Gear Talk > Lens Talk

105 f2.8 Micro-Nikkor ED-IF VR - sucking dust internally

(1/4) > >>

chambeshi:
To put it mildly, I was surprised to discover my brand new 105 VR had managed to get dust inside the lens barrel - plainly visible on the inner rear element assembly.

The context is as follows - I purchased this lens brand new last December to complement my veteran 55 f2.8 and 60 f2.8 Micro-Nikkors; which I have used for 2+ and 1+ decades, respectively. I got the 60mm mainly for its 1:1 magnification (not needing the PK-13 ext ring). I often used a SB-21B or SB-29 for macrowork (the 21B on that stalwart workhouse, the F3).

I found the VR capability on this super-sharp 105 Micro-Nikkor inappropriate for close up work; too often my subjects needed flash. Call me old fashioned, but the lack of manual  control over aperture in this gelded lens also rankled.  G lenses sure work okay for much contemporary photography, but I prefer AIS or even AF-D with aperture rings intact for macro photography. I know I will need this versatility.

True to the focal length of earlier classic Nikkors, this 105 VR is a superb portrait lens but it's too bloated, heavy, and above all costly, compared to others of the same speed. All in all, I had yet to take my brand new 105 into the field for serious nature photography.  On the few occasions I used this 105 VR, I stuck to my protocol when working in the dust and allied African hazards; so always very careful to keep lens caps on at changes. I stored this new purchase in its soft cover in a sealed camera case.

Last week, fortunate to be in London but short on sorely needed quid, and after some agonizing, I presented my 105 as a Mint trade-in toward the purchase of a coveted Nikkor lens. This was at a well known store. I was startled when the standard check, by the gentleman serving me, revealed 2 dust fragments (fine hairs) inside the body of this 105. These can only have been sucked into the lens! Shocking News indeed, especially given it's barely done any work! I was told a pro cleaning would cost a cool 100 quid, and so slashed the value on a Mint lens. Anyway, I took the swift strategic decision and traded in the culprit and left with a 70-180 Micro-Nikkor. I lost on the fiscal side of this deal, but it's fully justified as - finally - I now own the AF-D 70-180. It works best in manual mode. But one has the versatility, of course to use it as a medium zoom for other subjects.

The encircled "10" on these costly plastic G Nikkors does not mean 10 years life expectancy, necessarily. Choose your smaller time-unit! Sure I could have waved the Warranty at Nikon but I was in a difficult situation with a critical deal at stake. This latest experience reinforces my other misgiving as to where Nikkor stands (sits?) today. AF-S, N-coatings and VR sure are great but what a pity about the plastic chassis. Above all I am now very skeptical of the lack of basic dust-sealing in what is sold as a Pro lens. My personal view is the older AF-D Nikkors stand apart and stand high, and in any case Manual focus is the standard in close up....

Well, Good Riddance to that 105G VR. And be warned. Who knows what this Fluff-Sucker might yet accumulate. I can only surmise it would have let me down in the central African interior; yet here I have worked with a classic Micro-Nikkor since 1988. Both my 55 f2.8 and 60 AF-D Micro-Nikkors have served well being worked hard. The 55 often worked through thick and thin as a normal lens on my FM2 in the pre-digital days.

Andrea B.:
Fortunately - for anyone dreading the G/plastic/etc on modern Nikkors - there are vast amounts of good old Nikon AIS lenses and D lenses still available. As well as nifty newer items like Zeiss Otus-es and certain Sigmas. And for close-up work there is always the Vöightlander Apo-Lanthar 150, a heavy but sweet gem.

I have dual copies of the Micro-Nikkor 60/2.8: one old D version and one new G version. I also have kept my old 105/2.8D Micro-Nikkor. Sold off my Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8G VR. Too much chatter in the VR.

As far as dust-sucking, I don't think it is a particular fault of the entire line of the Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8G AFS VR lenses. You just got a dust-sucking copy. I had that happen once with another Nikkor lens. One copy inhaled dust, the other did not. When I had the 105 VR, it did not get dusty. It is probably important to look for this kind of thing before warranties expire.

It might be that Nikon repair under warranty could have replaced the gaskets and remedied the dust-sucking? That said, the gasket on the 105 VR was not particularly good. Easily snagged.

As for the Nikkor plastic, my particular take on it is that it provides more bounce and therefore less breakage and dings. Ask me how I know or make the obvious deduction there!!! The plastic also makes for a less heavy lens. But -- everyone has their own take on the plastic vs. metal discussion. Just remember there is bad plastic and then there is good plastic.

Bjørn hated the Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8G VR for other reasons and sold his too.  ;D

Anyway, welcome to Nikongear, Chambeshi !! We look forward to seeing some of your work.

richardHaw:
thats an easy lens to open up except for the front :o :o :o

it doest suck air that much but the fibre couldve come from the bottom. it might be fibres from the bag :o :o :o
mine is a heavily used but is pristine inside. the 70-200 is a workhorse but is clean as well save for a fibre. the 24-70 is heavily used and is dusty inside ::)

pluton:
Does dust inside do any harm?  Can't the outer glass surfaces be easily cleaned?  Don't all lenses, cameras, and just about anything else that exists in our atmosphere have dust inside?

Andrea B.:
Dust inside the lens does not affect the photo.
Fibers could possibly affect the photo? Depends on how big and where they happen to be currently sitting inside the lens.

It used to be that optical glass had "bubbles" and that was considered a siqn of good quality glass!! The bubble did not affect the image capture or image quality.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page