Notes on Nikon AF-S 105mm f/1.4E ED for Focus-Stacking and Close Work

[Michael Erlewine]

Here are some brief notes on my use of the Nikon AF-S 105mm f/1.4 for close-up work and stacking. And yes, I know it is not a lens for close-up work, but that has never stopped me. 

I find this lens very sharp, certainly sharp enough for the work I do. However, so far I find way too much color-fringing... all over the place. That is not what I need. That I consider a serious drawback and may be a deal breaker for me.

Aside from being sharp enough, the best thing about this lens is its “style,” whatever we can agree that means, its own “look,” especially if you consider bokeh in the mix. So it has a very nice style.

For my work, the focus throw is too short for detailed focusing and stacking work, at least IMO.

This lens is better than the classic Zeiss Makro-Planar 100mm lens, which also was sharp enough, but was not well-enough corrected, and it lacked the style I see in the new Nikon 105mm f/1.4

So, am interested what others find about this very interesting lens.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I find the images from this lens to be very pleasing. Sharp, smooth transition to out of focus areas, not too much CA for my use. Autofocus works excellently on the D5 but on the D810 I am less satisfied, as there are many out of focus shots when photographing moving subjects wide open, it is perhaps that a single processor can't analyse the AF sensor data fast enough. With the D5, in daylight, out of focus shots are very unusual with this lens in my use. I've also had very good results in a dark church; very reliable focus and sharp enough to crop if needed.

It causes moire in the hair on the D810 even wide open it seems to outresolve the 36 MP sensor by some margin. I am happy shooting it with the D5 but of course for sunlit situations the better low ISO IQ of the D810 is nice. I think to improve in-focus shot rates with the D810, I just need to be more careful and not expect instant AF.

Overall I couldn't be happier with the images from this lens. It is a bit like a mini 200/2.

https://flic.kr/p/Rpfk83
https://flic.kr/p/RqpQ9V
https://flic.kr/p/RrWuNn

[Michael Erlewine]

Well, I don't care about auto-focus; it's nice for family snapshots. And yes, I have not had much success with autofocus on the Nikon D810. The bokeh on this lens is very nice indeed and, as mentioned, it has its own style or look That is great.

It's just darned CA that is no fun at all. It seems lens makers frequently believe that if you make a lens sharp enough and fast enough, you have a winner. Well, they have a winner with the 105mm F/1.4, but they did not bother to correct the lens enough so that all of the fringing, etc. is kept at a minimum. This lens, IMO (for my work) fails at that. Too bad, because I could use a lens like that!

[simsurace]

Michael, do you use this lens with additional extension?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

CA occurrence is also a function of external variables, not just the lens. I certainly would not describe the 105/1.4E design team as "they did not bother to correct the lens enough so that all of the fringing, etc. is kept at a minimum". On the contrary, the properties of this lens show exactly the opposite. It is a very well conceived and nicely rounded-off optical design. One can hardly blame the designers for "flaws" when a user puts the lens to work well outside its parameter range ... Besides, would one pay the extra price and the massive increase in bulk for getting an improved design with slightly less potential for colour fringing?

I have shot a lot with this lens and never once being "bothered" by any significant CA. It is also important to note that some of the perceived fringing actually is a result of the lens outresolving its host sensor.

[Michael Erlewine]

CA occurrence is also a function of external variables, not just the lens. I certainly would not describe the 105/1.4E design team as "they did not bother to correct the lens enough so that all of the fringing, etc. is kept at a minimum". On the contrary, the properties of this lens show exactly the opposite. It is a very well conceived and nicely rounded-off optical design. One can hardly blame the designers for "flaws" when a user puts the lens to work well outside its parameter range ... Besides, would one pay the extra price and the massive increase in bulk for getting an improved design with slightly less potential for colour fringing?

I have shot a lot with this lens and never once being "bothered" by any significant CA. It is also important to note that some of the perceived fringing actually is a result of the lens outresolving its host sensor.

That may be. When I test a lens like this, I do look for the more extreme situations. I am not done testing, just reporting what I have found so far. If it is my fault, I will hopefully figure that out.

As for your note "Besides, would one pay the extra price and the massive increase in bulk for getting an improved design with slightly less potential for colour fringing?"

Yes I would.

[Michael Erlewine]

When all is said and done, for me, the short focus throw of this lens is a limiting factor. With a lens that sharp, to properly focus-stack, I need more throw to space out the stacked layers. This is partly because I tend to stack wide-open and sort of paint blocks of focus by layering. To do that, I need a longer throw. Of course, I could put in on a focus rail and stack that way, which would work, but a focus rail is not the best way to stack.

To repeat: what I like most about this lens is the "style." To indicate that, here is a simple photo, in fact the first I took with the lens, that shows (at least to me) the character of the lens. And I may end up keeping it. I am not looking down on it, but just honestly evaluating it for my work and what I am doing.

This done with the 105mm f/1.4 at ISO 64, aperture 6.3 and the Nikon D810.

This is what is left of a hand-made wooden hobby-horse, worked over by my kids and now my grand-kids.

[Danulon]

(...)
So, am interested what others find about this very interesting lens.

Are you?

[Michael Erlewine]

So, am interested what others find about this very interesting lens.
Are you?

I am interested or I would not have bothered to post at all. Lenses I really can't use, I just send back and don't bother to post about them. There is a lot to like about this lens, but as I try to point out, for my particular kind of photography, there are problems with the lens. Let me mention some, again, for particular use:

Not a close-up lens (not the len's fault)
Too short a focus-throw (makes it very difficult to do multi-layer stacks)
Auto-Focus (don't like the results so far, but I seldom use AF)
Fair amount of vignetting (not too bad)
Secondary longitudinal CA colors (magental/green) (too much for me)

So, if you love this lens and view my comments as dissing it, think again please. I am just talking about using this lens for the work I do, not necessarily for what the lens is designed to do. There are a few folks on this forum that stack focus.

[Peter Forsell]

I find this whole thread either counter-intuitive or intelligently insincere. This thread seems like a stubborn experiment where someone is trying to force a square peg into a round hole and then complains about it, time after time. I think it was Einstein who said something like "doing the same thing again and again and expecting a different result is insane."

Experimenting is fine. But once one has realized that lens isn't fit for close-up work, then one shrugs, smiles, writes one brief yet clear post and moves on. Kind of what we can find in the lens reviews at the old naturfotograf.com.

Where does this constant need to complain come from? That is the question begging for an answer. Not in a public forum, but in the peace of one's own mind. The source is not a small black inanimate commercial piece of glass and metal, that is certain.

[Dr Klaus Schmitt]

I would guess, since you use that lens basically away from its definition for close up and macro, that CA gets quite increased  - an experience I share with many other lenses, as I use them often outside their definition, too, like using projection lenses for close up work, which were made for usually very long projection distances.

When Bjorn made his comment about what you stated Michael, all he wanted to do IMHO is, to kindly remind you, that making such statements will point back at you, as YOU are using that lens outside its technical defintion as set by the lens designers, so please keep that in mind.   

[Michael Erlewine]

I don't see it as complaining, but I will not comment anymore on it.

[HCS]

I don't see it as complaining, but I will not comment anymore on it.

I was writing while you posted, so re-phrased what i wrote.

I also didn't take your posts as complaining. I understand that some people may take them like that. Let's all please be reminded that we are an international bunch, English is not our native language (for most or many) and we originate from many cultures.

I view Michael's posts as him taking us along in his thought process while trying to determine about the lens.

I appreciate that, but also appreciate the views of others in this thread. It gives good insights.

YMMV

[Michael Erlewine]

I was writing while you posted, so re-phrased what i wrote.

I also didn't take your posts as complaining. I understand that some people may take them like that. Let's all please be reminded that we are an international bunch, English is not our native language (for most or many) and we originate from many cultures.

I view Michael's posts as him taking us along in his thought process while trying to determine about the lens.

I appreciate that, but also appreciate the views of others in this thread. It gives good insights.

YMMV

What I thought I was asking is: are there any other folks who are using this lens for stacking focus and have some experience to share with the problems involved, like too short a focus throw, too much CA, etc.

I have not used this lens in strange ways, unless trying to extract a crop from this lens is "strange." I am simply shooting as close as the lens allow. For example, I have not tried to use extensions, etc. although I will today, to see what happens, etc. I don't have time to go through this kind of discussion all the time, when I was hopefully searching for folks with similar experience and to discuss that. I am sure it is my fault, not being able to express myself well enough to avoid misunderstanding.  That's life. Like all of you, I have other things to do.

[HCS]

What I thought I was asking is: are there any other folks who are using this lens for stacking focus and have some experience to share with the problems involved, like too short a focus throw, too much CA, etc.

I have not used this lens in strange ways, unless trying to extract a crop from this lens is "strange." I am simply shooting as close as the lens allow. For example, I have not tried to use extensions, etc. although I will today, to see what happens, etc. I don't have time to go through this kind of discussion all the time, when I was hopefully searching for folks with similar experience and to discuss that. I am sure it is my fault, not being able to express myself well enough to avoid misunderstanding.  That's life. Like all of you, I have other things to do.

I understood your post exactly as you have repeated it here. However, i cannot reply to your question because i don't have the lens. It is also unlikely i will have it, as it is somewhat (understatement alert) out of my reach.

Hoping others will chime in to give their experienced reply on your questions.