NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Frank Fremerey on December 06, 2016, 17:30:18
-
(admins feel free to join that with another thread if you want)
Yesterday it came from Amazon UK, but really it was sent from the German field office for 500 Euro less than the Geman Amazon charges.
Initial impressions:
- It is a chunk of glass, making the 300PF its little sister or brother
- AF is of the glacial speed even on the D500 ... to give you an idea: The D600 is a slow with it as the D500 when it comes to AF. Non scientifically the D3 is a little better, but only slightly so
- Reliability of AF is to be tested more. I am not so sure if a focus adjustment might be necessary
- MF is very smooth and nice
- On the D500 the FOV is a tad narrow for my taste, the real magic develops wth the D600
- I love the vignette and the way the main subject stands out at 1.4
- Color rendition is quite high fidel
-
Congratulations on your new lens.
I had the feeling that the AF speed was comparable to the rest of the 1.4 AFS lenses, a clear design choice to keep AF precision high.
Just have to love those two pigs having some fun ;)
-
congratulations Frank,
I have been looking at that lens, but its size and weight kolds me back.
-
ai, ai, ai... you're testing my resistance...
Thanks for sharing and congrats on your new lens
-
Done
-
I found AF speed on the D500 quite fast. Not supersonic like the new 70-200 or 24-70, but no slouch either.
'Bulky', 'chubby', take your pick. It is a fat one.
-
Congratulations on your new lens.
I had the feeling that the AF speed was comparable to the rest of the 1.4 AFS lenses, a clear design choice to keep AF precision high.
Just have to love those two pigs having some fun ;)
My 1.4/24G is a speed demon in comparison.
The pigs are hilarious. Yes. True. But I took the shot for the furniture in the street.
-
congratulations Frank,
I have been looking at that lens, but its size and weight kolds me back.
I will see how much carrying I am ready to suffer for the beauty. Soon I send the TC20E2 to Erik. Then I will be ready for next spring catching flowers & bees at 105 & 300
-
My 1.4/24G is a speed demon in comparison.
The pigs are hilarious. Yes. True. But I took the shot for the furniture in the street.
Strange, the 105mm should be the same AF speed,,,
-
Strange, the 105mm should be the same AF speed,,,
I will have it checked at my NPS routine soon
-
Congratulations on your new lens, Frank.
-
I would not use the 105/1.4 on a cropped sensor.
This lens screams for full frame. It also should have the same speed as other 1.4's
Your picture of the Black Veg Cafe. I can see an Arri 2k with some Gel sheet aimed at the window. Were they shooting Video?
-
Congratulations on your new lens, Frank.
right
-
Enjoy.
COncerning AF speed, I did not notice any trade-off between speed and precision. The 50/1.4G was my worst one (in both cases), while the 24-70 and 70-200 are fast and very precise at the same time.
-
I would not use the 105/1.4 on a cropped sensor. ...
The 105 f/1.4 is glued to my D500. This combination handles really well.
This lens screams for full frame. It also should have the same speed as other 1.4's
...
On the D500, it focuses faster than the 24/1.4.
-
Frank, I am 70 but I can manage to take my D810 plus grip with the 105 fitted every time I leave home so a ' young man ' like yourself should have no issues 8) I have a Peak Design slide fitted, the approx 2 inch wide webbing strap went a long way to make the weight manageable, there is one issue with the strap but it is a minor irritation only but the ability to disguise the weight makes it worth it.
-
Congratulations on your new purchase, Frank. I love my old 105/2.5 AIS too much to be interested in this new lens, but I have wanted a 200-500 since I saw yours back in May, and I have just ordered one.
-
The 105/1.4 is no replacement for the old veteran f/2.5 as they can co-exist happily. My experience for what it is worth.
The f/1.4 does much better than the f/2.5 if combined with extension. However, as it is 'E', one either needs the indefinite patience to manipulate the aperture to a desirable setting, or aim for an extension tube with pass-through contacts. In the latter case, don't forget the inner opening need to be as large as possible in order not to cut off peripheral rays. Erik made such a ring for me from a junked TC-14E.2 (thanks again for the birthday gift!!).
-
You are most welcome! Nice to see it put to good use also :)
-
Your picture of the Black Veg Cafe. I can see an Arri 2k with some Gel sheet aimed at the window. Were they shooting Video?
In this street they seem to shoot some TV series for a few years already. The tables were standing outside because they were filming inside. Yet I had to wait until the two parking spots were free to shoot it with the monochromatic scene as backdrop. I am desperatly waiting for the D810 successor. I need certain features of the 5th gen like AF and WB and color consitency over a huge ISO range.
Until then I will use the D600 & D500 and D3. For my purposes the D5 was not the right camera and the D810 was no solution for the D600 troubles.
Maybe I get somehow used to the 160mm FOW of this lens on the D500...
-
Frank, I am 70 but I can manage to take my D810 plus grip with the 105 fitted every time I leave home so a ' young man ' like yourself should have no issues 8) I have a Peak Design slide fitted, the approx 2 inch wide webbing strap went a long way to make the weight manageable, there is one issue with the strap but it is a minor irritation only but the ability to disguise the weight makes it worth it.
It is always a trade off. Sometimes I feel free when I go out with no camera and no phone. I can see and hear and there is no being prepared for anything. A call can make a difference of very significant amounts of money. No phone means I can call back later.
No camera means I can stand in wind and sun and rain and savour the light with no pressure to shoot compose and come back with something pleasing or frustrating calling to be edited.
Taking 2.5 Kilos of gear with me or 24 Kilos at times is a statement. I feel like an Ox with a carriage sometimes. Sometimes I love to be that Ox. Sometimes not.
Yet sometimes I love to keep a backdoor. An Option. And this option is the X100T. Very small pocket size and very adult IQ.
-
Congratulations on your new purchase, Frank. I love my old 105/2.5 AIS too much to be interested in this new lens, but I have wanted a 200-500 since I saw yours back in May, and I have just ordered one.
You know that I got rid of the 200-500 and paid the upgrade to the 300PF?
The reasons were manyfold:
One was 2300g vs 750g
One was Zoom ws Prime
One was 5.6 vs 4
One was the zooming with the 200-500 is slow
The 200-500 is superb for a situation with a fixed observation point, repetible animal movement like a nesting area or feeding station and a gimbal on a sturdy tripod. The 300PF is a wonderful walk around lens and you can keep a DX body in your backpack to give it another meaning.
AF and VR of the 200-500 are great but zooming is slow. Lots or practice and strong arms.
-
The 105/1.4 is no replacement for the old veteran f/2.5 as they can co-exist happily. My experience for what it is worth.
The f/1.4 does much better than the f/2.5 if combined with extension. However, as it is 'E', one either needs the indefinite patience to manipulate the aperture to a desirable setting, or aim for an extension tube with pass-through contacts. In the latter case, don't forget the inner opening need to be as large as possible in order not to cut off peripheral rays. Erik made such a ring for me from a junked TC-14E.2 (thanks again for the birthday gift!!).
Bjorn, Interesting. May I ask, in what ways do you see them complement one another. When, for example, would you prefer to use the f/2.5?
Lowell
-
Landscapes, casual shooting, when using the Df as my camera, and so on.
-
Congratulations Frank
-
Congrats Frank!
I've found AF to be at the same speed as my other 1,4 lenses too (24G and 58G).
This on a D810 and D500. On the D500 it's faster than on the D810, but that shouldn't be a surprise.
The lens is too big for my Df. :)
-
Congratulations for your new piece of equipment. I have already two 105mm: the Micro Nikkor VR and a vintage NIKKOR-P 105mm f/2.5, revamped by Erik. I will pass my way for this one (at least for the time being 😊)
-
Chris: Thank you. I will have that checked. The 24G is my fasted AF lens currently on the D500, on the D600 it is very slow, for the 58G I am still searching, looking for a deal in the 900 Euro area on a very good used one. The 105E is as slow as the 24G on the D600 on both the D500 and the D600, only the D3 drives it a bit faster.
-
Here are some more shots of today;
due to its bulk it is kind of "inertia stabilized";
"superb transitions" ...
-
Today in the Botanical Garden:
-
Botanical Garten 2:
-
Botanical Garden 3:
-
Botanical Garden 4:
-
One piece of magic with this lens is that I can see the picture before I actually see it. I set up the tripod and already know exactly what I will see when I look through the view finder.
On the display the shot then looks three times as good as through the view finder.
Only focussing can be very hard on the D600. I am looking forward to the D8xx successor with all the D500 has but full frame. 54 MP would be very fine with small RAW of 30 MP....
-
Congratulations on your new purchase, Frank. I love my old 105/2.5 AIS too much to be interested in this new lens, but I have wanted a 200-500 since I saw yours back in May, and I have just ordered one.
IMO, the 105 f/2.5 can't match the new 105 f/1.4 in any way, shape, or form.
The 200-500 is also a dud, compared to the 300mm f/2.8 VR II + 2x TC III.
It's better to wait a few months, and get the best, then hit the "buy" button ASAP and suffer mediocrity.
Jack
-
IMO, the 105 f/2.5 can't match the new 105 f/1.4 in any way, shape, or form.
It's better to wait a few months, and get the best, then hit the "buy" button ASAP and suffer mediocrity.
Jack
Jack: I feel it is not fair to compare these. The 2.5/105 is a wonderful piece of glass. Small. Light weight. Sleek. Elegant. With a very special wonderful way of drawing. MF. Ages old.
The 105E is new expensive highly specialized different. I'd like to have both.
A 2.8/300 is also something completely different than the 200-500 zoom. It is not only huge and heavy and very expensive, it is for a special purpose.
When I was buying the 200-500 I wanted "my first birding lens" .... I ended up with the 300PF a 300mm that is only F=4.0 but so small lightweight and unintrusive that I can take shots with it I simply cannot take with a 2.8/300mm .... no way people let me point that chunk of glass at them with flashing light exclation marks stating "professional" or "paparazzi"...
Sometimes a small unitrusive camera is right sometimes the bold appearence. Sometimes a D5 with 2.8/400 another time a X100T.
Dave is a wonderful person with a 50 year career in pro photography. He knows exactly what he is doing. More than most of us and the rest of the NG community is pretty serious when it comes to photography.
-
Frank I completely agree! Well described :)
-
Apples and oranges are both fruits. They are delicious, yet they taste differently, They also look differently.
The 105/2.5 is synergetic with the Df, The 105/1.4 performs best with a camera providing the required heft for counterbalance.
-
Jack: I feel it is not fair to compare these. The 2.5/105 is a wonderful piece of glass. Small. Light weight. Sleek. Elegant. With a very special wonderful way of drawing. MF. Ages old.
Fair enough, Frank.
The 105E is new expensive highly specialized different. I'd like to have both.
Mmm, I think the 105E can do anything the other can do ... and then some ... not so much the other way around.
The 105 f/2.5 is more of a casual lens imo, the 105E when you really want to nail a shot (esp) wide-open.
A 2.8/300 is also something completely different than the 200-500 zoom. It is not only huge and heavy and very expensive, it is for a special purpose.
Huge and heavy, yes. Far superior optically, yes again.
I disagree it's for special purpose. I've got everything from macros 10' away to portraits 100m away.
The 2x TCIII on it will give better results than the 200-500 at 500.
When I was buying the 200-500 I wanted "my first birding lens" .... I ended up with the 300PF a 300mm that is only F=4.0 but so small lightweight and unintrusive that I can take shots with it I simply cannot take with a 2.8/300mm .... no way people let me point that chunk of glass at them with flashing light exclation marks stating "professional" or "paparazzi"...
For people, I'd have to agree, where "softness" is acceptable.
For wildlife, which demands sharpness, I'd much rather have the superior f/2.8. Plus, again, it takes the 2x TC III perfectly ... where the 300 f/4 does not.
Sometimes a small unitrusive camera is right sometimes the bold appearence. Sometimes a D5 with 2.8/400 another time a X100T.
Like anything, I suppose it's based on what you're after. If you want to hike for fun, and capture some shots, with versatility, the 200-500 is lighter and more versatile.
If you want to take the finest image of the wildlife you come across, the 300 f/2.8 is the way to go.
I am saving up for the 600 FL VR as my next investment.
Dave is a wonderful person with a 50 year career in pro photography. He knows exactly what he is doing. More than most of us and the rest of the NG community is pretty serious when it comes to photography.
What does this have to do with anything?
I was comparing the two lenses, not the résumés of people.
Even in the hands of Ansel Adams, the 200-500 would still be optically-inferior to the 300 f/2.8 II ... but definitely more convenient for casual use.
-
Botanical Garden 4:
Beautiful ...
-
The assertions of how 200-500 compares to 300/2.8 + TC20 need factual evidence. They go again observations from other users.
-
I would also think the zoom ought to perform better than the 300/2.8 with 2X. The digital picture com's resolution tests give a clear lead to the 200-500 at 500mm, f/5,6 vs. VR 300/2.8G + TC-20EIII at 600mm, f/5.6.
My experience is that the 200-500 works best at mid to longer distances and I had difficulty making it focus on close range subjects. This may be one factor.
At least two reviewers have stated that they tested multiple copies and some were clearly sharper than others. If you would like, I can look those up but they don't actually show in side by side comparison, how much difference there was between samples. Anyway, this may in part explain why there are apparently conflicting reports.
I tested a borrowed copy of thea VR 300/2.8 II briefly, the 80-400 and 200-500 for a longer time but the lens which I kept and use is the 300/4 PF. It doesn't autofocus well with the 2X but by itself its AF is excellent and acceptable with the TC-14E III. The 300/2.8 can be used better with the TC-20EIII than the PF but it's a compromise. In particular I felt the tripod mount on the VR 300/2.8G II was woefully inadequate for the 600mm setup and wobbled a lot. No sale. Maybe the hopefully upcoming 300/2.8 FL will have a decent tripod mount. However, no matter what one does, a 2X TC is never going to compete for best image quality IMO. Portability and shooting in bright sunlight? Ok results can be had but a native long lens of the correct focal length is going to give better image quality wide open and better AF as well. I was never a fan of TCs because most of the time I need to shoot my tele shots wide open.
-
(off topic, can continue on another thread)
As I said before, I'm a no fan of TCs, but can live with the TC14 compromise.
To John,
If you do well with TCs, and for wildlife, consider the 400FL instead of carrying both the 300VR and 600VR/FL
With the 400FL you start at f2.8 and with TCs you get a lot of options with great IQ. Me? No TCs, but either with a D810, or a D500 for more reach... again with or without TC14III
-
The 200-500 is also a dud, compared to the 300mm f/2.8 VR II + 2x TC III.
That is what you wrote and what I feel can be seen as denigrating the ability of a person to choose the right equipment for his purpose.
I feel Dave is perfectly qualified to make the right equipment choice. He used the lens, he saw the results from Chris and me and others and these results have been very convincing for him.
What does this have to do with anything?
I was comparing the two lenses, not the résumés of people.
Two more shots from today:
-
Beautiful ...
Thank you. A friend said: "sad flowers" .... but I think the feel should be seen more as melancholic or poetic, esp. the bamboo shot.
-
The AF seemed OK for me ::)
I was actually expecting it to be slower :o :o :o
-
The botanical shots are my favourite, with Equisetum holding the edge.
Looking at 105/1.4 it does remind me of the 58/1.4, it is a matter of taste, for it lacks micro-contrast, being dull and flat wide open.
-
'Lack of micro-contrast' is not a descriptor I would associate with my 10/1.4 E. If anything, the contrast can be a tad overwhelming.
However, the subjects themselves also come into play here.
-
However, the subjects themselves also come into play here.
I feel the lightin situation at sunset and 90% reflected plays a role
-
The botanical shots are my favourite, with Equisetum holding the edge.
Thank you Fons, I am still learing how to use it better. I took some shots of plying kids with eye lashes dead sharp and the picture developing from there, interesting new possibilities due to magic transitions. Somthing immediately caught me when I saw the first pictures taken with this lens, the same that hoit me when I saw the first shots taken with the 1.4/24G ... The 35 & 85 did not catch my attention, I love the rendering of the 1.8-versions better ... only one missing is the 1.4/58G ... I wait for a used one, a bargain in the 900-Euro-area
-
One for Fons:
-
Micro contrast at f=1.4? Enough!
-
By now I shot down one Enl and a pack of 6 Eneloops, all with the 105E onthe D600. On the D500 it is too long for most of my purposes.
The AF might be slow, but in most cases it is fit for practical purposes.
At 4, 5.6 and 8 the lens delivers a high fidelity in colors and details that is stunning. A great lens for architecture outdoors, much better than the 1.8/85 which is very good for portraits indoor.
I am really very happy with the purchase of this very versatile glass.
I am looking forward to Erik's full contact extension tube to make the lens fit for insects and macros
-
You just mail me a TC-14E plus 150€ :)
-
Micro contrast at f=1.4? Enough!
I am not going to buy this lens? too much glass inside ;)
now i have a short list of lenses to decide on...,
all 2nd hand copies.
-
You just mail me a TC-14E plus 150€ :)
I have a TC-20E II ready to be dispatched. I want extension it for both of my "E" lenses 300 and 105. PLS mail me you home address for posting.
-
TC-20E is far to long build length for these two lenses, they rely highly on internal focusing and floating elements as was disclosed in the TC-20E extension tube thread,,,
-
Following on from the one lens for one week project I took the D810 plus 105 on my recent trip to the Apple shop in Birmingham, leaving home to walk to the station at 0545 I attempted some shop window images, then some images from the vicinity of the rag market followed by a couple of ' in store ' candid images, I found the lens focused without issues in a variety of lighting conditions, I have a wide strap fitted to the camera which makes the weight virtually unnoticeable.
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5720/31300724012_e8328c2f1d_b.jpg)
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5825/31300723932_a9c4a58191_b.jpg)
(https://c8.staticflickr.com/6/5611/31445991295_a3c18c1172_b.jpg)
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5347/31409258996_6b05b8d546_b.jpg)
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/6/5818/30637993243_221bf8201d_b.jpg)
(https://c3.staticflickr.com/6/5737/31300746602_604a689c9a_b.jpg)
(https://c7.staticflickr.com/6/5505/31409278046_5b38964c1d_b.jpg)
-
This last one is exquisite! I'm still wondering what it is i'm looking at :o
-
TC-20E is far to long build length for these two lenses, they rely highly on internal focusing and floating elements as was disclosed in the TC-20E extension tube thread,,,
So you say I need to sell the 20EII and get a 14E or 14EII instead?
-
Jaques: I am very impressed by the 1£ 1£ 2£ shot and the jellow leather seat!
I took a lot on assignment yesterday and I am relly happy with separation & transition...
-
So you say I need to sell the 20EII and get a 14E or 14EII instead?
Yes
-
Yes
Holy cow. I thought we discussed this...
-
So some shots from yesterday. Those involving children are ... pity ... not fit for the web, only for the exhibition catalogue
-
So some shots from yesterday. Details:
-
So some shots from yesterday. Details (2):
-
I just used it in parallel with the 1.4/24G. Another class of AF! While the 24 hammers away AF tracking at 10 fps the 105E goes slooowly but reluably ....
-
For the same AF target? Sounds wrong to me,,,
-
After the holidays I need that checked at NPS
-
Not taking of out of focus quality but can someone take the same subject with the 105E and the new 70-200E at 105?
Say at 2.8, 4 and 5.6
Many thanks
-
Pedro I think you have to be a bit more specific, 90% will be identical,,,
-
Pedro I think you have to be a bit more specific, 90% will be identical,,,
Yeah, I know, but I would like to know if there are visible differences in IQ.
I ave the new 70-200E, but still forcing me that I do not need this 105E...
-
I saw one copy for sale at 1500€ in Paris - used. Bought and resold shortly after, together with a D5.
Still too expensive to be put at the bottom of the Xmas tree.
Then I bought a very clean, and apparently good, 105/2.5 AI. Let us see if the curved blades really matter, as often stated by Bjørn.
-
I did not put it under the christmas tree although it in my christmas present. I put it on the cam immediately. 1500 is very cheap, that is next to 1000 Euros below RSP
-
Yes, but that's without VAT. Old trick.
-
Yes, but that's without VAT. Old trick.
No. I think it was a computer glitch. @Amazon I am a private user, not VAT registration ...
-
Recent review of the 105 1.4E
http://nikonrumors.com/2016/12/25/nikon-af-s-nikkor-105mm-f1-4e-ed-lens-review.aspx/#more-109685
-
Very interesting field test, with very good comparing material. Thanks for the link.
-
Yes, indeed, very interesting reporting.
Nevertheless, people continue to believe that polycarbonate is less shock resistant and cheaper than metal. Don't be fooled here, it only depends of engineering and material specifications.
-
Nevertheless, people continue to believe that polycarbonate is less shock resistant and cheaper than metal. Don't be fooled here, it only depends of engineering and material specifications.
That's right, wouldn't want my crash helmet to be made out of metal, wouldn't work.
Polycarbonates are lighter than metal though (usually).
-
Two very low light shots:
-
Very nice shots, Frank. I'd like a little more DOF on the first one but given the very low light that may not have been possible.
-
Very nice shots, Frank. I'd like a little more DOF on the first one but given the very low light that may not have been possible.
This is intentionally shot at 1.4 by my friend Nikolas. I feel he managed to use the shalow DOF wonderfully
-
Now that I gained some experience with this lens I must say that I like it much more on the D600 than on the D500. It is not only the handling and the uncomfortable 160mm-FOV that bothers me. The creaminess of the D600 tonality and the creaminess on the 105E rendering pair so well, I sometimes feel the tears in my eyes because it looks so nicely. Two sets from today:
-
Set two:
-
This will not win any nature photography competitions but I just thought I would post it as an example of what the 105 is capable of, I first noticed the low flying swan as it emerged from behind a riverside tree, this is a pure reaction shot, no time to adjust anything as the swan made a gentle landing but a reasonable effort for f2 I thought.
(https://c7.staticflickr.com/1/600/32044185126_52d011003d_h.jpg)
-
Very nice swan shot. I tend to miss these due to slow time.
Have to train my birding reflexes!
-
I would not use this lens for anything else than @ f1.4 (or in exceptional cases f2, where needed), as I consider it rather a f1.4 lens, than a 105mm lens :)
A joy to use wide open. No comparison to the AFS 85mm/1.4G.
With the D5, AF is sufficient fast to capture my running dog. More importantly, the AF is very precise with the D5. I have more issues with the D4/D800 to get repeatable results.
All pictures unprocessed (ooC), just resized to 2560x1708 (pls click on filename below picture for original quality)
rgds, Andy
-
Thanks for all the images - please keep posting
The creaminess of the D600 tonality and the creaminess on the 105E rendering pair so well,
I sometimes feel the tears in my eyes because it looks so nice.
Ahhh. When something moves you like this, you know in your heart it's right for you :)
-
Also not bad a f/2 ... subject isolation gone bullocks:
-
Andy, Thank you!
#87.1 is incredible and adorable. The lens itself is nothing I have used before, but that is just me
-
PS: developing the shots of this lens in NX-D sharpening=5 is the limit at typical apertures between 1.4 and 5.6 ... 6 can already be too much, beware of more, halos only.
-
Today NPS received my beloved chunk of glass because many here showed the AF of mine being too slow. So I hope Nikon will fix this!
-
Hallo Frank
please report to us how Nikon Düsseldorf ( Germany) does help you with this problem.
Does the the focus speed significant speed up ? And how long do have to you miss your glas.
greets,
Joergen :)
-
Hallo Frank, please report to us how Nikon Düsseldorf ( Germany) does help you with this problem.
Does the the focus speed significant speed up ? And how long do have to you miss your glas.
greets, Joergen :)
I will keep you posted. As I see people actually doiing SPORTS shots with the 105E, I am really interested if mine will continue to be as slow on the 500 as it is on the 600, which it should not.
I am with NPS Cologne (Albrecht Kamera Service) though.
-
Hallo Frank, please report to us how Nikon Düsseldorf ( Germany) does help you with this problem. Does the the focus speed significant speed up ? And how long do have to you miss your glas. greets, Joergen :)
The send the lens back, say, that the lenses AF is well within tolerance tested on their lens testing bench ...
I will see, if there is any change in AF speed. We have seen "silent repairs" earlier with our Japanese friends.
And I will try to meet people with the same lens to check speed vs. speed...
-
Several years ago, I noticed that AF-S 50/1.4G didn't focus noticeably faster on D3s or D4 than on lower models. I wouldn't be surprised if the 105E doesn't focus any faster.
-
Just make a video of the focus scale while the lens is hunting for focus, lens cap on.
-
Just make a video of the focus scale while the lens is hunting for focus, lens cap on.
Hm. How is this a scientific measure for AF speed? I am waiting for the lens to return.
-
No scientific at all, no need for that, just a visible way to show exactly how that lens is performing and compare it to other lenses. It will be quite easy to see how long time it takes the lens to go back and forth to infinity.
-
Ok
-
The LensRentals tore down the 105/1.4E:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/12/taking-apart-the-new-nikon-105mm-f1-4e-ed-af-s/
Yes, it's a chunk of glass in the true sense of the word!
-
I tried the 24/1.4G vs the 24/1.4G on both the D500 and the D600.
While the difference in practice is huge the difference in suggested lens cap test is minimal.
-
The LensRentals tore down the 105/1.4E:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/12/taking-apart-the-new-nikon-105mm-f1-4e-ed-af-s/
Yes, it's a chunk of glass in the true sense of the word!
Interesting article. Akira.
-
Interesting article. Akira.
Hope you enjoy it, Carl!
-
A friend wanted to borrow my 24-70mm to capture some gymnastics action and it just happens that he bought a 105mm which I then got to try out for a bit. This is a fat beast :) Being used to the 24-70 and 70-200, f/2.8, handling a f/1.4 lens is quite different (I'm using a D750). Compared to those, the AF is slower (as expected), but I wouldn't call it slow. The image quality is great and the bokeh is just wonderful.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/755/32839484550_6f7004bf0c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/S2UWDu)
Nikon 105mm shot at f/1.4, ISO 200 at night with flash (https://flic.kr/p/S2UWDu) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
This man is working on a completely broken down water line according to my son.
-
Nice ;) a shot from Billund 8)
-
Tulips.
f/1.4
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3719/33266117145_9d129d094c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SFBxDT)
(https://flic.kr/p/SFBxDT) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
f/2.5
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2821/33110225682_0a2c9ef093_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SrQyy3)
(https://flic.kr/p/SrQyy3) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
f/3.5
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/673/33266115925_4a89d053c4_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SFBxhR)
(https://flic.kr/p/SFBxhR) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
f/5.6
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/738/33110223942_d6b1fc831f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SrQy33)
(https://flic.kr/p/SrQy33) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
-
Joergen, these are lovely!
-
They are! but the window Bokeh is not.
-
Anthony: Thanks, I like tulips and that lens is just amazing.
Erik: Sorry you don't like it, I kind of do, especially at f/1.4. I guess I could try it again tomorrow against a white wall instead or what would you prefer?
-
,,,,,but the window Bokeh is not.
Window Bokeh=Rain drops or stains on the surface of the window-glass
Looks distracting, like blemishehes,,,
I was not referring to the lens or the flowers!
No need to shoot anything for me, I have shot a lot with it.
-
Erik: I don't think i misunderstood you, I know you didn't talk about the lens or the flowers :)
I fully expected you had the chance to play with this lens and wouldn't be surprised if you own one.
I should probably have been more clear in my post. I was only asking what kind of background you'd have chosen? As I said, at f/1.4, the window background don't bother me.
-
Ok, then we are on the same page ;)
Yes I was shooting Bjørns lens a lot when I visited him in Norway last year.
My conclusion was that it is very similar to Nikkor 85mm 1.4 AFS G except it has more of a swirly Bokeh that really comes out with shiny highlights, and that it doesn't have a ring-type SWM so focus speed is similar and no VR, similar crop/working distance, focal length - so all in all for my work they are similar.
By far I wanted a 200mm AFS f/2, amazing Bokeh without risk of swirls in the out of focus highlights, super fast AF, one of the fastest,,, VR, closer cropping due to longer focal length - Super expensive and heavy I agree. I found a Mint condition used 200mm f/2 AFS mark I at the same price as a new 105mm 1.4 AFS,,, so win win for my type of photography that most often have highlights in the BG.
-
Just a quick sample of what I try to write with letters about the 200mm AFS f/2 wide open - It's a very shiny venting-tube under the ceiling in the BG
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/690/32376212183_306e36b9c3_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RjYxUT)_EGL9629 (https://flic.kr/p/RjYxUT) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
I have never tried the 200mm AFS f/2, but I know it is legendary and your shot above is a fine example of how impressive the bokeh is.
-
A sample set of real world reporting most at f/1.4 (243 shots): https://www.flickr.com/photos/ngudu/sets/72157677313649654
-
Tulips again - with a white wall as background:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/776/33279023666_f6d262ed5f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SGKGj7)
F/1.4 (https://flic.kr/p/SGKGj7) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
Shot from f/1.4 - f/11. The rest can be found on Flickr.
-
So nice and relaxing to look at, thank you. Here the rendering of the lens truly show itself by the soft effortless blending of tones.
-
Erik: I very much agree, seeing the window shot next to this one - big, positive difference.
Some more random shots from central Aarhus:
#1 Juice
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3720/32479287364_ec3440cd3d_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Ru5Qzb)
2017-03-04 Nikon 105mm f1.4 test 009 (https://flic.kr/p/Ru5Qzb) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
#2 Beer
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/655/32507726573_91b9f22520_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RwAAyn)
2017-03-04 Nikon 105mm f1.4 test 023 (https://flic.kr/p/RwAAyn) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
#3 Gin
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/739/32939335110_6cac3a95ba_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SbJGJS)
2017-03-04 Nikon 105mm f1.4 test 042 (https://flic.kr/p/SbJGJS) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
#4 Aarhus Town hall tower (church in the foreground)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3908/32507725773_4a4d639550_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RwAAjz)
2017-03-04 Nikon 105mm f1.4 test 044 (https://flic.kr/p/RwAAjz) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
#5 City / retal bikes
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/656/32479284934_47e967d7ea_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Ru5PRh)
2017-03-04 Nikon 105mm f1.4 test 046 (https://flic.kr/p/Ru5PRh) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
-
Miracle images wide open, some magic even at f2.0. Looks like the old Noct - outstanding wide open to 1.8, maybe. After that, very high quality ordinary lenses, no more wonders. My own thinking, of course. Thanks for posting! LZ
-
I also tried using it for a bit of low light action. I used f/1.4 a lot, but even at a distance of 30 meters or so, the DoF is simply too shallow. The shots are from a TeamGym gymnastics competion. Teams compete in 3 disciplines, floor routine (rythmic), trampette and tumbling. For the photographer, the advantage is that you know roughly where the peak action is going to be for the trampette and tumbling. My failure was to use a too shallow DoF, but I got lured by the f/1.4 of this lens :)
#1 The floor routine does include jumps too
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/638/32508086663_ab133c00ed_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RwCrAP)
2017-03-04 TeamGym - Jysk mesterskab 126 (https://flic.kr/p/RwCrAP) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
#2 Tumbling
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3913/32939680910_a694878fba_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SbLtwW)
2017-03-04 TeamGym - Jysk mesterskab 364 (https://flic.kr/p/SbLtwW) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
#3 Trampette and vault
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3939/32508086043_475c2844d2_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RwCrq8)
2017-03-04 TeamGym - Jysk mesterskab 489 (https://flic.kr/p/RwCrq8) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
#4 Trampette
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3758/32939680400_22dd0c6b79_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SbLto9)
2017-03-04 TeamGym - Jysk mesterskab 507 (https://flic.kr/p/SbLto9) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
#5 Trampette
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3682/32479646494_5acd2dfa1e_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Ru7Fk5)
2017-03-04 TeamGym - Jysk mesterskab 565 (https://flic.kr/p/Ru7Fk5) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
#6 Trampette
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3804/33194437181_2c1c3ee57d_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SzhaGr)
2017-03-04 TeamGym - Jysk mesterskab 589 (https://flic.kr/p/SzhaGr) by Joergen Ramskov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jramskov/), on Flickr
-
Beautiful captures, very moody! But as you said, DOF is very shallow wide open. Especially in portraiture, in my try. I must have 2 eyes sharp, not profile or direct front only... So as was said before, I, personally, prefer 85, too. That's my own opinion, again! THX! LZ
-
Very nice shots, which shutter time did you use? My problem when trying at gymnastics is the low light levet in some halls.
You got the gymnast very sharp, nice.
-
I use the 105/1.4 wide open for action a lot! With the D5 the focus is nearly always bang on. I think it's partly because of the relative lack of LoCA and high sharpness, the AF sensor gets a clear signal without confounding side lobes.
I don't find it slow to focus; it is slower than 70-200/2.8E for sure, but at least with the D5, I get a higher percentage of shots in focus with the prime than the zoom, even considering both lenses wide open so the 105 has a more demanding task due to no VR and shallower DOF. However, with the D810 the situation is not nearly as good regarding in-focus rates with the 105.
-
Erik: I very much agree, seeing the window shot next to this one - big, positive difference.
I don't know, I'm quite fond of the backlighting detail coming through the tulips leafs and pedals on the window shot. The lighting from the first and the clean background from the second would be my vote.
-
Longzoom: Thanks. I've never tried the 85, so I can't compare. My normal lens is the 24-70mm.
Bent Hjarbo: Most of the shots were shot at 1/2000. I'm usually fighting the low light levels too. The vastly improved high iso performance we got with the D3/D700 and in the cameras since then has done wonders though :)
Ilkka: Interesting, but no doubt the D5 has much improved AF system compared to my D750. I don't think the 105 is slow, but on my D750, it's certainly slower than my 24-70mm and my 70-200mm.
Charlie: I like the light of the window version too, I think a combo would be my choice too.
-
That is easy, open the window,,, ;D
-
:D I don't have the lens anymore though.