Nikon NIKKOR Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S Macro Lens

[Birna Rørslett]

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.

[MEPER]

The image looks sharp and free of CA in the background blur.
We could probably expect some if AFS 105/2.8 was used?

[Birna Rørslett]

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.

[MEPER]

The 65/2 APO also looks fine?
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.....
 
 

[Birna Rørslett]

Not perfect to put a Sony E-mount lens on the Z. Doable yes. desireable, no.

[MEPER]

Strange if the 65/2 is only made with Sony FE mount?
Many "ED" elements in this lens.

[MEPER]

Maybe this adapter will work:
https://megadap.net/product/megadap-sony-e-to-nikon-z-autofocus-adapter-etz11/

[Birna Rørslett]

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.

[Michael Erlewine]

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.

[Bill De Jager]

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.

[MEPER]

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?

[Birna Rørslett]

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.

[MEPER]

The image examples are quite impressing:
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"?

[Birna Rørslett]

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.

[Birna Rørslett]

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.