Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

After using the new Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR for almost two weeks and
pitting it against the tried and true classic Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D I
came to the following conclusions. For me, I like both equally well and
would never part with either one.
From an optical standpoint I'm not 100% convinced yet that the newer VR is
any better. I can see slightly better bokeh in the newer one in certain
situations, but this is highly subjective on my part. The AF on the new VR
version is awesome and lightning fast compared to the older model. This is
great since the 105mm f/2.8D Micro would take a bit more time "hunting" in
some circumstances. The VR works great at longer distances and diminishes on
close macro shots, which is to be expected. For close-ups and macros the AF
on the new model is much better and quickly locks in. For all my close-up
macro shots I use manual focus so either lens is equally suited to the task.
And if you are wondering how the AF performs on this lens with the TC-20E
II, it does work OK. The speed is a bit slower, which we expected anyway.
And surprisingly the AF does function on this combination up to f/9. If I
get a real close focus it will stop at f/9 and not recover. The AF is
basically working as it should and will recover up to f/8. So, don't be
afraid to use a TC with this lens since the only time you'll experience this
problem is when the subject is about 6" in front of the lens.
As for having to do it over again, that's a real tough call since both
lenses are magnificent and either one won't disappoint you. If you shoot a
lot of portraiture than the newer VR version is slightly better with bokeh
(subjective) and the AF is quicker. Really, other than that it really boils
down to your shooting style. If your needs are for a lens for really close
up macros and nothing more I would consider a mint condition used 105mm
f/2.8D Micro on the market for an exceptional price and I would recommend
going that route instead of the latest and greatest. The bottom line if you
are starting out new in macro I would suggest you go with what you can
afford.
Rita

=?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

Re: Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

I think with any of these lenses you sacrifice light gathering for
magnification. I'm wondering how bright the Canon 5x lens is?
I had the 105mm VR and 2x TC out today and got a few shots. I missed some
really sweet wildlife shots since that damn thing decided to hunt. I got a
few distant baby dragonfly pic that I have to look at later. Optically, I
must say that the 2x TC isn't even noticeable.
http://www.geocities.com/ritaberk2006/black_b.htm
Rita


=?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

Re: Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

I was playing with the diopter closeup lens on my 45mm lens and it
doesn't get much magnification but it gets a lot more light than
70-400mm allowing to stop down for DOF. But maybe at equal
magnifications that doesn't really matter. I'm not sure.
Nice.


Paul Furman

Re: Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

Awesone Rita. Your pic of the spider is spectacular. Well done!
Helen


Helensilverburg@hotmail.com

Re: Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

D2x and D200.
Rita


=?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

Re: Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

I'm not sure that I would be happy with the 60mm. I had a chance to buy
several, but passed since the working distance is way to short for my style
of shooting.
The one thing I really like about the VR version is it works with the 2x TC
extremely well, optically speaking. Here is a handheld shot of a spider
underneath the web. I was above and shot it through the web. It has a
pretty neat effect.
http://www.geocities.com/ritaberk2006/pics/Web.jpg
Since I shoot macro in manual the differences between the two lenses are the
same. The VR version has the ability to use a TC and is IF so that is a
plus. Plus, I guess I'm just attached to the older version since I have all
my reverse coupling stuff designed around it.
Rita


=?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

Re: Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

It occurs to me that available light is a problem with macro and a
shorter 60mm macro may be wiser for that reason. But I also like the ong
reach of a long macro lens for bees & butterflies. I have good luck with
my 70-200/2.8 VR even with 2xTC but there is too much glass and odd
replections result and the bokeh goes bad.
Why do you like the old one, just smaller & lighter?
--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
Bay Natives
http://www.baynatives.com


Paul Furman

Re: Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

on
AF
sk.
his
ls
ou
Thanks Rita for that info. I've been wondering which lens was the best
and if using teleconverters with them were ok. Just out of curiosity,
what camera are using with these lenses? =20
Regards,
Helen


Helensilverburg@hotmail.com

Content - Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D
Found 7 post(s). Page 1 of 1
| 1 |










 
Keylogger - Labret - Commission Junction - Stop Internet Censorship - Asthma Treatment And Copd
Photoshop questions