12 replies to this topic

[Merco_61]

In my opinion, the right number is 6.

• 105/2.5 "silver nose", the early sonnar version with 9-bladed aperture diaphragm.
• 105/2.5 AI, gauss construction with the larger rear element.
• 105/1.8 AIS
• 105/2.8 AIS Micro Nikkor
• 105/4 AI or AI'd Micro Nikkor
• 105/2 DC

I have had some more, but sold them off as they didn't do anything my 6 don't. I used to have both versions of the AF Micro Nikkor but sold them as I value MF feel too high when shooting closeups. The 6-bladed sonnar has really harsh bokeh. I never liked the AIS 2.5 because of the shorter focus throw and flimsy and short hood.

 

The 1.8 does not do portraits as nice as the silver nose and is not quite as good for landscapes as the AI 2.5, but since it does both better than the "wrong" 2.5 for the job I use it a lot.

The 2.8 AIS gets a bit shorter in focal length when focusing close, which I don't like, but it is faster, which I do like. The 4 on the other hand gives more working distance when using larger magnifications.

The DC is a joy to use in a studio setting, but the older manual cousins are easier to use well in the field. The effects of the DC can't quite be reached in post, even if you can do something like it...

 

What are your favourite 105- lenses? Discuss!

 

/Peter

[Russ]

None! Never had one

And probably never will.

[TBonz]

Don't have one now...really enjoyed my 100 macro that I had many years ago with my Pentax MXs.  Nice for portraits and thought the focal length worked really well for macro.  The AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED is on the top of my wish list right now - just deciding if I should pull the trigger with the current rebate...part of me is hoping that my friend who has a few D4 bodies will give me a great deal on one or two D4s if they switch to the D4S...I'd need every available penny if that happened, so trying to hold off as long as I can!

[K-9]

I've never owned one.  I feel it's just too tight for everyday shooting, especially anything indoors.  I've always stuck with an 85mm or wider.  However, if I were to head in that direction, I'd hunt down my dream lens: the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 125mm f/2.5. 

[alden]

I've borrowed one and used it, the 2.8 AIS Micro. It's a fantastic lens.

 

I shot a rock concert at night with it and got some outstanding images.

 

Go to the "Gallery" section and look for ".38 Special..." in the Members Albums to see them.

[Ron]

I don't know a great deal about Nikkor 105mm lenses because I've never owned one. However, a few years ago I got to play with a friend's F2as and he had a 105 on it at the time. I don't know which version except that it was manual focus. Buddah, .... focusing was like buddah! Omg... and things snapped into focus very quickly with minimal rocking. A beautiful lens! 

 

--Ron

[Merco_61]

I've never owned one.  I feel it's just too tight for everyday shooting, especially anything indoors.  I've always stuck with an 85mm or wider.  However, if I were to head in that direction, I'd hunt down my dream lens: the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 125mm f/2.5. 

 

To me, the 105 feels just right. That could be because of starting with Takumar and Minolta 135 mm short teles, so the 105 feels less tight than if you come from the other direction.

There are situations when 105 is too long and 85 is just right, but I use 105 far more.

 

The Voigtländer is magnificient, but internally quite fragile. I have never owned one, but I have borrowed one from a friend a time or two.

[B Grace]

I'd say maybe two.  I have an AF105/2.8D micro which is great for its intended role but I do fondly recall the late pre-Ai 105/2.5 I borrowed several years ago with an F2.  I do question whether I'd like the built-in hood of the AiS version of the 105/2.5.  No harm in mixing and matching Ai and AiS primes though, I guess.

[Wired]

I have one of the AIS variants, and I do enjoy the focal length quite a bit. I also had a 135mm AIS and decided I liked the 135mm focal length better...which is why I now own the 135mm 2.0 DC

 

 

crazy lens. love it

[TBonz]

OK...This seems like the right place to ask a question regarding 105 Micros...

 

I was wandering through lenses on e-bay...Nikon AF Micro 105 f/2.8 D

 

The description:  "The Nikon 105mm AF Micro is a manual focus camera lens..."

 

I saw this on a few different listings for the lens...Maybe I'm out of touch, but I always thought that AF stood for for Auto Focus.  Please let me know if I'm going crazy or if these descriptions are just flat out incorrect!

 

[K-9]

No lens designated AF is manual focus.  Either they made a mistake in calling it AF or a mistake in saying it was manual, when it's actually autofocus. The photo should hold the answer.

[Merco_61]

They are copying each other, and some one found a strange text to start with. Since they recommend it for D40, D40X and D60 they are right in saying manual focus but that does not make it a MF lens...

AF is autofocus, D is a chip that gives distance information to the body.

It is the second and best of the three generations of AF versions, but I personally don't like it.

The two first were identical optically and mechanically, they just had different chips. The distance info is useful for matrix metering and flash. this generation still gets a bit shorter in f/l when nearing the near limit and feels like ~95 mm at 1:1. The current version with VR ends up at ~83 mm...

 

/Peter

[TBonz]

I was sure I was right - just wanted to be sure I hadn't missed something!