NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Michael Erlewine on January 25, 2022, 14:39:18
-
I looked for the thread for this lens, but perhaps it was lumped in with other Nikon Z offering. It deserves its own page, IMO.
By this time, I have a number of the new Z lenses, and am especially fond of the ‘S’ series lenses. That being said, my most-used “S” series lens is this MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S lens.
At least for my work (closeup stacked images), it is like a dream come true. For around $1K, which is a small amount IMO to pay for a really capable macro lens, this lens became an instant classic, at least to my own mind.
It is tack sharp, and so very capable, at least in the macro or closeup range. I have lenses that cost many times more than the MC 105mm S Macro that are, as far as I can see, no better. And we have autofocus!
It is also not, in my experience, a heavy lens to use. 1.4 lb (630 g) feels light compared to its size.
Here are just two stacked images using this lens. At least for my limited style of use, what’s not to like?
-
I agree, though I don't have such nice images of my own, I really like this lens. I'm happy to see it in capable hands by others. ;-)
Hopefully I'll have more time to use it in the future. Right now the weather conditions outdoors are fairly unpleasant in my area.
-
I agree, though I don't have such nice images of my own, I really like this lens. I'm happy to see it in capable hands by others. ;-)
Hopefully I'll have more time to use it in the future. Right now the weather conditions outdoors are fairly unpleasant in my area.
Same here, many days below zero. Waiting for spring and a chance to use our new inflatable kayak. Our 18-foot 'Old Town' Guide Canoe is getting just too heavy.
-
Not bad as a portrait lens either...
-
"Not bad as a portrait lens either...
I would say so. Great image!
-
(OT: Are you related to the historical AMG reviewer, Stephen Thomas Erlewine?)
-
(OT: Are you related to the historical AMG reviewer, Stephen Thomas Erlewine?)
My nephew. I founded the company.
-
Wow! I have been following his reviews since immemorable time, always competent and reliable!
-
A few more samples from my 105...
I tend to use it more as a lightweight "general" medium tele for when I don't want to carry a heavy tele zoom. I rarely do real macro, for the simple reason that I always shoot outdoors, no tripod and the wind makes it impossible to do some reliable stacking. But when the need occurs, the ability to get real close is useful.
Before it, I had the old AF-D 105/2 DC. Actually I still have it, but it couldn't have a different character even when used as a portrait 105 (of course, since the DC doesn't do macro). Both great lenses.
-
More portrait and nature...
-
The last one especially is wonderful! I resisted the 105 in favour of the handily smaller 85mm f/1.8 on much the same grounds. The extra speed is useful now and then. That said, I have just ordered a 105mm f/4 Micro-Nikkor.....
-
Astonishing images. That lens looks better and better with each new sample
-
The Nikon NIKKOR Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S is still only avaible on pre-order over here! With a wait time up to 4 weeks.
-
The Nikon NIKKOR Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S is still only avaible on pre-order over here! With a wait time up to 4 weeks.
Certainly worth waiting for, IMO.
-
You prove a point Michael ;)
-
You prove a point Michael ;)
I may have to wait a year to get the Z9, because I was late to order. Anyone not happy with theirs, let me know.
-
Very happy at present :) and it works nice with the 105 MC too.
-
Very happy at present :) and it works nice with the 105 MC too.
I want to confirm that :-)
-
I wonder how the stacked image of the red flower would look like if one of the older 105mm micro lenses was used?
E.g. AIS 105/4 micro which I have. Would it look bad?
-
I wonder how the stacked image of the red flower would look like if one of the older 105mm micro lenses was used?
E.g. AIS 105/4 micro which I have. Would it look bad?
The Cyclamen (red flower) was not the best example. It would look good in the early lens, but this one (Night Blooming Cereous) IMO would not look as good in the older lens.
-
Could be interesting to see how big the difference would be. Now the Z-105 is not very expensive but still compared to a 2nd hand older Nikkor 105.
The price difference between the EL-Nikkor 105 APO version and the normal EL 105 6-lens version is bigger. So also here could be interesting to see how big difference is in a real life example.
But I know if would take a lot of time using a "bad" lens to make all these images for a "stack" :-)
If I could get a bit of money for my AFS 105/2.8 the Z-105 would be a nice upgrade.
If I just got the Z-105 the older AFS would never be used. The AIS 105/4 I still like a lot and also the Vivitar 105/2.5.
-
The price difference between the EL-Nikkor 105 APO version and the normal EL 105 6-lens version is bigger. So also here could be interesting to see how big difference is in a real life example.
But I know if would take a lot of time using a "bad" lens to make all these images for a "stack" :-)
the APO El-Nikkor 105mm is a pristine lens. I use it a lot, but have not used it so much since I have the Z MC 105mm f/2.8 Macro. That says something in my book.
I also have many of the early Nikkor 105s of various types, which just sit on the shelf... for the most part.
-
The new 105/2.8 MC is all the 105/2.8 AFS promised to be, but failed to deliver. Image sharpness at last is back to a professional level and the annoying chromatic aberrations have largely been eliminated. Physically it is not small yet quite easy to handle and it balances nicely on the Z9.
The old 105/4 Micro is still a fine lens and provided it is not stopped down too far, capable of delivering excellent results.
-
Think I will downgrade my AFS 105/2.8 to a pure portrait and general purpose mid-tele lens and only use it from 1m - infinity. Think it is ok for that purpose.
Then I have a good excuse to get a Z 105/2.8. Problem is that on a Z-body I will never use the AFS if I get a Z 105. I wonder if I can find a "use-case" where the AFS performs better.....
In theory there could be a case like Infinity sharpness, direct sun images, foreground bokeh etc. etc......
-
None of the cases you outlined.... The 105 MC reigns supreme by a very comfortable margin.
-
I can reuse the nice 62mm B+W filter I have mounted on the AFS!
https://nikonrumors.com/2021/06/04/nikkor-105mm-f-2-8g-vr-if-e-vs-nikkor-z-mc-105mm-f-2-8-vr-specifications-comparison.aspx/ (https://nikonrumors.com/2021/06/04/nikkor-105mm-f-2-8g-vr-if-e-vs-nikkor-z-mc-105mm-f-2-8-vr-specifications-comparison.aspx/)
AFS has direct coupled MF override! <-- electronic on Z-version?
AFS probably has more metal as it is more heavy (+120g).
The MTF shows that Z-version has higher resolution.
How well does the AF 200/4 ED micro perform compared to the 105mm Z-version?
-
How well does the AF 200/4 ED micro perform compared to the 105mm Z-version?
IMO, not in the same class as the new Z 105 Macro.
-
The 200/4 ED is good, but the design is now nearly 30 years old and on the Z cameras it can only operate in MF. Actually, it should only be used with manual focusing anyway as the A/M clutch ring is prone to break if used.
The 105 MC is as of now the premier Micro-Nikkor.
-
It is always fun to have the "best tools".....even that it is only a hobby and not for living......
As long as I only have a Z50 the AFS 105 can probably do it. I don't think I can blame the lens if my images are not good enough......
I have some scanner lenses I need to play with first and get some mountings for it so it can be used on a camera.
The older AI 200/4 micro is only a collectors item now unless it has some use with a reversed lens on it.
I never see this technique used anymore.
I have John Shaws book "Closeups In Nature". He used stacked lenses. It may still be useful to go above 1:1 magnification.
-
Many people, yours truly included, use the AF 200/4 ED-IF as a relay lens for infinity-focus microscope objectives such as the Mitutoyo metallurgical models. This would entail magnifications 5-10X or higher, depending on the actual microscope objective deployed.
-
The 105 MC also doubles as a handy lens for all-round use and landscapes. In fact, much in the same manner as the old 105/4 Micro-Nikkor touted by John Shaw in his books.
From today's shooting with the Z9. The bokeh is really nice and helps emphasize the subject against the background.
-
The image looks sharp and free of CA in the background blur.
We could probably expect some if AFS 105/2.8 was used?
-
I owned the AFS 105/2.8 just three months before my annoyance with it became impossible to stand any longer. By a stroke of luck I had just detected a nice Voigtländer 125mm f/2.5 APO-Lanthar for sale at a low price and the first comparison test against the Nikkor settled the score immediately. The CV 125 blew the Nikkor out of the water. For all purposes, no more CA and much better bokeh and manual focusing travel.
To prove no tree ever grows unchecked into the heavens, I later found that whilst the optics of the CV 125 were stellar, its build quality was not a match hence I have acquired several copies of these lenses as spares. My Danish friend Erik (aka 'Dr. Lens') has kept them working over the years.
-
The 65/2 APO also looks fine?
https://www.closeuphotography.com/voigtlander-apo-lanthar-65-mm-f2-macro-lens-test (https://www.closeuphotography.com/voigtlander-apo-lanthar-65-mm-f2-macro-lens-test)
....but if build quality is not that great.....we now have the Z-105 as an alternative.....
-
Not perfect to put a Sony E-mount lens on the Z. Doable yes. desireable, no.
-
Strange if the 65/2 is only made with Sony FE mount?
Many "ED" elements in this lens.
-
Maybe this adapter will work:
https://megadap.net/product/megadap-sony-e-to-nikon-z-autofocus-adapter-etz11/ (https://megadap.net/product/megadap-sony-e-to-nikon-z-autofocus-adapter-etz11/)
-
It probably would. However, there certainly seems to have been issues and bugs with the adapter on Z camera, as revealed by the advertial blurb.
Hopefully Voigtländer/Cosina launches a dedicated Z version of the 65/2. I might be interested in such a lens myself, but for now, the old workhorse AF 60mm f/2.8 & 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkors have to make do.
-
It probably would. However, there certainly seems to have been issues and bugs with the adapter on Z camera, as revealed by the advertial blurb.
Hopefully Voigtländer/Cosina launches a dedicated Z version of the 65/2. I might be interested in such a lens myself, but for now, the old workhorse AF 60mm f/2.8 & 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkors have to make do.
I have both the 65mm and 110mm versions of the Sony Macros, and I have adapted them to the Nikon ZII, with OK effect. At first I was very enthused by these lenses on the Nikon mirrorless, but over time my enthusiasm has become muted somewhat. I find I don't use them... much at all. Something is lost in the adaptation. I agree with Birna. I too have had issues with various Sony-E to Nikon-Z adapters and don't much like any of them, and I have tried a few. Trying to make Sony lenses work on the Nikon mirrorless apparently is something of an oxymoron. I have moved away from this, even though I love Voigtlander lenses and have a stack of them. I too have several of the CV125 lenses, although I am selling one of them, never used, mint and in all the original packing.
I use the Nikon MC 105 Macro S a lot. I also have the Nikon MC 50mm, which is not in the "S" line, but I am not particularly happy with this lens, although I love the idea of wider-angle macro lenses. I don't use it much. How do others feel on the 50mm MC?
I seem to like the "S" line of the new Z Nikkor lenses because they are outstanding for the most part.
IMAGE using the CV 65mm Sony adapted to Nikon mirrorless.
-
Another alternative is to get the same lens in M mount when that's available. Mounted to a Z camera with a dumb adapter, the compromises are no EXIF data and fully manual lens operation. The plus side of that are no electronic or data problems caused by a buggy adapter.
I recently bought a Zeiss 85mm f/4 ZM and was very pleased with its performance on my Z6. The Voigtlander 65mm f/2 macro isn't available in M mount but the Voigtlander 50mm f/2 macro is.
Of course, using a lens via adapter introduces twice the opportunity for slight imperfections in mount parallelism to affect images. In many cases this won't be a particular concern, but for exacting or high-resolution work this could be an issue.
-
I have just got the Z-40/2 lens and as far as I can see it has low CA.
If I get the Z-105/2.8 I might be the first to try to reverse mount the 40/2 on Z-105. For that I have ordered a 52-62 adapter (male - male).
The Z-lenses "sleep" at aperture 5.6 so I hope this setting of the 40mm can give a decent image if 105 is set wide open?
Until I get a Z-105 I can try combination of AFS 105.....when 52-62 adapter arrives.
Do you think it would work?
It would give about x2.5 magnification.
The Z-50 micro could be even better if reversed on Z-105 for a x2 magnification?
Then the Z-50 micro can get some use if combination gives nice results?
-
For 2.5X, get a Laowa 25mm f/2.8 instead. Much smaller and neater approach, and image quality is very good. No vignetting. The Laowa covers the range 2.5-5X.
-
The image examples are quite impressing:
https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-25mm-f-2-8-2-5-5x-ultra-macro-2/ (https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-25mm-f-2-8-2-5-5x-ultra-macro-2/)
I wonder if all insects/spiders are dead?
It would be most demanding to capture them "live"?
-
In my experience, doing 2-5X in the field is just barely doable and will lead mostly to a lot of frustrations, missed opportunities, and waste of footage. Besides, in order to get the quality and depth of field such objects require, focus stacking is nearly always most beneficial. All this calls for a studio approach.
-
Here is a typical example of what one really only could achieve in a studio setting, under which lights and other ambient conditions can be controlled.
A fruiting duckweed Lemna minor, seen at 5X. Since the subject is not very thick, I could make do with only 20 frames. Laowa 25mm f/2.8 @f/4, Nikon Z7, stacked in Zerene.
-
Nice image!
An image like this from Laowa homepage is that also a stack or can this be obtained with a single frame?
They claim that the wide angle design gives better DOF.
Lens is CA-free it seems.
-
I looked at web what is possible with AFS 105/2.8 which I have and I have concluded that I can live with that lens as there are some quite nice images made with the lens and the resale value is quite low.
Even that the Z-105 is very good there are other Z-lenses I want more (like the 200-600 zoom).
I made a test on some fabric to force some CA to check how bad it is (full aperture). I had default CA-correction enabled in RAW conversion. There are some CA in back and foreground. I think I can learn how to use the lens to obtain good images. Bokeh can be quite nice.
2nd image are same fabric shot with a Minolta scanner lens. If I can get a spider to stand still I may be able get an image like the one shot with Laowa 25mm lens?
The scanner lens is very well corrected.
Think I forgot that this is a Z-105/2.8 thread......but still there are some references back to the Z......on how other lenses compare to it.....
-
Nice image!
An image like this from Laowa homepage is that also a stack or can this be obtained with a single frame?
They claim that the wide angle design gives better DOF.
Lens is CA-free it seems.
Of course the Laowa 25mm f/2.8 is NOT a wide-angle lens. And depth of field is just a function of image magnification and aperture setting. People are confused by thinking in terms of a short focal length automatically means 'wide angle of view'. That is not true.
No idea what setting the referred image had. At 2.5X or higher, even stopping down the lens fully will not give much increase of depth-of-field, just make the image softer.
-
It is a shame they don't have more information on how the sample images are obtained if they were stacked and which aperture was used etc.
Just above the spider sample image Laowa claims this which confused me a bit:
"Wide-angle design with magnification range from 2.5 to 5X benefits the high magnification design by providing greater depth of field compared to telephoto or long lens designs. Moreover, manual focus operation for precise control over focusing distance when working with close-up subjects."
Must believe that the spider image is a single frame else it would be "false marketing". A fine lens anyway and not expensive.
-
The image is probably a single frame, agreed.
The advertising blurb is pure nonsense, not unusual these days. You do not gain any more depth of field by using a shorter focal length, with the caveat that a ultra-short focal length say << 1mm might add a little extra. What you might get is an uglier bokeh.
Just because the Laowa is 25mm does not entail it is a wide-angle lens. Using shorter focal lengths for higher magnification simply means you need less extension.
Below are the 105MC (background, to 1X) and in front the Laowa 25mm f/2.8 (2.5-5X), Olympus OM 38mm f/2.8 (1.5-2.5X), and AFD Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 (to 1X). The Laowa and Olympus have a Laowa LED ring light in front, very practical unless the subject is wet (then you get ugly reflections). The frontline lenses each sits on a dedicated FTZ adapter.
I have used the Olympus lens a lot in the field as it is a very robust construction well suited to field abuse. The Laowa likely would stand up to field use, but its magnification range is too high.
-
The Olympus lens I don't know.
I have noticed the optional LED ring light which can be purchased together with a Laowa lens. I wonder how it is powered. Probably a battery somewhere.
I had a "sleeping" macro project which I now have activated and ordered the parts to be able to make this setup with a 9000 ED Scanner lens:
https://www.closeuphotography.com/scanner-nikkor-ed-lens (https://www.closeuphotography.com/scanner-nikkor-ed-lens)
The review of the Laowa 25mm ultra macro lens at closeuphotography is not ready yet it seems.
The Componon 28/4 also looks good for macro work (with or without M). A shame I don't have any of those.
-
The Laowa ring light is powered by any external 5V USB source. You could use a Powerbank, or run a USB connection to the nearest computer or USB power supply. I use a special cable with on/off switch and a dimmer.
-
Sorry if it has been asked before, but has anyone tried the MC 105mm with a 6T close-up ring, reversed or otherwise?
Ah, I see the topic was mentioned on dpreview, though the 5t.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4622703
-
The Canon screw on close up lenses that are approximately equivalent to the 5T and 6T are also worth considering. They are called 250D (+4 dioptres) and 500D (+2 dioptres) and they are doublets. About $US75 new here in Australia for a 52mm version. Sizes also include 77mm versions, which are much more expensive.
-
Sorry if it has been asked before, but has anyone tried the MC 105mm with a 6T close-up ring, reversed or otherwise?
Ah, I see the topic was mentioned on dpreview, though the 5t.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4622703
I have those Nikon rings and the Canon 500D and am sure, without trying, that nothing as good as the natural lens itself will result. At least for my work, those close up lenses seldom improve a lens. I understand why you might want to try them, and I have done the same, but those lenses sit unused in a drawer at this point. Let me know what you find out and show me something better for using them. I would use other lenses with greater magnification instead.
-
OK. as soon as I am able to ruminate through the relevantr bins for the 5T/6T, I'll give these a spin on my 105 MC.
In fact, the only one of possible interest would be the 6T, as the 5T is reported to give only 1.3X and the small increase over the native lens is not worth its while.
-
Found 3T and 4T, still looking for the bigger brothers 5T/6T.
-
Well, it’s less than ten days until the Spring Equinox, but here in northern Michigan, it is still snow, and if it warms even a little, it refreezes, and we have solid ice for a time. It’s way too soon for any flowers outside, so a few from a local flower shop will have to do.
I continue to be impressed by the Nikkon Z 105mm Macro S lens. For less than $1000, this lens competes with the best lenses I’ve got, and I have a great many close-up and macro lenses. And it is auto-focus, which means I can stack focus in-camera if I choose.
I always struggle to suggest a close-up/macro lens for beginner. Yet, this it is. Perhaps a wee bit expensive for a newbie, yet totally worth it.
Here are a couple from yesterday with this lens.
-
I continue to appreciate the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 S Macro Lens.
-
Just got my copy a couple of days ago, the testing is not yet started, but my first impression is ok.
It is very light to my surprise.
Very few dealers have it in stock here in Denmark.
-
Looks amazing! Also looking forward to your images Bent ;)
-
I continue to appreciate your photos, guys.
-
Finally received my copy 8)
First stack Z7 / f/4 / 35 images
-
Beautiful!
-
Yes, that's what the MC 105 Z can do, make it much easier to stack and produce fine results.
-
Well this is not macro, buy it is the new 105mm.
Close up and far away @f11
-
Lovely picture Bent! I like the rendition
-
Thank you.
The lens must have the credit for the rendition ;)
-
I love the lens. Yesterday in the fields:
-
I love the lens. Yesterday in the fields:
The shot of the grain is really lovely.
-
The 'Grain' image tells all there is to know; A true marvel of a lens! Great Frank
-
The shot of the grain is really lovely.
I feel honored
-
The 'Grain' image tells all there is to know; A true marvel of a lens! Great Frank
And doubles as a portrait lens:
-
Well this is not macro, buy it is the new 105mm.
Close up and far away @f11
Bent,
This is a nice photograph...isolation with soft out-of-focus background flowers. I hazard to guess, however, that the image would be equally attractive if captured with, say, Nikon's long-discontinued 105mm f4.0 AIS micro or similar lens (e.g., the Voigtlander 120mm f2.5).
Robert
-
Similar maybe but not so sure about the Bokeh and the light fall off in the corners...? I have sold the AF-S, AF and MF micro versions but still have the 105/4 in my collection. If time permits I will look into comparison shots with the Z MC. I am sure we have more experienced community members to chime in.
-
Similar maybe but not so sure about the Bokeh and the light fall off in the corners...?
The old 105/4 micro has the lowest light fall-off in the corners of any lens I own. Because the optical unit is very compact and the focal length is relatively long, not much peripheral light is clipped by the front and rear elements, so mechanical vignetting is very low. Vignetting is entirely gone when closed down one stop. Most lenses need to be closed down at least two, three or more stops before mechanical vignetting disappears. Of course, this lens is only f/4 wide open, I am sure most f/2.8 micros would have similar levels of vignetting at f/4 and smaller, but with higher light fall-off at full aperture.
-
I have both 105/4 and the Voigtländer 125/2.5 both excellent but the new 105Z is quite different, my only gripe is the af, with the Z6!, is not reliable at close distances but the manual override is easy and accurate. I dont use the buttons on the lens, i find these confusing.
-
I continue to be impressed by this lens, the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8
This taken yesterday, stacked. Z7II
-
Used z macro 105 made black and white z9
Almost too sharp
Grahame
-
Used z macro 105 made black and white z9
Almost too sharp
Grahame
Lovely. No such thing as an overly sharp bird. They are our rightful superiors.
-
Thank you
-
An interesting alternative to the eBay lens collar.
https://www.willirolfes.de/2022/04/30/woche-47-stativschelle-fuer-nikon-z-105er/