micro-nikkor Z

[David H. Hartman]

I'll pre-order the 105. RRP was quite acceptable, for once.

I do hope Nikon can put production into proper gear so as to deliver the new lenses without too much delay.

Probably not due to the rampant "printing" of digital green backs.

Dave

[Michael Erlewine]

I got my order in for the two Z Macros early enough that I hope to get one. Slightly off-topic, but another fairly new lens is the Nikon Z 70-200, here coupled with the TC-1.4 Z and an 11mm Meike extension ring. I am gearing up for some autofocus (mostly insect) shots and it looks to me that this combination will work and be up to what I need to get from a close up, and I am not even going close-in for this shot. I was waiting to order the TC-1.4 and already had the extensions, but John Koener showed me what he is doing with this combination for butterfly shots, so I wanted to get on with ordering the TC and so far am very happy with it. I feel the Nikkor Z 20-200mm f/2.8 is an amazing lens with a style all its own, IMO.

[PhotoBuzz]

The Z 105 MC looks like a lovely beast I still wished they'd come out sooner rather than later with a 85mm 1.4 equivalent, which surely will be on the S line up and surely 1.2 as that seems on the mirrorless lenses to have become what replaced the AF Nikkors 1.4 line-up. That and a Z "S" Nikkor 105 1.8 portrait lens.

[Jack Dahlgren]

The Z 105 MC looks like a lovely beast I still wished they'd come out sooner rather than later with a 85mm 1.4 equivalent, which surely will be on the S line up and surely 1.2 as that seems on the mirrorless lenses to have become what replaced the AF Nikkors 1.4 line-up. That and a Z "S" Nikkor 105 1.8 portrait lens.

The 85mm f/1.8 does a lot of what the 1.4 does at a fraction of the cost and a moderate reduction in weight. I can certainly understand why it was prioritized over a 1.2 which is an expensive niche to scratch.

[richardHaw]

while the new 105 is priced reasonably specially considering the engineering that went into it, i do not see why the new 50 should cost that much, i think it is $150 more expensive than it should be theres no display window, is not an S lens, has printed scales instead and less parts, etc. of course, less glass and materials used. does anybody feel the same too?

[Michael Erlewine]

while the new 105 is priced reasonably specially considering the engineering that went into it, i do not see why the new 50 should cost that much, i think it is $150 more expensive than it should be theres no display window, is not an S lens, has printed scales instead and less parts, etc. of course, less glass and materials used. does anybody feel the same too?

I had those same thoughts. For me it is all about the proof of the pudding. If it is sharp in the center and wide open, a decent focus throw, and no significant fringing, I will like it because it is macro and wide...also light and smallish. And it is autofocus.

[richardHaw]

I had those same thoughts. For me it is all about the proof of the pudding. If it is sharp in the center and wide open, a decent focus throw, and no significant fringing, I will like it because it is macro and wide...also light and smallish. And it is autofocus.

the sample photos look awesome (as they should, of course!), corners look nice, too.

i am skeptical about its focus as i suspect that its focus by wire

looks like the price here is $200 higher for both lenses! i will skip

[David H. Hartman]

Oops! Wrong discussion.

Well to post something relevant I can say I wish there were an F-Bayonet 105mm Micro-Nikkor to replace the one I own now and I'm a bit jealous. I think I'd like a Z7 II but can't see myself affording one.

Dave

[Erik Lund]

The 105 Micro just became available for pre-order at my usual dealer's and now there should be one for me as soon as the lens arrives to Norway.

I did also pre-order the lens - Looking forward to test it 

[richardHaw]

for the price, unfortunately only the 105 seems worth it. nikon has to justify the price of the 50

[Ilkka Nissilä]

for the price, unfortunately only the 105 seems worth it. nikon has to justify the price of the 50

I think it's a good thing if one doesn't feel compelled to buy something, for the planet's environment and for our personal finances. ;-)

Generally speaking, 50-60mm Micro-Nikkors have been popular and I think the 50 mm MC lens will sell itself (electromagnetic aperture, stepper motors, and more compact with no need for an adapter). The pricing is similar to the existing 60 mm lens. I do not need the 50, as my current 45 mm and 60 mm are excellent and I do not generally use these focal lengths for tight close-ups (for 1:2 - 1:1 I generally need more working distance).

The 105 mm MC, however, is very appealing.

[Birna Rørslett]

I already have more than a handful of the 55/60mm Micro-Nikkors. Amongst them several copies of the AFD 60mm f/2.8, which for me is indispensable for close-ups on my Multiphot stand *because* of its short working distance. I always use it with manual focusing. Absolutely no need for a fly-by-wire AF lens for the Z format.

Apart from the above-mentioned and very specific use, I much prefer longer focal lengths for close-up work. So the new 105 Z will fit straight into my usual routines.

[golunvolo]

It is possible to adjust (by the mothership) a fly by wire mamual focus to behave like a normal helicoidal? To get a linear and consistent experience? Maybe even be able to choose long or short throw, direction of the rotation and so on?

[Michael Erlewine]

It is possible to adjust (by the mothership) a fly by wire mamual focus to behave like a normal helicoidal? To get a linear and consistent experience? Maybe even be able to choose long or short throw, direction of the rotation and so on?

Not sure what this is saying. Can anyone explain please?

[golunvolo]

If it is possible for a fly by wire focus lens to behave like one with helicoid for manual focusing.

  I hope this is more clear