micro-nikkor Z

[David H. Hartman]

I was under the impression that the DC feature was most effective at full aperture. The DC ring introduces uncorrected spherical aberrations to alter the front and rear bokeh, and stopping down reduces spherical aberrations so the effect quickly reduces at smaller apertures.

This was my understanding also. If it were not for the M/A ring that can break I would probably buy a 105mm DC now. I always wanted one but I doubt that Nikon will service the lens for long. I wouldn't place money on Nikon serving the 105/2.0 DC now. I'd check.

I'd be very happy with an AF-S 105mm f/1.8G or E, IF-ED Nikkor. I'm sure a 105/1.8 will never be made.

Dave

From Nikkor - The Thousand and One Nights; Tale 5, AI 105mm F2.5...

The insufficiency as far as spherical aberration in particular is what makes defocus background appeared beautiful.

...This condition exists at maximum aperture and portrait focus distance.

[Erik Lund]

I was under the impression that the DC feature was most effective at full aperture. The DC ring introduces uncorrected spherical aberrations to alter the front and rear bokeh, and stopping down reduces spherical aberrations so the effect quickly reduces at smaller apertures.

The DC effect of the 105DC is less than the 135DC due to the shorter focal length. The Canon RF 100mm macro has a similar focal length and is a stop slower than the 105DC, so I would expect the effect to be even less. To produce an obvious effect, overall sharpness should suffer since you can't introduce spherical aberrations without affecting sharpness. It seems like it a gimmick for a macro lens where maximum sharpness is usually  needed, and would be more appropriate for a medium telephoto portrait lens. But I guess we won't really know until we see some real-life images.

What I meant was exactly what you also state, loss of sharpness or as Nikon states resolution.
It's lens designed for shooting film, today we have huge resolution and optimal image quality so much easier to edit in post processing.

Here is a clip from the user manual from Nikon: Note third paragraph
https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/products/305/AF_DC-Nikkor_105mm_f_2D.html

[MILLIREHM]

I was under the impression that the DC feature was most effective at full aperture. The DC ring introduces uncorrected spherical aberrations to alter the front and rear bokeh, and stopping down reduces spherical aberrations so the effect quickly reduces at smaller apertures.

The DC effect of the 105DC is less than the 135DC due to the shorter focal length. The Canon RF 100mm macro has a similar focal length and is a stop slower than the 105DC, so I would expect the effect to be even less. To produce an obvious effect, overall sharpness should suffer since you can't introduce spherical aberrations without affecting sharpness. It seems like it a gimmick for a macro lens where maximum sharpness is usually  needed, and would be more appropriate for a medium telephoto portrait lens. But I guess we won't really know until we see some real-life images.

maximum sharpness is an important but not the only criteria for all situations. There is nothing against additional options and with the DC ring in normal position sharpness and resolutoin should be unaltered.

[Jan Anne]

For those whom have the CV125 and made the full transition to the Zee or Sony platforms I suggest to ditch the Nikon “Ai-P” version for their Canon EF counterpart as the latter has an “E” electronic aperture control mechanism which is pretty much mirrorless mount agnostic as it only needs a simple electronic adapter.

So with my CV125 EF I have full exif and aperture control on both the Sony a7S and now the Z6 using a very slim adapter.

[MILLIREHM]

My CV 125 mm f/2,5 is just AI-S. But there are some chipped AI-P samples out there. Interesting thought to chose the EF version Jan Anne. Which adapter are you using?

[Jan Anne]

Still in transition haha so for now a stacked solution with the old Metabones EF-FE adapter plus the Techart Pro FE to Z adapter where the latter is also used for the Sony Zeiss 35/1.4 and Voigtlander 15/4.5 until Nikon releases the 35/1.2 and 14/1.8.

Everything works but somehow wideopen is now 2.4 instead of 2.5 but this should be solved with a dedicated EF to Z adapter, there are several on the market now but am waiting for some more alternatives until I actually need one.

[Birna Rørslett]

Just got an e-mail that my pre-ordered Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8 Z is on its way. The sluggish Norwegian mail might delay delivery of my lens until beginning of next week, but anyway, a surprise worth its while in waiting. Actually, I pre-ordered just a few days ago

If the lens lives up to expectation, the Z system has made a significant leap forwards for sure.

[richardHaw]

i will make a review of both lenses when i have the time

[Birna Rørslett]

Cannot match you there, as my only interest is the 105MC Z, no 50 micro for me.

If Norwegian Mail is to be believed (sic), the lens arrives firstcoming Monday June 28th.

[richardHaw]

im not buying any Z lenses, the raw files are processed so i couldnt see how the lenses actually perform

[Ilkka Nissilä]

im not buying any Z lenses, the raw files are processed so i couldnt see how the lenses actually perform

I don't think the raw files are "processed" in any unusual way (I am sure there is some processing to remove certain kinds of noise that is not easily removed without prior knowledge of the hardware), but Nikon and Adobe converters follow the tags that give the information on how to process the images by default, and this includes some vignetting and distortion correction. If one wants to avoid those, another raw converter that does not follow these instructions should do the trick. You should be able to get uncorrected images as a result.

[Jack Dahlgren]

im not buying any Z lenses, the raw files are processed so i couldnt see how the lenses actually perform

As much as I sympathize with this viewpoint, photography is about the whole workflow, from subject selection, lighting, composition, lens, body, sensor/film, post-process, narrative to appreciation of the final result. Of course for many there is joy (and anti-joy sometimes) in the process, but I find that a system that out-performs the sum of the parts through the clever application of math and science to be something joyful rather than something I’d avoid buying.

[David H. Hartman]

im not buying any Z lenses, the raw files are processed so i couldnt see how the lenses actually perform

Using Nikon software, Capture NX-D or NX Studio, anything that was not "baked into" the NEF file can be turned off. I would download the NEF files. Download Nikon Capture NX-D or NX Studio and install one. Set the Picture Control to Neutral and turn off all sharpening and noise control. Why not set the PC to Flat? I don't think Flat is a practical consideration unless one plans on extensive post processing of the RAW file.

Was there ever a "Flat" negative film and paper combination? Maybe a very low contrast film and grade 0 paper, yuck!

A negative film always compresses the shadow contrast and the printing paper always compresses the highlight contrast. That is the nature of the wet photographic process. You could reduce this by choosing the lowest contrast film and developer combination and then choosing the lowest contrast printing paper and developer but never completely remove the compression of shadow and highlight from the photographic process.

Dave

[richardHaw]

well, that just doesn't work for me unfortunately at least for my purpose maybe if i actually get back to shooting instead of reviewing then that may not bother me at all.

on another topic:
    105/2.8:
        quite sharp, almost no aberrations even wide-open, i think i turned off any in-camera corrections but i cannot trust the results i see.
        i am not sure but the resolution seemed so-so until you get to f/5.6, not bad but i expected more from it, still much better than the G.
        focus is fast but not instantaneous, if i am not mistaken the older 105G may be faster. af hunts a bit.
        while IQ appears rather good it felt underwhelming, maybe i am just picky.

    50/2.8:
        very sharp, near-perfect, exceeded all my expectations. this is something that you should try for yourself to believe it.
        excellent resolution even wide-open.
        very minimal to no aberrations, again, i do not know if the camera is applying something to it so i cannot trust what i see.
        slower af compared to the older G, i mean a lot slower. the older G will "snap", this won't.
        focus-by-wire is nice at normal distances but it sucks when doing macro, not bad but nothing beats a real helicoid.
        the extending barrel can be a problem in real-world use but nobody was complaining with the older lenses that did the same.
        focus breathing

[Ilkka Nissilä]

This is incorrect. Z cameras produce NEF files which have instructions for distortion and vignetting correction which for some lenses cannot be turned completely off in Adobe or Nikon raw conversion software. You can get the true image projected by the lens from e.g. dcraw of any raw converter which doesn't obey the instructions regarding distortion correction. Capture One is mentioned as one which also allows turning them off.

This seems to be standard practice in mirrorless cameras by several brands.

Using Nikon software, Capture NX-D or NX Studio, anything that was not "baked into" the NEF file can be turned off.