounds. ???
Nah, even that "tiny" Zeiss 1700/4.0 weighs 564 pounds.
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3865393209/zeiss1700f4
-
If I remember well (tried to find the article with no success) this lens has been made for an wildlife arabic photografer.
I also remember in that article seing the lens mounted in the rear of a van...
Didn't bought it because still today there's not a proper backpack capable of holding it... :P
-
If I remember well (tried to find the article with no success) this lens has been made for an wildlife arabic photografer.
I also remember in that article seing the lens mounted in the rear of a van...
Didn't bought it because still today there's not a proper backpack capable of holding it... :P
Pedro, you would also need to think about replacing your favorite Cartoni tripod/head. :P
Sorry to stray. Let's go back to the 105/1.4!
-
Let's see... 105/1.4 = 75mm. If they use the standard 77mm filter size, that is an extremely tight fit - just 1mm margin around the edge for the retaining ring with no allowance for an oversize front element to reduce vignetting. They manage the same with the 300/4 lens which also has 75mm entrance pupil inside a 77mm filter, but that's less of a problem with long focal lengths. A 105mm lens has a wider angle of view so oblique rays are more likely to be cut off by filters causing vignetting. The picture on nikonrumors (assuming it is genuine) shows a retaining ring around the front element that is thicker than 1mm, so they are either cheating on the focal length, max aperture, or the filter size is 82mm like the new 24-70VR. Is 82mm becoming the new pro standard?
There were also rumors of a new AFS 70-200/2.8, might that also grow from the current 77mm to 82mm? With an entrance pupil of 200/2.8 = 71mm, that is also a tight fit inside the 77mm filter, especially since zooms tend to need a larger front element than primes.
Very fast 105mm lenses have always been curiously absent. Various manufacturers have very fast 85/1.4 and 85/1.2 lenses (60 or 71mm entrance pupil), fast 135/2 and even 135/1.4 lenses (68 or 96mm entrance pupil). Yet the fastest 105mm lenses are only 105/2 or the old AIS 105/1.8 (53 or 58mm). So an AFS 105/1.4 would represent a new class of lens. Yet I can't help wondering if an AFS 105/1.8 would be a better lens - smaller, easier to handle and more affordable.
-
Roland, considering that both AiAF and AF-S 85/1.4 have 77mm filter threads, it would be safe to assume that 105/1.4 would have an 82mm thread.
I remember reading an interview to a Nikon engineer who said that he had thought designing an AF version of 85/1.4 was almost impossible. I thought he was suggesting the difficulty of keeping the rear element from trimming drastically (like in Canon EF 50/1.0) because of the contact block. There should be a certain significant technical breakthrough that enables the design of 105/1.4 whose rear element should be huge. Or the lack of the aperture lever of "E" design may have helped.
-
The Canon 85/1.2 uses a 77mm filter size. If the new Nikon lens had a 100mm focal length, the entrance pupil would be the same (85/1.2 = 100/1.4 = 71), so 77mm would be possible, especially considering the narrower field of view. But Nikon adopted the 105mm focal length since the mid 1950s for better separation from the 85mm lenses, that will force them to use a larger filter size for the 105/1.4 lens.
The size of the front element depends mainly on the size of the entrance pupil, especially once you get to about 60mm or longer (FX format). However the size of the rear element is roughly dependent on the maximum aperture only, and not affected by the focal length. Nikon already have 24, 35, 50, 58 and 85mm lenses with an f/1.4 aperture - all have similar size rear element - I expect a 105mm would also be the same. Lack of the aperture lever on "E" lenses would give the designer a little more freedom with the size of the rear element.
Akira - what time is it in Tokyo - you must be up very early! :)
-
So an AFS 105/1.4 would represent a new class of lens. Yet I can't help wondering if an AFS 105/1.8 would be a better lens - smaller, easier to handle and more affordable.
The undisclosed "Roadmap" says to me:
Nikon sells a 2000 Euro 1.4 and 3 years later introduces a 1.8 that is just as good to the people who did not buy the first one.
-
Just like they did with the 24/1.4 :)
Only with 105mm, first they'll introduce an expensive 105/1.4 first, then an expensive updated 105DC, then an expensive new 105 micro, and finally a (barely) affordable 105/2 :o
-
Just like they did with the 24/1.4 :)
Only with 105mm, first they'll introduce an expensive 105/1.4 first, then an expensive updated 105DC, then an expensive new 105 micro, and finally a (barely) affordable 105/2 :o
I think so.
And if we want our favourite brand to survive, the marketing concept is very good.
-
The Canon 85/1.2 uses a 77mm filter size. If the new Nikon lens had a 100mm focal length, the entrance pupil would be the same (85/1.2 = 100/1.4 = 71), so 77mm would be possible, especially considering the narrower field of view. But Nikon adopted the 105mm focal length since the mid 1950s for better separation from the 85mm lenses, that will force them to use a larger filter size for the 105/1.4 lens.
The size of the front element depends mainly on the size of the entrance pupil, especially once you get to about 60mm or longer (FX format). However the size of the rear element is roughly dependent on the maximum aperture only, and not affected by the focal length. Nikon already have 24, 35, 50, 58 and 85mm lenses with an f/1.4 aperture - all have similar size rear element - I expect a 105mm would also be the same. Lack of the aperture lever on "E" lenses would give the designer a little more freedom with the size of the rear element.
Akira - what time is it in Tokyo - you must be up very early! :)
Good morning! :D My last comment had been posted right before I went to bed.
Anyway, other considerations of the diameter of the front element would be the light fall-off and the shape of the round bokeh. Even if the theoretical speed of a lens can be realize by the calculation of the entrance pupil, the only necessary diameter would not allow the enough amount of light reaching for the peripheral areas of the image sensor. In addition, the obvious light fall-off is related to the cat's eye shape of the bokeh in the background. In order to keep the bokeh as round as possible, the front element should be larger than necessary for the speed.
As for the diameter of the rear element, you may be right.
-
..................Yet I can't help wondering if an AFS 105/1.8 would be a better lens - smaller, easier to handle and more affordable.
Affordable is relative....
It would be a lens I would love as it would fit my studio. But I doubt I will be in that price class.
-
Definitely interesting, though out of my league price-wise. And here I was saying recently that if a new 105mm came out that it would likely be a new DC. This lens is quite a surprise.
-
I have always been partial to the 105 mm focal length, so this lens if of the quality I'd expect is high on my priority list. One simply has to close eyes and not think of the price I'm afraid.
-
I could trade my 85/1.4G for this one. :)
-
The AFS 2300/2 shows Nikon engineers can, if they so wish, make a superfast lens having internal focusing yet not exhibiting the usual optical side effects in terms of CA of the axial kind. However, that kind of performance doesn't come for free: price and weight are the response.
Yes, but ... if the 105/1.4 is intended as a portrait lens, as the large aperture suggests, it will be over-corrected for spherical aberration, as the 200/2 does not need to be. Over-corrected spherical aberration is what gives you the nice smooth bokeh in the background - the foreground bokeh is ugly bright rings, but that is rarely an issue in portraits. (Perfectly corrected spherical aberration gives less soft bokeh that is symmetrical from front to back and uncorrected spherical aberration gives nice smooth foreground bokeh and harsh ring bokeh in the background: the DC lenses change the amount of spherical aberration so you can move the attractive bokeh around). Spherical aberration is wavelength dependent, so colour fringing is always prominent in lenses with designed-in spherical aberration.
Spherical aberration increases with the cube of the aperture, so even one stop less maximum aperture makes a big difference - this is why among portrait lenses an f/1.8 is never quite the same as an f/1.4 as far as bokeh smoothness goes.
-
That does it! I'm going to have to sell my house and live in a tent.
Dave
-
No need to live in a tent. You can live in the box it comes with ;)
-
No need to live in a tent. You can live in the box it comes with ;)
You make tents sound very spacious. ;)
-
No need to live in a tent. You can live in the box it comes with ;)
Yes but!
I need a 24/1.4, 58/1.4 and 105/1.4 to be complete. :)
Dave
-
Yes but!
I need a 24/1.4, 58/1.4 and 105/1.4 to be complete. :)
Dave
So, you can have a second house and a summer house!
-
If the 105/1.4 is intended as a portrait lens, as the large aperture suggests, it will be over-corrected for spherical aberration, as the 200/2 does not need to be.
I think you mean under-corrected for spherical aberration...
This is possible, since Nikon seem to optimise lenses more for beautiful rendering rather than resolution, which is why they don't always do well on test charts - the 58/1.4 being an obvious example.
However, a 105/1.4 lens has an entrance pupil larger than 135/2.8 or 180/2.8 lenses, the blur circles will be so large that the lens could be perfectly corrected for spherical aberrations (neutral bokeh) and background would still be rendered smoothly. I expect most super-telephotos are corrected like this to ensure maximum sharpness - spherical aberrations cause loss of sharpness towards the edge of the image. Maybe just a shade under-corrected, not enough to affect sharpness too much, but enough to make the background smoother? I'm sure the lens designers have long discussions on this...
-
In addition, the obvious light fall-off is related to the cat's eye shape of the bokeh in the background. In order to keep the bokeh as round as possible, the front element should be larger than necessary for the speed.
Or the whole optical unit (front to back) is as short as possible. The 105/4 micro is a good example, the front element is not oversized but the optical unit is very compact - just 5 elements grouped near the front of the lens barrel. That means oblique rays are hardly clipped by the edge of the front or rear elements. A single-element magnifying glass is the most extreme example - no mechanical vignetting at all!
Obviously compact designs are rarely possible with high speed lenses. Even with oversize front elements most have high mechanical vignetting, giving strong light fall-off and cats-eye bokeh towards the edges of the image.
-
This is what Nikon say about the lens in the press release: "The 105mm f/1.4E is a fast lens with endearing character, providing stellar optical performance, even in the peripherals. Sharp rendering is attained for shooting distant subjects throughout the aperture range – from maximum aperture to being stopped down by several stops. Gradual alteration from the focal plane helps render subjects in high-fidelity with a natural depth, giving colorful portraits and landscapes that little bit of extra “pop” to help create a truly distinct image. The AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4 is also an excellent choice for low-light photography, as its large maximum aperture allows photographers to shoot at the fastest possible shutter speeds. Additionally, this lens can reproduce point light sources faithfully without sagittal coma flare, even on the edges of the frame.
Masterful Lens Construction
Decades of precision, knowledge and experience are put forth into every NIKKOR lens, and the AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E ED is an exceptional example of brilliant craftsmanship and Nikon technologies merging. Packed with the latest advanced optical innovations, the 105mm f/1.4 features Nikon’s electromagnetic aperture control technology for consistent exposures, even during high speed continuous shooting.2
On the outside, solid build quality is well-balanced for all-day shooting, while the lens is sealed and gasketed to resist dust and moisture. Additional Fluorine coatings are used on the front and rear elements, so that smudges, dirt or moisture are easily removed. Inside the lens, the optical formula consists of 14 elements in nine groups, which include three ED glass elements. A 9-blade diaphragm further helps to create a circular, pleasing out of focus area. The lens also features Nikon’s Nano Crystal Coat technology to significantly reduce instances of ghosting and flare."
-
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ja&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http://www.nikon-image.com/products/lens/nikkor/af-s_nikkor_105mm_f14e_ed/features01.html&edit-text=
The rendering looks lovely :o :o :o
just look at the guy that looks like a genie, the lens is a worthy successor to the 105mm f/2.5 lens line ::)
-
"A worthy successor to the 105mm f/2.5 lens line"?
Well let us hope so.
With today's optical design, materials, and manufacturing know how at their disposal, I just wonder what Nikon could come up with by way of an entirely new 105mm f/2.5 lens? It would be quite special I am sure.
-
f/2.5 does not mean anything nowadays..people want fast fast fast :o :o :o
i want cheap cheap cheap ::)
-
Getting more interesting. Certainly not a light weight (Approx. 985 g (2 lb 2.8 oz) ). I really do like the FL for indoor events and functions shooting mainly people participating and attending. I spent time checking out 135mnm vs 105mm in the venues where I often shoot and 105mm was a far more useful FL. My keeper rate would go up with AF vs MF.
Richard, I do not often use my f1.4 85D at 1.4 but there are times I really want to separate two people having a social interaction . It is more money than I need to spend :(
-
Wow that is a nice les, designed like the 35 and 58mm 1.4 AFS - looks perfect in more or less all aspects 8) and fits the line of 1.4 AFS lenses
Only little issue with the others is the slow AF speed but let's see ;)
-
Here is the original site where you can see the thumbnails a little larger:
http://www.nikon-image.com/products/lens/nikkor/af-s_nikkor_105mm_f14e_ed/sample.html
It has a very very nice rendering! Size and weight is perfectly acceptable IMHO
-
Wow that is a nice les, designed like the 35 and 58mm 1.4 AFS - looks perfect in more or less all aspects 8) and fits the line of 1.4 AFS lenses
Only little issue with the others is the slow AF speed but let's see ;)
these are the new generation of Nikkors. :o :o :o plastic fantastics!
i hope that they can have you program the AF like Sigma
-
Richard, I do not often use my f1.4 85D at 1.4 but there are times I really want to separate two people having a social interaction . It is more money than I need to spend :(
it is rather expensive, I will say that :o :o :o
-
,,,,,i hope that they can have you program the AF like Sigma
I have no need for anything like that! ;D
-
The picture of the lady that looks like Marie from Roxette is too warm for my taste ::) but the details are stunning! i can see the "curleche" ( <- no english eqivalent?) and it is a very flattering lens
The 2 pictures of the dark lady shows great sample isolation and nice details in the mid range :o :o :o the 105mm f/2.5 does this very well,too!
sorry if i keep on comparing this to the 105 2.5
-
Erik, size and weight...well, definitely better than the D3S w/ 70-200 2.8 and about the same as the 24-70 2.8 so I can live with it ;)
AF speed is a question but I have no real problems using 84 1.4D, DC105 f2D for catching most one-off candids and neither are speed merchants. Faster would be nice. MF works but occasionally miss that split second look or gesture.
-
Sure the AF-D lenses are faster than the AFS 1.4 G lenses on the Pro cameras,,,
They are slow by design Nikon stated to allow for perfect 1.4 focus,,,
The rendering does look very close to that of the 105mm 2.5 or 2.0 DC it just goes one or two steps beyond and above as far as I can tell - Dare I state same league as 200mm 2.0
-
Very interesting samples in bokeh terms. Translates more to an extended 85/1.4. DOF is however larger than the 200/2 but can come close, difficult to judge from these samples.
-
the 85mm f/1.4 can partially fulfill the 50mm/58mm and 105mm f/1.4's role :o :o :o
this is probably best for people who want 28mm 50mm and 105mm f/1.4 ::)
-
The 105/1.4E is now official. Filter size is indeed 82 mm as we have speculated over earlier.
In the press release, Nikon specifically points out the new lens has three ED elements in order to reduce axial colour (longitudinal chromatic aberration). They also state that the vignetting causing "cat's eyes" has been minimised so blur circles are circles even in the out parts of the frame.
Price is, as expected, on the stiff side, but I'm going to pre-order the lens nevertheless.
I assume the lens will be available for inspection at the upcoming PhotoKina, at which event miraculously also yours truly will be present.
-
Any idea on price Bjørn?
I see H&B is not listing it yet for pre-order.
-
Nikon Nordic wants NOK 23,000 for it. That's about the same price as a D500 or Df.
-
That - my friend - is STEEEEEEEEP :o
-
That is about the same price here :o :o :o
https://www.mapcamera.com/item/4960759146656
-
Today I went to Nikon Ginza showroom to have my D750 and AF-S50/1.8G checked (I dropped the combo from about 40cm hight to the wooden floor :o). To my relief, neither the camera or the lens was found to be affected.
Then I found new flyers of 102/1.4E. The people at the showroom said that it had been official at 1:00 PM in Tokyo.
-
Really great news to see this lens appear. This is a great alternative to the Zeiss 135 -- a bit shorter, faster, but about the same price, size and weight. And AF is a benefit. It seems like a golden age with so many great lenses to choose from.
However, despite the 82mm filter thread the lens produces cat's eyes like most ultra-fast lenses:
(http://www.nikon.ch/imported/images/web/EU/products/lenses/nikkor/af-s-nikkor-105mm-f1.4e-ed/key-features/nikon_nikkor_lens_afs_105mm_f1_4e_focal_length--original.jpg)
Not a big deal in my opinion, but just to set expectations straight.
I'm not quite sure how the wording in the press release was intended.
-
That is about the same price here :o :o :o
https://www.mapcamera.com/item/4960759146656
Fujiya camera offers it for the same price. ;D
http://www.fujiya-camera.jp/shopdetail/000000039679/ct1135/page1/brandname/
-
Ohooo. It is not a 58/1.4 sauce in the sense no Mexican Sombreros around.....however we have inherited an ugly dog's "cone of shame" lens hood.
The 85/1.4 and 58/1.4 have obviously better Bokeh vs the 105/1.4 and cat eyes.
It seems that they have butchered the Bokeh to get a sharper focus WO......which is fine.....it just seemd a bit unreal sharpness.....it just looks as if it is retouched......which is great if real as it will save us lot of time in retouching.
The bokeh Royal linage still rest with the 200 - 85 - 58......but hey.....whose complaining.
-
Indeed a nice and interesting lens.
i hope that they can have you program the AF like Sigma
Richard,
I hope that Nikon is not going the route of Sigma with regards to AF adjustment. The USB dock solution is a solution to a problem which shouldn't exist in the first place. The cameras can't recognize the (type of) Sigma lens in their firmware, hence the AF correction values need to be stored in the lens. Instead of agreeing with Nikon on a license agreement, users are asked to invest their time to adjust the AF with multiple correction values (different distances, different focal lengths with zooms).
The lens is supposed to be available end of August. W'll see.
rgds,
Andy
-
posted link i tried delivered page in japanese ... this seems to work:
http://www.nikon.com/news/2016/0727_lens_01.htm
www already picking this up e.g.
https://www.dpreview.com/news/6025394569/nikon-introduces-ultra-fast-af-s-105mm-f1-4e-ed-prime-lens
Indeed a steep US price but this looks to be one superb pro lens, and the latest in a distinguished stable of front runners. Those previous models won't die soon, as we know ;) And last month, i bought a 105 f2.5 AI out of retirement :-)
-
The impressive MTF chart hints at a very sharp lens even sharper than the Nikkor 85mm 1,4 AFS that is already by far sharp enough for most applications in my book ;)
The New 105mm1.4 AFS is stated as having a ring type motor for the AF - Potentially giving it same or similar AF acquisition speed as say a 200mm 2.0 AFS - Would be a huge plus IMHO,,,
-
UK Rreccomended Retail Price: £2,049.99 inc. VAT
Sales Start Date: 25th August 2016
http://www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/newsitem.php?id=418&pg=1&mem=&arc=0
-
€2459 in Holland
I think I'll wait a year or so.
-
The New 105mm1.4 AFS is stated as having a ring type motor for the AF - Potentially giving it same or similar AF acquisition speed as say a 200mm 2.0 AFS - Would be a huge plus IMHO,,,
I wonder if this lens was conceived as a "short 200/2" rather than a "fast 100mm" ... with ring-type motor and large number of ED elements it has more in common with the super-telephotos than the shorter lenses.
Close focus limit is 1m, with magnification of 0.13x (1:7.7), about the same as the 85/1.4 and 105DC so nothing special here.
No aspherical lenses so no onion-ring bokeh.
Vignetting (cats-eye bokeh) is present towards the corners when shot wide open (as expected) but not excessive. I imagine it will be largely gone by f/2 and completely gone by f/2.8
-
I agree; the images look a lot like the 200/2 II would produce.
-
.
-
Yet another new filter size (Nikon is developing a zoo in comparison to former years)
So the 105 f/1,4 would couple well with the 500mm f/8 Reflex ;-)
-
Wolfgang, the filter size of Reflex 500/8.0 was 86mm...
-
Akira, maybe you mean the first version (Ken Rockwell is giving 88mm but that would not mean too much)
The newer version has 82mm thread
-
Akira, maybe you mean the first version (Ken Rockwell is giving 88mm but that would not mean too much)
The newer version has 82mm thread
Wolfgang, you are right. Sorry for the confusion!
-
Back to 105/1.4, it is so big that it makes D5 look like D5500...
-
Nikon lenses with 82mm filter:
- 18cm/2.5 preset for rangefinder
- 35cm/4 preset for for rangefinder
- 3.5-8.5cm prototype zoom
- 85-250/4
- 200-600/9.5
- 500/8 reflex (new) (the older version is 88mm)
- AF 300/4 (also 39mm rear filter)
- AFS 24-70 VR
So it's not unprecedented especially among older leness, but not exactly common either.
-
The USB dock solution is a solution to a problem which shouldn't exist in the first place. The cameras can't recognize the (type of) Sigma lens in their firmware, hence the AF correction values need to be stored in the lens. Instead of agreeing with Nikon on a license agreement, users are asked to invest their time to adjust the AF with multiple correction values (different distances, different focal lengths with zooms).
I'm not sure how eager Nikon would have been to grant a license to Sigma. There seems to be some long-standing animosity between the two firms. And unlike Nikon, Sigma does allow you to store multiple correction values for zoom lenses.
-
Finally a 105mm and I am pleased to note it is a 1.4 as long as it is not similar to the 58/1.4 with the Sombrero feature.
After reading between the lines in Nikon's announcement, I would guess that this lens will be using the same lens design philosophy as the 58/1.4. It is aimed at the portrait market. I have not had a problem with real world photos based on this concept with my 58/1.4. This review, that I saw after I purchased my lens, covers all of the other reviews that I saw before I bought it.
https://photographylife.com/category/lens-reviews/page/3 (top review). You need to read the whole thing. I am excited to see how the 105 behaves compared to the 58. Then I need to find a lot of money :)
-
Let's be a bit realistic here.
There is a difference between NEED and WANT.
I am addressing the NEED.
There is absolutely no reason on this earth why one NEEDS this lens to make better photos if one has a lens you are already using successfully in studio. (I am referring to photographers like me) This lens wasn't available last year - and I did just fine without it. My studio photos will not be $2000 better with the new lens. My clients will not even notice the difference. Hell, they would be horrified knowing I purchased a lens for this amount as they will feel THEY are paying for it.
Those who WANT it for whatever reason - nice challenge for improving on what you can or want to do artistically - etc - totally different and quite acceptable/justified in my opinion.
-
Akira, that image of the D5 combo is scary ;)
Elsa, absolutely right..... darn it :) . I succumbed to the 58 1.4G and have not regretted until a friend bought an 'as new' one last year for 1/2 the price I paid. In reality, after the honeymoon, I would probably grab my old 85 1.4D just because of the size and weight.
Tom
-
The results so far look good, though I would not at all put it in the same league as the 200/2. I am curious to see how it compares with the Zeiss 100/2 Makro. They aren't too far off in price and I find myself wishing the 105/1.8 focused closer more often than I find myself wishing for less depth, though that does rarely happen.
Elsa, photographers were making a living the year before every piece of gear you own came out as well. While we are all fortunate enough to not have to keep pace with every new piece of gear, the march of progress is always a good thing in the end. I suspect the Zeiss Makro would fit me better than the 105/1.4, but I am also happy the 105/1.4 came along. It could end up making way for another 105mm in the future that really does it for me. Hell, I hope someone makes a ~105mm f/1.2 just to push things! Even though I likely couldn't afford one.
-
Back to 105/1.4, it is so big that it makes D5 look like D5500...
Mass equals inertia: hand holding the105/1.4E on the Nikon D5 should be easy! :)
Dave
-
A 105/1.8E with a 77mm filter and similar performance would suite me. If money were no object I'd want both. Neither can have the size and weight advantage of the classic 105/2.5(s).
Dave
Can one truly sell their soul to the devil? If so I wonder how much mine would fetch?
-
Back to 105/1.4, it is so big that it makes D5 look like D5500...
Another reason to regard it as a "mini super-tele" rather than another lens like the 85/1.4 ...
The results so far look good, though I would not at all put it in the same league as the 200/2. I am curious to see how it compares with the Zeiss 100/2 Makro. They aren't too far off in price and I find myself wishing the 105/1.8 focused closer more often than I find myself wishing for less depth, though that does rarely happen.
The new 105/1.4 focuses to 1m, the same as the AIS 105/1.8, and pretty much the same framing at minimum focus too. If you need to focus closer with a fast telephoto, the Zeiss 100/2 or 135/2 are better choices (but no AF ...)
A 105/1.8E with a 77mm filter and similar performance would suite me.
105/1.8 = 58.3mm. The AIS 105/1.8 uses a 62mm filter but that's only barely big enough for the front element.I think an AFS version would be 67mm (same as AFS 85/1.8 ) or 72mm at the most.
Ever since the AF era, there has been a complete lack of compact telephoto primes longer than 85mm - no AF 105/2.5 or 135/2.8. I really wonder why, such lenses would be very useful for those who don't want the bulk/weight/price of fancy lenses like the 105 micro or DC lenses, or slow zooms.
-
The jury is still out on the 105/1.4. So far I do not see any creamy bokeh or round circles. What I see is a sharp lens WO which is fine.
I was mainly thinking about the way the eyes are rendered, extremely sharply in a narrow depth of field, similar to that by 200/2 II. Previous "portrait" lenses (fast short to mid tele primes) by Nikon have had relatively low contrast wide open and there is some spherical aberration as well; it seems the 105/1.4 is different in this respect and to my eye looks similar to 200/2 II. However, given a framing for the main subject, background features are smaller and there are more of them in an image by a 105mm lens than 200mm; the narrower angle of view of the longer lens helps simplify backgrounds and make them more abstract. This I regard mostly a feature of the longer focal length.
I was just using the 200/2 II in a church wedding on Saturday and took some close-ups where this was evident, the focused eye really "pops" out of the surround. I needed the fast lens because the church was very dimly lit (with 24-70 in my other camera I was using ISO 9000-12800, with the 200/2 I could stay at ISO 4000 (VR did help here)). I would prefer not to have to go to ISO 12800 too often but that day it was more common than not. A 105/1.4 would definitely help me stay with lower ISOs (compared to using e.g. 70-200) and I've always been fond of this focal length. It should pair well with the 24-70 and give a reasonable gap from 70mm.
-
I think the rendition of the new mid-teles like AF-S105/1.4E, Zeiss Otus/Milvis 85/1.4, Fuji 56/1.2 et al. reflect the modern style of portraiture: paper thin DOF and clear contrast between sharp focus and soft bokeh.
Years ago, the portraits, especially those of the females, were shot with soft focus lenses, and some specialized lenses like Leica Thambar 90/2.2 or Rodenstock Imagon even used attachments to enhance the spherical abberation or flare for the soft focus effect. The older Nikkor mid-teles were designed with that in mind: the spherical aberration increased when focused in the portrait range, which should be the similar concept.
-
Ever since the AF era, there has been a complete lack of compact telephoto primes longer than 85mm - no AF 105/2.5 or 135/2.8. I really wonder why, such lenses would be very useful for those who don't want the bulk/weight/price of fancy lenses like the 105 micro or DC lenses, or slow zooms.
Roland,
I don't think there is a chance for an AF-S 105/2.5E ED. The AF-S 105/2.8G ED Micro is about as close as I think we will ever see and it's about the same size as the 180/2.8 AIS. With its hood it's huge. I bought a AF-S 105/2.8G ED Micro recently and I'd read reviews and seen photos but still I was taken back on the bulk of the lens. I like it but it's a storage problem and I hate taking the hood off and reversing it. There is nothing safe to hold once the hood is reversed. I all but never take off the HS-14(s) I use on my 105/2.5 and 135/2.8.
I would love to see a compact professional quality dSLR About the size and weight of an F3 with a set of primes as close in size as possible to the AI/AIS 24/2.8, 28/2.0 35/2.0 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 105/2.5. The camera would not be a retro but a modern dSLR control layout. It would have to be taller for controls. Not a chance but one can dream...
I'd like a AF-S 105/1.4E ED despite the size and weight as it opens up new possibilities for low light photography.
Best,
Dave
-
I would love to see a compact professional quality dSLR About the size and weight of an F3 with a set of primes as close in size as possible to the AI/AIS 24/2.8, 28/2.0 35/2.0 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 105/2.5. The camera would not be a retro but a modern dSLR control layout. It would have to be taller for controls. Not a chance but one can dream...
I'm with you. It is my assumption that while a camera that small is 'merely' a matter of the electronics being shrunken down in size a bit, lenses that small would need to exclude auto focus, an act which would be seen as asking for death in the marketplace. But who knows...Maybe they'll be able to shrink AF....
-
As a big fan of fast lenses I can't wait to try this beast at the Photokina.
And yes "beast" is the appropriate term when comparing it to it's 1.4's siblings, got to love that impressive front lens 8)
-
:o I am a sucker for giant front elements.
-
:o I am a sucker for giant front elements.
Then you'd need to acquire a 600/4 ;-)
-
As a big fan of fast lenses I can't wait to try this beast at the Photokina.
And yes "beast" is the appropriate term when comparing it to it's 1.4's siblings, got to love that impressive front lens 8)
It's available at the end of August, so with a little luck Bjørn has his review copy with him or one of the others.
-
Entrance Pupil Envy(tm)
Dave
EPE: modern medicine confirms it can only be treated with cash.
-
A while ago NikonRumor reported a Nikon patent for a 135mm 1:1.8 lens. By coincidence or design 135/1.8 = 75mm, exactly the same entrance pupil as the 105/1.4. I wonder if there will be a companion for the 105/1.4 with 135mm focal length?
-
looks like Nikon is updating some of it's classics :o :o :o
-
Then you'd need to acquire a 600/4 ;-)
If size matters, go get a Samyang 500/6.3, which costs next to nothing and makes decent pictures.
-
Here are 4 images in full resolution to download (2x D810 and 2x D5)
>Click here (https://www.flickr.com/photos/petapixel/sets/72157668716365503/with/28576850366/)<
rgds, Andy
-
I am worried about the tendency for swirly bokeh and cat's eyes. Not what I'd expected from the Nikon blurb presented to me.
-
Personally I actually love cats eyes towards the perimetres. Swirly bokeh too for that matter.
-
Does anyone know of any Nikon tele lens that is very fast and does not have cat's eyes towards the periphery of the image? As far as I can see, all of the usual suspects have it to some degree, i.e. 85/1.4, 105 and 135/2, 200/2, and now this 105/1.4.
I suspect that in order for that type of vignetting to be completely absent, the front elements would have to be of excessive size.
-
Back to 105/1.4, it is so big that it makes D5 look like D5500...
That is a BIGGIE!
-
Does anyone know of any Nikon tele lens that is very fast and does not have cat's eyes towards the periphery of the image? As far as I can see, all of the usual suspects have it to some degree, i.e. 85/1.4, 105 and 135/2, 200/2, and now this 105/1.4.
I suspect that in order for that type of vignetting to be completely absent, the front elements would have to be of excessive size.
The problem of cat's eyes with the 200/2 is minor.
In order for this kind of vignetting to be totally eliminated not only the front element but everything including the girth of the lens casing has to be larger. Alternative, lens speed must drop and/or the physical length of the optics assembly must be shortened. There is a balance to be struck here somewhere.
-
Two examples pulled from my archive files to show cat's eyes not always occur. Taken with the Nikkor 1200/11 and 300/2.8.
-
Bjørn, if I understand correctly, the mechanism of how the bokeh circles appear in the latter example is different from that of the cat's eye bokeh in the background.
-
No, not really. If there is mechanical vignetting present, the blur circles will be cut off to become "cat's eyes".
-
The undisclosed "Roadmap" says to me:
Nikon sells a 2000 Euro 1.4 and 3 years later introduces a 1.8 that is just as good to the people who did not buy the first one.
Frank, you nailed it. I am a bit surprised to see this 105 before a fast 135, as many have asked for a Nikon match to that item in Canon's line up. I will probably not be buying one of these as it is pricey and not my style anyway. A fast 135, perhaps.
-
i think we should change the title :o :o :o
-
I am a bit surprised to see this 105 before a fast 135, as many have asked for a Nikon match to that item in Canon's line up.
I would have preferred Nikon to issue roughly evenly spaced AF-S updates to the primes that cover the whole range of focal lengths (e.g. 24/50/105/180/300) and then refine the lineup with in-between focal lengths and maximum aperture variations, but they took a different route. Nikon seems to have started from the 50/1.4 and then expanded gradually from there into both directions (another center of development was the long fast primes, which they have been regularly updating, but for a long time they regarded body motor AF good enough for the shorter primes, which it is not IMO).
I'd be surprised if they issue a 105/1.8 later; it would still belong into the ultra-fast category - how many different versions of a given focal length can really be needed? There is still no AF-S 135mm or AF-S 180mm. :o
I am still very happy that Nikon is paying attention to fast primes, and will not complain about the 105/1.4 per se.
-
If Nikon released a 105/1.8 that continued with the 105/1.8 Ais' strengths I would buy it in a heartbeat. I could be wrong, but I am guessing the portraiture focus of the 105/1.4 will leave it with noticeable field curvature.
-
According to the MTF curve at f/1.4, the new lens should have an amazingly flat field.
-
Ilkka. Nikon caters to different markets at different price points. If you and I or Bjørn or many others on this
special forum want a lens we grind our teeth and put another 2000 Euros on the counter.
Yet. The market for 1000 Euro lenses and 500 Euro lenses is much bigger. And I am very happy about that.
In 1996 I got my F4s used for 1500 German Marks plus a new 1.8/85D for 900 Marks.
What used camera would you get for 750 Euros today? A D3? Not yet.
BUT and that is the point. You can get the current 1.8/85G for 450 Euros.
Very wise policy: give the Enthusiasts a head start and make them pay.
Later cater to the crowd, recycling the design and downgrading it for manufacturing costs.
Your other point is more difficult to address: Why did they choose to step through the focal length that way?
I guess because the tele designs were quite good and not selling like ice cream.
And because, apart from terrific zooms Nikon was short on stunning wide angle options.
Now we got plenty of these, the 105 is next.
Fast, macro, slow, vintage, DC
That is a legendary focal length with lots of incarnations to come.
I am interested in a AF-S micro nikkor that does not change fl focussing. VR3 could be nice.
-
Ilkka. Nikon caters to different markets at different price points. If you and I or Bjørn or many others on this
special forum want a lens we grind our teeth and put another 2000 Euros on the counter.
If we don't have the frogskins are the rest of us allowed to grind our teeth?
Dave
-
Frank, I'm not questioning the need or usefulness of the intermediate maximum aperture primes. I would like nothing better.
However, Nikon's policy in the autofocus era has been difficult to understand. For the longest of time, Nikon did not see the need to update the focusing of their AF Nikkor primes, all the while making no less than six variants of the f/2.8 telezoom, improving the autofocus at every step of the way. Of course the sales of the primes have been poor; what is the value of a fast prime with no means of reliably focusing it? Trying to manual focus a 180/2.8 AF(D) (N) had me climbing on walls in frustration. Having to fire a burst to get one shot in focus is hardly a good approach when properly implemented technology that was available to Nikon (exhibited by the AF-S f/2.8 telezooms) would have easily solved the problem. One of the reasons I overshoot regularly is because I had to focus bracket every situation with the 180/2.8 and it's been difficult to shake the habit.
Now suddenly Nikon sees fit to make two AF-S primes of each focal length? So they finally admit that there is in fact demand. I believe the demand was always there but Nikon in essence told us that everyone who is serious about autofocus photography should just use the f/2.8 telezoom. I know a lot of people who do not want that lens and prefer something which is either faster or more compact, or both. I loved the compactness of the 135/2.8 and 180/2.8 - and I believe the 180/2.8 AF (D) has been quite popular inspite of its shortcomings. Many enthusiasts would love these lenses with properly implemented focusing (both auto and manual) and a bit less LoCA. This was the main reason I purchased the 200/2 - to get focusing that I could count on, at large apertures. The 105/1.4 is along the same lines - it seems to be about breaking records of lens design rather than providing users with practical tools. I'm not saying it will not be a great lens; it's just that something a bit less exotic might suit the needs of a larger group of photographers.
I would like to ask Nikon for a little bit of consistency, and I'm not talking about regular updates of already spectacular performers but improving what is weak in the lineup and thinking about what is practical for professional and enthusiast alike.
-
One thing that is good about these super high resolution, fast primes is that when combined with high resolution camera bodies, such as the D810, there is quite a bit of flexibility in cropping which brings these lenses closer to zooms in practical use. I've noticed little damage to the quality of 200/2 II images when cropped by 1.5x in stage lit concerts and this gives added working range to the lens. I imagine the 105/1.4 should be similar. But the ability to do this crucially depends on how well the focusing works. If it is reliable and sufficient for the demands of depth of field at f/1.4, then the lens will be very useful also for event documentary images and not just portraits.
At weddings, I find myself often looking for medium telephoto lenses to pick audience / guest reactions to the speeches and program. The audience in the church can be in very low light, e.g. f/2, 1/125s, ISO 6400 is not atypical and places can be darker still. 1/125s is not a motion stopping shutter speed, but it usually allows relatively stationary reactions to be recorded sharply with the help of VR. Or, with an f/1.4 lens, at 1/250s which is already sufficient to stop most movement apart from sports etc. Although ISO 12800 has become usable in some of the latest camera bodies (D750, D5, D4 and Df) I still find the tonality thin and I would prefer to stay with lower ISO settings, but that really does require f/2 or f/1.4 lenses in some cases. I have reasonable amount of hope that the new 105/1.4 will focus fast enough, and above all, accurately so that it can be used for documentary photos in dim light as well as portraiture. If it turns out to be similar in AF performance to the 200/2 (II), I won't grind my teeth much. I still think they should make a 135mm as well, and in that case it should be at most f/1.8, or f/2, to avoid excessive cost and weight. Apo Sonnar image quality and Nikon SWM focusing - now that would be quite something. :)
-
....Now suddenly Nikon sees fit to make two AF-S primes of each focal length? So they finally admit that there is in fact demand. I believe the demand was always there but Nikon in essence told us that everyone who is serious about autofocus photography should just use the f/2.8 telezoom. I know a lot of people who do not want that lens and prefer something which is either faster or more compact, or both. I loved the compactness of the 135/2.8 and 180/2.8 - and I believe the 180/2.8 AF (D) has been quite popular inspite of its shortcomings. Many enthusiasts would love these lenses with properly implemented focusing (both auto and manual) and a bit less LoCA. This was the main reason I purchased the 200/2 - to get focusing that I could count on, at large apertures. The 105/1.4 is along the same lines - it seems to be about breaking records of lens design rather than providing users with practical tools. I'm not saying it will not be a great lens; it's just that something a bit less exotic might suit the needs of a larger group of photographers.
I would like to ask Nikon for a little bit of consistency, and I'm not talking about regular updates of already spectacular performers but improving what is weak in the lineup and thinking about what is practical for professional and enthusiast alike.
More than another 105, a revamped 180 2.8 AF pro lens will be something, especially is it can be kept as compact and even sharper (!) than the 180 f2.8 AFD:-)
The classic primes have been redone for 85 and 200, and in the supertelephotos. 105 is well provided for; the 135 f2D DF is specialist. The BIG gaps in the Nikkor primes crying out for state of the art updates are a fast 135 and 180!
-
I would like to ask Nikon for a little bit of consistency, and I'm not talking about regular updates of already spectacular performers but improving what is weak in the lineup and thinking about what is practical for professional and enthusiast alike.
I can only double underline this sentence.
That was a tough choice of you to buy and haul around the hefty 2/200G because Nikon did not update the optically amazing 2.8/180D...
ThomasMUA did a long series about how he manages to nail sharpness on most of his 2.8/180D shots (on the old forum) ... he focus traps most of the time iirc.
I am not sure if I am allowed to link threads from the old site here...
PS: The D500 is my first Nikon ever that can really AF fast primes fast and reliable. So it is not always the lens' fault only, it seems. I can even focus track with the 1.4/24G which could only be rated as "non AF" before the arrival of the D500 and D5
-
2 info's:
1) More High Res images
http://asklens.com/2016/07/nikon-105mm-f1-4-sample-images
2) Someone in another forum reported, that the lens is "Made in China"
rgds,
Andy
-
A little surprising that it is made in China, usually the high-end gear is made in Japan. On the other hand, all the other f/1.8 primes are made in China.
-
Roland,
I just relayed this info, couldn't confirm myself (due to a lack of lens :) )
Indeed, it would be interesting if this lens would be made in China.
A few potential "reasons":
1) Capacity limitations in Japan (earthquake)
2) A new factory opened for high quality gear in China
3) Modern factory automation available, reducing the need on large quantity of skilled labor
4) "Huge" quantities expected
5) Good 'ol - "lets maximize profit" approach
:)
rgds, Andy
-
Roland,
I just relayed this info, couldn't confirm myself (due to a lack of lens :) )
Indeed, it would be interesting if this lens would be made in China.
A few potential "reasons":
1) Capacity limitations in Japan (earthquake)
2) A new factory opened for high quality gear in China
3) Modern factory automation available, reducing the need on large quantity of skilled labor
4) "Huge" quantities expected
5) Good 'ol - "lets maximize profit" approach
:)
rgds, Andy
Last Monday I was at NPS bringing back a 200/2.0 loaner. They just received a 105/1.4, a so called IPS - Initial Preproduction Sample, and the rep asked me if I would like to try it. ;D
I tried it on a D810 but was not allowed to put the images on a card. So I could only "judge" from the LCD
I played with it for 5-10 minutes. It's a big piece of glass but it handled pretty easy. Rendering is alike the 58G; very pleasing.
The lens had a "made in China" tag on it.
According to the rep only lenses with a manufacturing price above about €2000,00 are made in Japan, all others in Thailand or China.
-
Last Monday I was at NPS bringing back a 200/2.0 loaner. They just received a so called IPS - Initial Preproduction Sample, and the rep asked me if I would like to try it. ;D
I tried it on a D810 but was not allowed to put the images on a card. So I could only "judge" from the LCD
I played with it for 5-10 minutes. It's a big piece of glass but it handled pretty easy. Rendering is alike the 58G; very pleasing.
The lens had a "made in China" tag on it.
According to the rep only lenses with a manufacturing price above about €2000,00 are made in Japan, all others in Thailand or China.
It's early morning but how is a 200/2 a sub-2000€ lens?
-
It's early morning but how is a 200/2 a sub-2000€ lens?
Chris brought back the 200/2 and tried the 105/1.4.
Good morning btw ;D ;D
-
I reconstructed the context as being of the 105/1.4.
IP samples are (usually) fully functional, but no guarantee they behave like the production items. Hence you are only allowed to play with them, not to show images taken with any IP product. Nikon is very strict on this issue and all NDAs have a specific clause on the restricted use of IP samples.
I once used an early IP sample of the 24-70/2.8 (first version) delivered without any multi-coating. One could appreciate the AF focusing speed, but not the propensity for flare and ghosting.
-
According to the rep only lenses with a manufacturing price above about €2000,00 are made in Japan, all others in Thailand or China.
Well, that doesn't sound correct.The manufacturing price normally is a fraction of the price that the product is sold to the customer. If all Nikon lenses that are being manufactured in Japan (based on the "made in Japan" text in the lens) cost about 2000€ or more to manufacture, it would mean most of these lenses are sold at a significant loss.
-
My Nikkor 16-35mm f/4 is Made in Japan and costs here less than $1'000
-
Don't shoot the messenger. ;D
I added 105/1.4 in the text.
-
That rep is definitely wrong. My 105/2DC is nowhere near $2000 even retail, much less manufacturing cost.
-
I expect if the rep was telling the truth it might be applicable for new lens models but maybe they'll end up moving some (less complex) models from the existing lineup to their Chinese production plant as well. Time will tell :)
-
The creators of this lens said, that they made the one with the 58/1.4 in their minds. If so, I'll pass on this lens. I do not like the new 58/1.4 one. It is my own, pure personal opinion. Everyone's way will vary, of course! LZ
-
I expect if the rep was telling the truth it might be applicable for new lens models but maybe they'll end up moving some (less complex) models from the existing lineup to their Chinese production plant as well. Time will tell :)
Exactly. Perhaps they started a couple of years ago with this.
105DC and 16-35VR are "old" lenses, I guess the 105DC is no longer manufactured and there're lots of samples in stock (on the shelf at Nikon) of the 16-35VR.
-
The manufacturing cost is unlikely to be more than about one third of the retail price. Thus only lenses that cost about 6000€ or higher to the customer would be made in Japan; that is seven lenses at the moment. The high value of the Yen may have pushed Nikon to move production to other countries but on this scale, not likely.
-
As far as I know my 1.4/24G was manufactured in Sendai before the 2011 Earthquake hit
-
Do we have Nikkor lenses which have different production sites ? Or, one lens, one site ?
-
Do we have Nikkor lenses which have different production sites ? Or, one lens, one site ?
The earlier lot of AiAF50/1.4D was made in Japan, whereas the later versions are made in China.
-
Quite a few Nikon lenses have shifted production from one country to another, you can see this detailed here: http://photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html
For example the AFS 105VR micro started production in Japan, later moving to China
The AFS 60mm micro started in Japan, moved to Thailand, back to Japan (possibly due to the flood a few years ago) then back to Thailand
The 18-105 and 15-140 both started in Thailand, now made in China.
And many others...
However I very much doubt we ever had the same lens made in two locations at the same time.
Going back to the 105/1.4, I have added the specifications to my site.
-
Thank you Akira & Roland 😊
-
I am looking forward to test drive the thing one day.
Everybody sure there is no VR?
-
VR lenses have "VR" in the lens name and barrel.
-
I am looking forward to test drive the thing one day.
Everybody sure there is no VR?
Sorry Frank, the sample I had was without VR.
-
I was curious bwcause it is so huge...
Anyone knows the weight? More that one kilogram I guess?
-
I was curious bwcause it is so huge...
Anyone knows the weight? More that one kilogram I guess?
985g. All specs can be had on Nikon's official website now.
-
We can safely assume there is a lot of plastic material inside it, then. Hopefully some reinforced carbon fibre variety to give robustness.
The glass alone must make up the better part of the total weight.
-
The 105/1.4 appears to have an outer plastic shell similar to lenses like the AFS 85/1.4. Overall the size and weight is similar to lenses like the 135DC and AFS 24-70, so I expect a similar mix of materials in the constuction.
-
I have the impression that Nikon is trying to reduce the weight of newer lenses. Most notable examples are the f1.8 wideangles which are very light for their significantly larger sizes compared to the old Ai AF f2.8 lenses. I also remember that I was quite surprised by the (light) weight of 16-35VR zoom.
The AF-S lenses like 24-70/2.8VR, 85/1.4 or the new 105/1.4 couldn't be light because, as Bjørn noted, their lens barrels are stuffed with thick or many optical glasses.
-
I see, the official announcement is there. I ask NPS for a sample.
-
The 105/1.4 appears to have an outer plastic shell similar to lenses like the AFS 85/1.4. Overall the size and weight is similar to lenses like the 135DC and AFS 24-70, so I expect a similar mix of materials in the constuction.
Roland,
I had the chance to handle it for a few minutes. A few things I memorized:
The 105mm/1.4 looks like and handles like a beefed-up AFS 85mm/1.4G. The difference is more tangible on the diameter, less on the length. With the hood, the length of the AFS 105mm/1.4 vs. the AFS 85mm/1.4G is about 4cm longer. The tactile feeling is very similar between the two lenses (on material, grip, buttons). The major differences on the tube are the golden characters "1.4G" vs. "1.4E ED", the inscription "M/A" and "M" and the white dot (finding the proper mounting position) is larger on the 105.
Dismounted, the AFS 85mm (a "G" lens) keeps the blades on the smallest aperture f16, the 105mm "E" keeps it open at f1.4. Looking through the front lens, there is a direct view on the inner imprint of the LF-1 "LF-1 Made in Japan".
While the weight is similar to the 135mm DC, the ratio diameter:length there is very different. Also the material.
With the AFS 24-70mm VR, the material seems to be more or less identical, but the "missing" diameter of the 24-70 creates a very different handling experience.
On a single digit body with the AFS 105mm, the combo handles "balanced".
BTW, it has 4+ screws (in your terminology), s/n is 7 digits.
rgds, Andy
-
Thanks Andy, I will add the new details to my list. I don't suppose you remember the serial number, or if it is indeed made in China?
-
..... or if it is indeed made in China?
Yes, it is listed as "Made in China"
-
scheduled to test this lens next week. :o :o :o
-
Apparently Nikon had another possibility of design for 105/1.4 using fluorite elements:
http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2016-08-05
Sorry the texts are all in Japanese. FWIW, the entries of this blogger (apparently of an optics/camera designer) are often cited in Nikonrumors website.
-
scheduled to test this lens next week. :o :o :o
Should already be appearing at Nikon showrooms in Ginza and Shinjuku?
-
Should already be appearing at Nikon showrooms in Ginza and Shinjuku?
latter half of this week I was told :o :o :o
-
The 105ED does not play well with small camera bodies and needs a D4s/D5 for proper balance.
There is no issue about acquiring focus and there is a "color" price to pay for the sharpness WO. What is of concern is the Cyan creeping out. No more heavy Reds but a conflict with Magenta as it seems the Cyan is taking over the curve.
This might be an issue with auto correction in processing unless C1P and LR/PS correct for the same. Lens profiling is gonna be needed.
The silver lining is that this is excellent for Split Toning and a time saver for skin retouching.
Compared with the 135D, the differential is the propensity to achieve critical focus on the fly......The 105 wins
The Bokeh and transition from sharp to OOF.....the 135 wins.....as well as for the color
Dunno what the landscape/flower/bugs photographers will make out of it as my reference is Beauty editorial images .
I am getting it anyway as our shooting season starts mid Septembre.
Disclaimer. I did not test the lens and only found the answers at the bottom of my coffee cup.
-
According to my dealer, the lens will arrive on Thu/Fri this week.
rgds, Andy
-
According to the Nikonrumors site, the 105DC is listed as discontinued at Amazon...
-
According to the Nikonrumors site, the 105DC is listed as discontinued at Amazon...
That would be inevitable. So, the 135/1.4E ED is just below the horizon, or at least 135/1.8? 8)
-
Not 135/1.4 I think - that would be as fat and expensive as a 200/2. Nikon did patent a 135/1.8 design some time ago. To get an idea of the size of such a lens, it would have a 75mm entrance pupil - identical to the 105/1.4 - I think we can see 82mm filter size becoming more common.
-
Yeah, I would also think that 135/1.8 is more likely.
The patent for a 115/1.4 VC is applied for by Tamron. Its theoretical entrance pupil is 82mm which would require at least an 86mm filter.
http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2016-08-24
The entrance pupil of a 135/1.4 is 96mm and the smallest standard filter size for the lens is a 105mm one!
That said, I would still a little doubt if Nikon would be content with a 135/1.8 which was preceded by Pentax and Sony/Zeiss.
-
115/1.4 VC would certainly be fun. I wish VR had been implemented in the 105/1.4.
-
Finally the pics started flooding in.....
........and IT IS SHARP.........unfortunately including the Bokeh!......and the Cyan is too high (probably this is the sharpness compromise to reduce Red and up Green?????).....we shall see as it has basically less warmth than the usual Nikkor Primes.
It really sits betwee the 85G's and the 200G......A Sport lens, it is not as the AF seems to be rather Zimmery.
https://taotzuchang.wordpress.com/2016/08/24/nikon105/
http://www.dslr-forum.de/showthread.php?t=1718219&page=36
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUHbSVaUO9o
-
Quote from Haruo Sato - Nikon;
...Nikon has recently released the new AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E ED, a 105mm lens that inherits the concept and ideas behind the traditional AI Nikkor 105mm f/1.8S while supporting the latest technical advances. This lens was developed with the same design concept as the AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G in mind. That is, “improved three-dimensional rendering characteristics”. While images captured with the AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E ED are just a little sharper than those captured with the 58mm f/1.4G, overall image characteristics are the same...
-
The reviewer Taylor Jackson in the YT video The First Nikon 105mm F1.4 Review (With Sample RAWs!) said something to the effect that the photos from the 105/1.4 and 85/1.4 were basically identical. I'm having a hard time with that. If the subject is the same size in the frame then the perspective has to be different as one will be standing farther away with the 105mm than with the 85mm. I never felt that an 85mm replaces a 105mm lens and vice versa. I prefer the 105mm over 85mm by a modest margin. Many attributes of the photos may be similar but not identical. A bit sloppy I think.
The video was interesting as one can see what a honker AF-S 105/1.4E ED is. It makes my AF-S 105/2.8G ED Micro look slim which it is not. It also make the 105/1.8 AIS look slim. I wonder if I got a bad sample when I special ordered the 105/1.8 AIS. I was not impressed with the 105/1.8 AIS.
It's just a fact that today's prime Nikkors are BIG compared to there manual focus counterparts. To me this is a major drawback for the AF lenses.
Dave
-
The reviewer Taylor Jackson in the YT video The First Nikon 105mm F1.4 Review (With Sample RAWs!) said something to the effect that the photos from the 105/1.4 and 85/1.4 were basically identical.
LOL, I was just going to post that he basically says "everything looks the same". So IMHO it's not worth paying much attention to it.
-
David, thanks for the tip-off. While I wouldn't call that a review, the raws are definitely handy and I will be taking a look at them.
Erik, I found that quote perplexing in the read. I have yet to try the 58/1.4, but from everything I have seen and heard it was designed quite differently from the 105/1.8. It would seem to me that if it followed the design concept of the 58/1.4 I would expect it to lack some of the corrections that makes the 105/1.8 unique from the 105s. In that case, it would only be carrying on the focal length and faster aperature. Once it gets into the hands of some NG members we will see for ourselves. One of my favorite things about NG, experiencing lenses vicariously through you guys! :-)
-
Nikon promised the 105/1.4 will be present at PhotoKina, to which event some of us plan to go. Thus in about 3 weeks' time, we'll know what all the fuss is about.
-
Tristin, That is not how I read it,,,
-
My copy arrived on thursday.
a few & quick impressions:
1) As it is a f1.4 lens. AF accuracy is good on my D5 (center AF field and AF fields at the edge work properly). Needed no adjustment
2) Different than the AFS 58mm/1.4 at open aperture - more sharpness
3) lens is not only for portraits, nice 3-d pop effect at larger distances
4) less LoCA at open aperture than the AFS 85mm/1.4
Will take more shots over the weekend. Enclosed a few initial images. all at f1.4. Just resized, no pp.
rgds, Andy
-
just look at how it dwarfed the Df :o :o :o
it has more mass then my FE ::)
maybe we should change he title of the topic?
-
1) As it is a f1.4 lens. AF accuracy is good on my D5 (center AF field and AF fields at the edge work properly). Needed no adjustment
on the pitiful AF module of my Df:
AF is not 24-70 fast BUT accurate. maybe closer to the 85mm f/1.8? i am actually impressed to be honest :o :o :o
-
nice separation even if it's 5m< :o :o :o
-
focus was fast enough for me to take a picture of her before she got shy and ran away :o :o :o
-
How is the focus ring?
-
Very typical, not as damped or greasy as manual lenses. Dof field is useless. It felt light but adequate,the tamrons felt better to be honest lol :o :o :o
-
Thank you Andy and Richard!
The images are phenomenal, but that might be because of the photographers, not just the lens :)
-
Thank you Andy and Richard!
The images are phenomenal, but that might be because of the photographers, not just the lens :)
thats only true for Andy's images hahaha. i have some more images but their of books and useless stuff because I just wanted to see the bokeh :o :o :o
this is a BIG and HEAVY lens ::)
-
Saw the real thing at a large retailer. Not for me! :D
-
I like what I see in Andy's Lory shot!
3D pop out effect. Yes.
-
A few images from the weekend. Water, sand and mud included :-)
Images in full resolution (out-of-cam JPEGs) can be found here:
https://onedrive.live.com/?id=C59FEF9F04ED4A3A%212051&cid=C59FEF9F04ED4A3A
All shots taken handheld and at f1.4.
3 images are taken with the D500, all the others with the D5.
rgds, Andy
-
Hi Andy,
3684 is excellent to demonstrate the possibilities. Like the rendering of the lens. :)
Harald
-
recent article pertinent to this thread
http://nikonrumors.com/2016/08/28/nikon-nikkor-af-s-105mm-f1-4e-ed-vs-dc-nikkor-af-105mm-f2d-lens-comparison.aspx/
and "The Nikon AF DC-NIKKOR 105mm f/2D lens is listed as "Discontinued by manufacturer" at Amazon.com"
http://nikonrumors.com/2016/08/24/nikon-af-dc-nikkor-105mm-f2d-lens-listed-as-discontinued.aspx/
"Update: Nikon UK confirmed that the AF DC-NIKKOR 105mm f/2D lens is no longer in production (thanks Harv)"
I will always hold a soft spot for the DC Nikkors, and do not plan to part with my 135 f2 DC :-)
-
One can only anticipate a price increase on the remaining DC Nikkors. ...
-
Complète report here http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_105mm_f1-4E_ED/verdict.shtml
-
It seems a love affair is growing with this lens. It is really a great lens.
It will not replace my 200/2 VII - 58G or my different 85's and I suppose I should publish some shots for the fun of it with the 105/1.4 - 135D - 100APO - 100ZF2 - 100Trioplan - 125Voigt....etc......No time to do that as the shooting Fashion season has started with a vengeance.
When it is impossible to shoot with the 200/2, I am carrying the 105/1.4 and either the 24G or the 50Art..... Great combos.
I shot this (crop) with a 105/1.4 test lens back in July before the official release......NDA and all that jazz......
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/Duke_1/_DSC7736-2_zpsyfwzikff.jpg)
-
I was shooting this street performer when accidentally I got some colour in the image. D5, 105/1.4, f/1.4, 1/800s, ISO 160.
-
I was shooting this street performer when accidentally I got some colour in the image. D5, 105/1.4, f/1.4, 1/800s, ISO 160.
I like it Ilkka...another Isac in the works perhaps...
-
Hmmm...reports of internal dust issues with brand new copies. My dealer told me to check one out, so we'll see how it goes...
-
Hmmm...reports of internal dust issues with brand new copies. My dealer told me to check one out, so we'll see how it goes...
Just checked, no problem with mine. :)
-
Some lenses aren't quite camera friendly ;D
-
Sten, can you put your fingers around the grip? ;D
-
Sten, can you put your fingers around the grip? ;D
As a matter of fact there is some room to spare between the grip and lens but it ain't much!
Clearly, the 105G is HEAVY and needs backing by something substantial.
-
A few with my favorite subject.
-
I like the second and third, Chris!
-
Chris, these are beautiful.
-
As a matter of fact there is some room to spare between the grip and lens but it ain't much!
Clearly, the 105G is HEAVY and needs backing by something substantial.
Yeah, I could tell.
Canon EF50/1.8 used to be called "the most expensive body cap". Now I would call D5100 "the most expensive lens rear cap"!
-
Chris those really show the quality of both subject and lens!
-
Apparently the 105/1.4E does well in IR. Thus, as of today, I'm joining the owners list.
-
Congrats. I'll keep my Zeiss 135/2: one cannot have everything. Plus , a MF Lens for doing event shoots: now that's a real challenge nowadays.
-
Seems to have become a very popular lens already! ;) Good for IR - Interesting ;)
-
AF focus in IR is off, but not by a wide margin even at f/1.4. probably can be adjusted by a fine-tune. Excellent IR contrast and sharpness, no signs of any hot spot. Actually I had expected such an issue to manifest itself, but today's test shooting bears out the lack of any hot spot.
-
I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. ...
-
We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Jakov, you are made of stern stuff, but there is a limit to what pressure even you can withstand ...
For visible-light work, one gets amazing sharpness for landscapes even at near wide open aperture. Many lesser lenses won't come close at their best apertures. Period.
For 'pure' IR with no visible-light components, sharpness at f/1.4 is again amazing.
For 'false-colour emulated Ektachtrome' stuff, a current favourite inclination of mine, there is significant visible light present and due to the focus offset, stopping down is recommended. Results are marvellous once the aperture is adjusted to cater for the required additional depth of focus.
-
I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. ...
I'll let you play with mine upcoming weekend. Lets see how strong you are (I mean mentally ;D).
-
Chris, you are killing me!
Luckily Bjørn didn't post any of his visible and IR images ::)
-
Chris, you are killing me!
Luckily Bjørn didn't post any of his visible and IR images ::)
I might do just that ....
Anyway, we'll meet up in a couple of days and you can play the 105/1.4 in stereo :D
-
I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. ...
So when are you buying it? ;D
-
I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. I will NOT buy this lens. ...
We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. We know will and soon. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
I know, I know, you guys like "The Shining".
-
Sunflowers are 'in the vogue' these days.
D500, 105 mm f/1.4 @f/3.2 (too bright for f/1.4 ....)
Overview & 100% crop.
-
A standard test subject ('my lake') in false-colour emulated Infrared Ektachrome. Not the most enticing subject in pictorial terms, but who cares. This is in fact an amazingly good rendition very close to what the film delivered in its days. For example, various deciduous tree species are identifiable and well separated from the confers.
D600 broad-spectrum, 105 mm f/1.4 @f/16, ISO 100. Overview and 100% crop
-
Bjørn, the first image in the immediately previous post looks VERY familiar. Is that the same location you used when you tested D70, D2H, D200 etc. for UV/IR sensitivity tests for the reviews in your classic website?
-
Yes. The very same lake and scenic landscape. This is my neighbourhood here in Oslo. Yet, I can get downtown to the city centre in 15 minutes by bus.
-
I was curious to learn whether the 105/1.4E could operate with extension. Of course it does, just don't fall for the myth that 'extension doesn't impact quality because there is no glass inside'.
The inescapable fact is that any extension added to a lens not designed for this will adversely impact quality. The 105/1.4E isn't designed for extension and its quality certainly suffer. Now, the more interesting points are how much quality is lost, and how can one control the aperture of the 'E' lens?
Extension adds the expected spherical aberration causing some veiling and lowering of contrast, but changes in field curvature were not dramatic. These are good news as the veiling can be used to create dream-like images, and contrast can be boosted to some extent later. Being able to stop down would also improve contrast and cut back on the spherical aberration. To this end, one either needs an extension tube with pass-through contacts (Kenko or similar; alternatively, butcher an 'E'-type TC and remove the glass inside), or utilising the dirty trick described in the next paragraph.
The cheap approach is using any F-mount extension, for example, an M- or E-ring as they have a maximum clear opening inside. Before adding the extension, conduct the following steps with the lens on camera: To put the aperture at the wanted setting, dial the number in from the camera, press the depth-of-field preview and at the same time, push the unlock button to detach the lens. The aperture will now be 'frozen' at the specified f-number. Add extension to the lens and put it back on the same or another camera. Fire away.
-
We should have a tips and tricks section :)
-
Consider the whole site a tips and tricks section ;)
-
I was curious to learn whether the 105/1.4E could operate with extension. Of course it does, just don't fall for the myth that 'extension doesn't impact quality because there is no glass inside'.
The inescapable fact is that any extension added to a lens not designed for this will adversely impact quality. The 105/1.4E isn't designed for extension and its quality certainly suffer. Now, the more interesting points are how much quality is lost, and how can one control the aperture of the 'E' lens?
Extension adds the expected spherical aberration causing some veiling and lowering of contrast, but changes in field curvature were not dramatic. These are good news as the veiling can be used to create dream-like images, and contrast can be boosted to some extent later. Being able to stop down would also improve contrast and cut back on the spherical aberration. To this end, one either needs an extension tube with pass-through contacts (Kenko or similar; alternatively, butcher an 'E'-type TC and remove the glass inside), or utilising the dirty trick described in the next paragraph.
The cheap approach is using any F-mount extension, for example, an M- or E-ring as they have a maximum clear opening inside. Before adding the extension, conduct the following steps with the lens on camera: To put the aperture at the wanted setting, dial the number in from the camera, press the depth-of-field preview and at the same time, push the unlock button to detach the lens. The aperture will now be 'frozen' at the specified f-number. Add extension to the lens and put it back on the same or another camera. Fire away.
. Correct, indeed! Out of questions! LZ
-
Being able to stop down would also improve contrast and cut back on the spherical aberration. To this end, one either needs an extension tube with pass-through contacts (Kenko or similar; alternatively, butcher an 'E'-type TC and remove the glass inside)
Does any of them have big enough opening for this lens, or are the trick with the Nikon tubes actually the only workable alternative?
-
The Kenko tubes are infamous for their narrow internal opening. They very likely will vignette severely with the 105.
I have made a dedicated solution for an E2/CPU at present and will gather experience using this before other alternatives are sought.
-
Kenko/Tokina makes No.2 and No.3 achromatic (1G2L) closeup lenses up to 77mm diameter and No.1 - 3 single-element closeup lenses up to 82mm. Also, Canon makes achromatic 500D closeup lenses up to 77mm.
Bjørn's original lens review says that you can use Nikon 5T (or 6T) on AF 85/1.4 D without vignetting. So, chances could be that you can use a 77mm one on 105/1.4E at least without vignetting...
-
The cheap approach is using any F-mount extension, for example, an M- or E-ring as they have a maximum clear opening inside. Before adding the extension, conduct the following steps with the lens on camera: To put the aperture at the wanted setting, dial the number in from the camera, press the depth-of-field preview and at the same time, push the unlock button to detach the lens. The aperture will now be 'frozen' at the specified f-number. Add extension to the lens and put it back on the same or another camera. Fire away.
Good to know.
Canon EF lens users have been using a similar method for many years, when a dedicated, aperture-controlling adapter/mount isn't available, such as mounting a Canon still lens on a video camera..
-
Good to hear the new 105mm is an excellent lens. I will likely own a copy someday. How is the field curvature?
-
My take on the new 105mm AFS 1.4 - Very nice lens indeed! In all aspects, renders in the same class as Noct-Nikkor and APO Lanthar color transitions and sharpness vise
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/9/8126/29272267873_6df26aa8a4_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LAG2pF)_EGL6452 (https://flic.kr/p/LAG2pF) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
Here 'compared' to the old workhorse 180mm AF-D 2.8 - That aparently holds up well even close to the min focus distance,,,
(https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8491/29898513175_f827a0e796_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/My2Gjt)_EGL6455 (https://flic.kr/p/My2Gjt) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
I will NOT buy this lens (I did not have sex with that woman)!
All the hype about this lens is true as can be clearly seen from my image 8)
-
I will NOT buy this lens (I did not have sex with that woman)!
.....and you did not inhale ;D
-
... How is the field curvature?
Practically non-existing.
-
.....and you did not inhale ;D
I did try it but I did NOT inhale :D
EDIT: forgot to add the images after I did NOT inhale!
-
Not as artistic as your shots but whilst waiting patiently for my wife to get ready this morning I cast my eye around the room for something to help make the time pass, I saw the ( now empty ! ) spotted pig money box, these were taken at the absolute minimum focus distance at 1.4 hand held using only the light from the window, more or less straight jpeg conversions from the original nef file.
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/9/8621/29902359065_2a29803249_b.jpg)
(https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8214/29608154070_b90b2ecaf1_b.jpg)
-
So reflecting over what makes this a 'different' lens than the rest in this class; The large front element of the lens helps greatly to make foreground subjects 'wash out' very well.
This is seen also with other lenses with large front elements like 200mm f/2, 300, 400mm f/2.8 and the big f/4 lenses.
You are able to shoot straight through object and at the same time 'look around' these object and see the main subject. Gives a fantastic effect INHO that shorter focal length lenses, although fast can't do to the same extent due to the smaller front element.
First the 105mm AFS 1.4 a blue bicycle bell is in between the lens and the flowers,,,
(https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8085/29937577135_577647d24a_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/MBtUF2)_EGL6547 (https://flic.kr/p/MBtUF2) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
And here a shot with 500mm f/4 at f/4 for the similar effect.
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/2/1541/24956487972_dcd007329d_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/E2jwpo)_EGL2646 (https://flic.kr/p/E2jwpo) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
The new 105/1.4 is simply a master of 'drawing' smooth effortless transitions from sharp to unsharp.
(with the D500, handling bad light from fluorescent fixtures in a relaxed manner)
-
Jakov and Erik, the first shots of each of your two really got my attention. Outstanding! And thanks, Erik, for the explanation of that shot.
-
John, I agree - really nice sample images; ditto Bjørn (the mother and tired child image). Nice explanation Erik of the import of the large front element and the ability of the lens to 'see around obstacles'.
My predictions: A 105mm f/1.4E for Jacov: P>0.5 within six months; p>>0.9 within twelve months. ;D
Jakov and Erik, the first shots of each of your two really got my attention. Outstanding! And thanks, Erik, for the explanation of that shot.
-
Couldn't resist the 8% tax deduction and the 5% discount of using Visa card at Bic Cameras of Tokyo and bought mine too. A little cheaper (or less expensive) than at B&H.
My very first pics.
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula002/aD5S_2857_zpsnval5owz.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula002/aD5S_2857_zpsnval5owz.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula002/aD5S_2862_zpsq08aj6yj.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula002/aD5S_2862_zpsq08aj6yj.jpg.html)
(http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af237/atpaula/atpaula002/aD5S_2875_zpsiake3cxm.jpg) (http://s1011.photobucket.com/user/atpaula/media/atpaula002/aD5S_2875_zpsiake3cxm.jpg.html)
-
LOL, Aguinaldo! Hope you enjoy your new toy!
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66DGMwf-diY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66DGMwf-diY)
-
Jakov and Erik, the first shots of each of your two really got my attention. Outstanding! And thanks, Erik, for the explanation of that shot.
Thank you John, I am glad you like sharp, not distorted, without color fringing or color aberration image made with a lens that I will NOT buy. :)
-
Correction: Not buying *yet*
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66DGMwf-diY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66DGMwf-diY)
That polyester shirted guy is nothing but worth seeing if one has an absolute wish to waste one's time.
-
You guys are making my life harder...
-
A local guy bought a mint 58 1.4G for 1/2 of what I paid for mine new ;) >:( , so I will suffer with my current 105s and wait for a good deal on a 105 1.4G or a fast 135 with AF.
-
Pedro, do NOT listen to them and do NOT buy this lens.
What do THEY know :)
Surely, you have a great arsenal of lenses already...
-
Pedro, Jakov, et al....the new o'five is too good to be ignored ;D
As far as myself goes...I am content without it...
-
That polyester shirted guy is nothing but worth seeing if one has an absolute wish to waste one's time.
wow... I learned a lot... and boy, we around here, are wrong, we have been wrong all the time... well, time to shift ::)
-
Pedro, do NOT listen to them and do NOT buy this lens.
What do THEY know :)
Surely, you have a great arsenal of lenses already...
Hey, Jakov, you speak loude and louder! (oh, I miss that devil's emoticon!!!)
-
That polyester shirted guy is nothing but worth seeing if one has an absolute wish to waste one's time.
I'm not so worried about the polyester :D
-
This thread is a promotional trip ... IIRC one does not inhale trips ...
-
Frank, I don't know what you mean :)
I checked out Fons' link and it's nice to know that there are those don't like this lens.
During our gathering at JA's after Photokina where I tried out the lens, I deliberately tried to induce some swirly bokeh, color aberrations and any other irregularities but wasn't able to.
Perhaps this guy in the youtube link has a bad copy, and yes, he does repeat himself like a broken record.
Now I am sorry I didn't use it more...
Bjørn, I know that you like the 105/2.0 DC too.
I am really curious to know which of the two is more appealing at f/2.0 or f/2.8 :)
-
...
Bjørn, I know that you like the 105/2.0 DC too.
I am really curious to know which of the two is more appealing at f/2.0 or f/2.8 :)
The 105/1.4 is by far the optically better at these apertures. However, you concurrently have none of DC features to play with. Just smoother bokeh in general with the 105/1.4.
-
Bjørn, I know that you like the 105/2.0 DC too.
I am really curious to know which of the two is more appealing at f/2.0 or f/2.8 :)
Just as a matter of interest - I "swapped" my 135 DC for a 105 DC and was terribly disappointed with the quality in comparison with my 135. Let both go and got the 85 f1.4 (new one)
-
(https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8327/28882178254_6ae231574f_h.jpg)
(https://c7.staticflickr.com/6/5484/29400858014_f4a17299c2_h.jpg)
-
I started to watch the polyester shirted guy video, but about one minute in, we had a brief power failure, which knocked the internet router out for about five minutes. Now, I've lost interest.
-
I should really stay away from this thread.
-
I watch it, and get back to old 105/2.5 which is the next best thing :)
Or the 85/1.4 if I want bikes.
You cannot buy them all...
-
Erik provided me with an extension ring made from a TC-14E.2 as a birthday gift. Fits the 105/1.4E perfectly. All functions of the lens are intact thanks to the pass-through nature of the 10-pin contacts of the otherwise glass-less ring.
Some field curvature and spherical aberrations are introduced by adding extension, as expected, but the lens still is amazing sharp. Stopping a fair bit down would cure most of these nominal issues yet still provide verey shallow depth of field and the super nice bokeh.
This is near wide open (D500).
-
Here a couple of images from today,,,
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/9/8704/30070477435_ad079327f6_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/MPe4iv)_EGL6720 (https://flic.kr/p/MPe4iv) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/6/5824/29987079451_2f8cfacc28_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/MFRBZe)_EGL6719_1 (https://flic.kr/p/MFRBZe) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/6/5625/29443515213_65dd96aebb_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LRPHh2)_EGL6731 (https://flic.kr/p/LRPHh2) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
So there is nasty cats-eyes in the out of focus areas and the swirly bokeh.
Clearly visible in the leaves and background.
Dear All, I definitely am NOT going to buy this lens.
I also saw the 85 vs 105 images in the other thread and I like the 85 better.
Sorry :-[
-
Eventually, you'll like this lens.
-
I've never seen Jakov fighting so vehemently against his desire to purchase a lens. ;D
-
Nor I. ;D
Within six months? Or maybe 12?
I've never seen Jakov fighting so vehemently against his desire to purchase a lens. ;D
-
Nor I. ;D
Within six months? Or maybe 12?
You mean, "days"?
-
I'm convinced enough to rent one and see what it's all about.
-
I'm convinced enough to cry myself to sleep.
Dave
-
105/1.4 E.......She ate all my Doughnuts......... 8)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/Duke_1/_DSC7625-1_zpszbnjl5cb.jpg)
-
(mumble mumble mumble)
105/2.5 in your bag is better than 105/1.4 in the store front
-
Erik provided me with an extension ring made from a TC-14E.2 as a birthday gift. Fits the 105/1.4E perfectly. All functions of the lens are intact thanks to the pass-through nature of the 10-pin contacts of the otherwise glass-less ring.
Some field curvature and spherical aberrations are introduced by adding extension, as expected, but the lens still is amazing sharp. Stopping a fair bit down would cure most of these nominal issues yet still provide verey shallow depth of field and the super nice bokeh.
This is near wide open (D500).
A stunning lens on a stunning camera with a one of a kind PK-extensioin-Ring...
-
So there is nasty cats-eyes in the out of focus areas and the swirly bokeh.
Stopping down a little will cure most of that.
-
This is near wide open (D500).
In spite of all the ED glass there is still some LoCA - notice the reddish edges to the defocused petals in the foreground. The pictures of fruit on Lloyd Chambers' blog also shows signs of LoCa. All these shots were taken at close range, maybe correction is better at distance?
-
This was with extension added, which breaks the optical design. I have hardly noticed any CA irregularities in ordinary use.
-
Stopping down a little will cure most of that.
Roland, why pay a premium price for a 105/1.4 and then stop it down to avoid swirly bokeh and cat's eyes?
-
f/1.4 is just setting on the lens that you may use when the situation calls for it. If you don't like the effect for a particular subject, you can try other apertures or work on a different composition. Usually the best image quality is obtained stopped down a bit. This is true of most lenses. If anything, the 105/1.4 handles shooting wide open very well but that doesn't mean stopping down won't improve it. In any case the depth of field should be chosen to suit the subject and composition and not always f/1.4 will be the best, obviously. The swirly bokeh is apparent in some images, but mostly not, so even if you don't like the effect, there are plenty of uses for the lens.
-
Ilkka, please don't patronize me.
f/1.4 is not just a setting on the lens - it is why it is huge and why it is so expensive.
I am one of those that likes crazy out of focus backgrounds and foregrounds and speedy lenses. This one is just not appealing to me. That doesn't mean that it's not appealing to you or others.
-
An f1.4 lens can have round bokeh to the corners, say, at f2.0 whereas you would have to stop down an f2.0 lens to f2.8. So, a fast lens still is advantageous even if you would need to stop down a bit. ;)
-
Akira, I have been using in recent months the 135DC at its widest setting f/2.0 and have not noticed swirly bokeh or cat's eyes.
For more than 10 years I have been using the 85/1.4 AF-D and have not noticed these characteristics either.
While I do agree with you and Illka that contrast and sharpness do improve when a lens is stopped down a bit, I simply don't agree that swirly bokeh or cat's eyes are common features of all fast lenses at the widest settings.
And, let me repeat, I love swirly bokeh and irregularities of lenses like the Zenit 85/1.5 or the Heligon 100/1.6. I have posted hundreds of such photos here. But their rendering of irregularities is so much more appealing to me.
In the beginning I was joking that will NOT buy the 105/1.4, now I definitely won't, thanks to Erik's examples and other examples I have seen.
It doesn't match my needs, but it doesn't mean that it doesn't match the needs of others :)
And again, I am not stating that it is a bad lens, I am just saying that it's not for me, because I am the guy that makes all those blurry photos :)
-
Jakov, if I understand correctly, the swirly bokeh and the cat's eye bokeh are two different things. The former is caused by the astigmatism of the lens, and the latter, the vignetting in the optical path possibly due to the narrow lens barrel.
I think that the DC 135/2.0 is essentially a well corrected lens and thus won't show any swirly bokeh. If it doesn't show any cat's eye bokeh, then the barrel should be large enough to aboid vignetting.
-
Jakov, if I understand correctly, the swirly bokeh and the cat's eye bokeh are two different things. The former is caused by the astigmatism of the lens, and the latter, the vignetting in the optical path possibly due to the narrow lens barrel.
In the case of the 105/1.4, I believe both the cat's eyes and the appearance of swirly bokeh on occasion are caused by the same thing which I believe to be vignetting. I've been trying to study my images to understand when these issues might occur. However, I'm coming to the conclusion that it is rarely an issue, mainly when shooting through leaves etc. which I don't do often. Traffic lights appear as cat's eyes and some other objects as well, which can create a mild circular appearance but after a while of using the lens I don't feel the spinning through a tunnel effect as much as I first did. I am not sure how it affects someone not used to the lens.
I think that the DC 135/2.0 is essentially a well corrected lens and thus won't show any swirly bokeh. If it doesn't show any cat's eye bokeh, then the barrel should be large enough to aboid vignetting.
The 135 DC is great for bokeh, fabrics and skin but it can be difficult to get consistent AF from it, and tracking seems to work best on a D3/.../D5 class body, so it's very demanding in that respect. AF was my main motivation for purchasing the 105/1.4 and I'm quite happy with that aspect of it, even if the rendering of skin is not as flattering as that in the 105 DC, for example. I do think it is a very nice lens overall but takes some getting used to. I'm very happy that I don't have to overshoot to get some shots of moving subjects in focus now. It's less stressful and I'm happy to use the new lens at events which I was too afraid to do with the DC Nikkors.
-
Illka, I shoot a lot of events and nothing beats 70-200/2.8 VR :)
Given the size and weight, I wouldn't hesitate a second which lens to use.
I do understand your points. As I said, 105/1.4 is a great lens from what I have experienced during our Photokina gathering. I know Bjørn, Chris and many other love it and that should do.
Thanks.
-
Just trying to help,,, 105 AFS 1.4
Please help me pluck the berries,,,
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/6/5092/30138037515_79a0f20b5f_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/MVcjyt)_EGL7024 (https://flic.kr/p/MVcjyt) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
Akira, yes. Two different things. I understand that it doesn't happen often. I couldn't manage to induce any irregularities myself. Then again, I only used it briefly.
It's a fine lens and all those using it will enjoy it as they have and will... and I will enjoy the images coming :)
-
A mighty Nikkor of yesterday shot with the new kid on the blog,,,
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5035/30103163196_9fc755f912_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/MS7zD7)_EGL7002 (https://flic.kr/p/MS7zD7) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
Illka, I shoot a lot of events and nothing beats 70-200/2.8 VR :)
Do you mean the earlier version? I have the Mk II and I don't much care for it. Here is an example illustrating its less attractive out of focus rendering. So in practice I use it at events if I really need it but otherwise I avoid it. Hoping that the next version will have nicer out of focus rendering.
-
Hoping that the next version will have nicer out of focus rendering.
The next version seems to be just around the corner?
http://nikonrumors.com/2016/10/03/two-new-nikon-lenses-to-be-announced-soon-nikkor-pc-19mm-f4e-ed-and-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-ed-vr.aspx/
-
Illka, I have used both versions of 70-200 and never felt that the bokeh was bad with that lens.
I guess it's just a matter of taste :)
-
I guess it's just a matter of taste :)
Yes, I agree such matters often are. :)
The next version seems to be just around the corner?
I look forward to seeing what Nikon has come up with.
-
I can order it now and get it from Amazon UK (themselves no marketplace!) for 1836,26 Euro including shipping. Is the price OK???
I see that amazon DE (themselves no marketplace!) want 2419,00 Euro plus shipping
gosh, I am tempted although the lens will probably arrive to late for California.
-
That's a very good price, low enough to raise my suspicions. :-\
I don't want to spoil anything, if it seems like it is a legitimate offer by Amazon then go for it! Though personally I do not like the way Amazon packs some stuff.
-
Exchange rates will be a factor. The euro:GBP rate has gone from 1.42 in December 2015 and 1.3 in June 2016 to 1.14 today. If the amazon.de price in euros and the amazon.co.uk price in GBP started out equivalent, the change in exchange rate alone would mean the price in euros at amazon.co.uk would have gone from 2419 to somewhere between 2100 and 1900, depending when the retail price was set. The current euro price on amazon.co.uk implies a discount of 100 to 200 pounds rather than 500 pounds, which is much less suspicious.
If this is right, euro purchasers may find more bargains from amazon and other UK suppliers.
-
Frank, Grays of Westminster have it for 1,790 Pounds and they will send it to you but you pay the shipping cost. They've sent a lot of gear to me, ex-Vat ;) . So the Amazon price at 1,799 Pounds is probably correct but that is over 2000 Euros ???.
If B. R. doesn't delete the link ;D
http://www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/products/specials.php
I want to see what the size and weight is on the 'to be announced' one is. I really only use the 2.8 for sport and some events otherwise I use the f4.
Focus Breathing, at close range is very pronounced on the current version. Not bad at distance.
Cheers,
-
Just had a look at 2nd hand prices there (Noct & others). Well, it would take a very hard Brexit to make them temporarily affordable.
-
there are some people saying that this lens didn't meet their expectations, citing flat images, dull colours, etc. :o :o :o
i wonder what made them say that...
-
Maybe some of them are paid by competitors to make such statements, or they are trying to make provocative claims to bring attention to their web site etc. Finally the cost of the lens may make some come up with these claims to justify not using the lens (whereas cost may be an influenting factor rather than quality).
We live in a post-truth era.
-
... We live in a post-truth era.
Ain't that the truth :D
This lens has significantly exceeded my expectations.
The 105/1.4 E even performs in IR which is very unusual for fast lenses with a large exit pupil.
(D5300, 105/1.4E, 46 image stack stitch in IR)
-
maybe i should borrow this lens for the afternoon the next time we have a model shoot :o :o :o
let's see what this thing can do.
-
Bjørn, what a lovely, unusual, stunning image!
Now I have two questions; where is it? and how do you stitch these things?
Well...perhaps a third question, why do you need 46 images (if I understand you correctly) to capture this subject?
Regards AH
-
Richard, sounds like envy disguised as condescension. "Too expensive for me . . . it isn't good enough for the price."
Arne, stacking images is not the same as stitching. Stacked images typically uses multiple images of identical composition to various effects. Focus stacking to work around the abysmal depth of field at macro range is a common example.
Now, what Bjørn used stacking here for is another question. I'm guessing that at that range, even at f/1.4, 46 images wouldn't be necessary for focus stacking. I am interested what the reason was as well, as Bjørn surely had a solid one. Or three.
-
Sorry for any confusion regarding terminology. Not stacking in the sense of creating a fake depth impression, but combining many image to give a very large image capable or being printed at a tremendous size (in this case, easily 3 x 3 m with detail enough to be scrutinised at close range). Or, being shrunk into a smaller image with enormous depth of detail.
Individual frames are processed in Photo Ninja, then combined in PTGui. The final file is around 2.5 GB.
Arne: this is 'Bispen' at Stigefoss (Trollstigen).
-
So it was stitching. Not the thread to get into this but best we all try to keep our photography terminology clear and distinct. I was totally racking my brain wondering why you would employ stacking for that image, was expecting it to be something IR involved as I know practically nothing of it.
Very nice image btw. :) Realy enjoying seeing the pics roll in and showcasing this excellent lens. Thanks to NG I no longer have to look at sample images brewed in the pot of mediocrity to get a peek on lenses!
-
Yes, I had the wrong term foremost in my mind when I wrote. Sorry for any confusion.
Added: members should know I always strive for the correct terminology. However, being of a human nature myself, I'm not infallible plus sometimes fine details are lost in translation.
Tristin: 'excellent' is certainly a term that applies to the 105/1.4. It might be expensive, true enough, but consider it combines several functions, such as portraiture, landscapes, close-ups, all with utmost ease.
-
Bjørn, that picture is just awesome! Wow.. :P
-
looks like the landscape of another planet :o :o :o
-
2 recent Tests / Synopses of the 105 f1.4E Nikkor
http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/nikon/105mm-f1.4e-ed-af-s-nikkor/review/
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/105mm-f14.htm
-
Hardly any new info there.
I found the AF to be spot on with my 105E, tried on four different cameras. These very fast lenses demand as much of the user's skill and understanding on how AF works than on the alignment of gear components themselves. Even with 25 mm extension + TC14E.2, AF is positive and accurate, but understandingly a bit slower than with the naked lens itself.
-
there are some people saying that this lens didn't meet their expectations, citing flat images, dull colours, etc. :o :o :o
i wonder what made them say that...
This is clearly a sample variation in ..... people
-
A variation in subjects (& processing) too, I assume. However, with a very capable lens like the AFS 105E at hand, few if any subjects are intimidating to take on. Branding this lens as "portrait" only is not wise as it can do almost any kind of scenes and subjects.
A snapshot to show the kind of vivid colour rendition the 105E is delivering.
-
The AFS 105 E is also a surprisingly versatile 'walk-around' lens. Very suited for snapshot-like pictures such as this; its subject isolation is quite powerful.
-
I just posted serial number for this lens from reading Ken Rockwell's review. The shame of it ... :-[
-
The AFS 105 E is also a surprisingly versatile 'walk-around' lens. Very suited for snapshot-like pictures such as this; its subject isolation is quite powerful.
Bjørn, shadow high light recovery? which software, D500?
-
I just posted serial number for this lens from reading Ken Rockwell's review. The shame of it ... :-[
Oh dear.
Obviously the first batch got to Europe, as our serial numbers are much lower than the one listed on your site. (#200335 for my sample)
-
Bjørn, shadow high light recovery? which software, D500?
D500, run straight through Photo Ninja.
-
Have no luck with Photoninja 1.25 on the D500 nefs, will tediously need to set-up a profile for it.
-
Have no luck with Photoninja 1.25 on the D500 nefs, will tediously need to set-up a profile for it.
After trying PN on the d500 nefs with completely off results, it started to behave nicely all of a sudden.
;D
-
I actually got the latest Photo Ninja (1.34) to circumvent the slow networked storage response of the earlier versions. Apart from an increase in graininess and dull flat greens, both of which are correctable, PN 1.25 did pretty well on D500 NEFs.