Nikon 105mm 1.4E cannot resolve 45mp

I was originally going to focus this thread on a number of Nikon lenses, but to streamline the point I will focus solely on the Nikon 105mm 1.4E.

It has a "great" reputation as one of the "sharpest lenses" with dreamy bokeh, and all that nonsense. I won't address the lens defects for this thread.

I will simply state: the lens is not capable of resolving over 36mp, and is only sharp at 36mp or less.

Now, now... before you start. Yes, there will always be a slight boost in performance using a higher megapixel sensor. That isn't what I'm referring to.

We can use lenses like the 200mm F/2, 300mm F/2.8, Zeiss Otus 85mm 1.4 as our "standards" for sharpness, bokeh, etc. If these lenses can resolve 45mp sensors without this type of loss in performance, so should the 105mm 1.4E, right?

If one lens is as sharp at 36mp as it is at 45mp, and the Nikon 105mm 1.4E is not --- the conclusion is simple.

After all --- Why buy a $2,200 lens that can't resolve current camera sensors, and more importantly future camera sensors?



Above we find the example sourced from CameraLabs.com (https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon-nikkor-af-s-105mm-f1-4e-ed-review/3/).

This is the performance of the Nikkor 105mm 1.4E on a 36 megapixel sensor. Purple fringing aside, the image is reasonably sharp but it is also appearing softer than it should.

However, look what happens when the 105mm 1.4E is put on a 46 megapixel sensor: sourced from CameraLabs.com (https://www.cameralabs.com/sigma-105mm-f1-4-art-review/2/):



The image is incredibly soft when compared to the Sigma 105mm F/1.4 ART, the Sigma 135mm 1.8 ART, the Zeiss OTUS 85mm 1.4 from CameraLabs.

I can also confirm there is zero image degradation on a Nikkor 200mm F2 VR1, or Nikkor 300mm 2.8 VR1 at 45mp. The Nikon 28mm 1.4E likewise shows no difference between 36 and 45mp. Nothing like we are seeing here.

Sharpness vs Resolving Power:

We consider that certain lenses are designed to be softer wide open. These lenses are softer on 36mp, and on 46mp. They are "portrait" lenses. Some people even make claims that "clinical sharpness" is not preferred in portrait lenses.

However, the 200mm F/2 dispels these nonsense claims, as does the OTUS 85mm 1.4. If those lenses resolve 46mp with the quality of images they produce then the Nikon 105mm 1.4E should be able to do so as well.

Just as importantly --- a lens that is a certain sharpness at 24, or 36mp should be the same level of sharpness at 45mp if it is capable of resolving 45mp.

We should not see this level of image degradation moving to 46mp on the Nikon 105mm 1.4E.

The Nikon 105mm 1.4E is simply not capable of fully resolving 46mp (it can barely resolve 36mp), and is barely sharper than the outdated Nikon 85mm 1.4G --- which is also incapable of resolving 46mp.

Many, Many lenses from Nikon and others are struggling to resolve higher megapixel sensors.

Do your research. Carefully evaluate the bodies and lenses you plan to use.

Misfocused chart

Here we go again. So many misconceptions, too many to address.

MrNikkor said:

I was originally going to focus this thread on a number of Nikon lenses, but to streamline the point I will focus solely on the Nikon 105mm 1.4E.

It has a "great" reputation as one of the "sharpest lenses" with dreamy bokeh, and all that nonsense. I won't address the lens defects for this thread.

I will simply state: the lens is not capable of resolving over 36mp, and is only sharp at 36mp or less.

Now, now... before you start. Yes, there will always be a slight boost in performance using a higher megapixel sensor. That isn't what I'm referring to.

We can use lenses like the 200mm F/2, 300mm F/2.8, Zeiss Otus 85mm 1.4 as our "standards" for sharpness, bokeh, etc. If these lenses can resolve 45mp sensors without this type of loss in performance, so should the 105mm 1.4E, right?

If one lens is as sharp at 36mp as it is at 45mp, and the Nikon 105mm 1.4E is not --- the conclusion is simple.

After all --- Why buy a $2,200 lens that can't resolve current camera sensors, and more importantly future camera sensors?

Above we find the example sourced from CameraLabs.com (https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon-nikkor-af-s-105mm-f1-4e-ed-review/3/).

This is the performance of the Nikkor 105mm 1.4E on a 36 megapixel sensor. Purple fringing aside, the image is reasonably sharp but it is also appearing softer than it should.

However, look what happens when the 105mm 1.4E is put on a 46 megapixel sensor: sourced from CameraLabs.com (https://www.cameralabs.com/sigma-105mm-f1-4-art-review/2/):

The image is incredibly soft when compared to the Sigma 105mm F/1.4 ART, the Sigma 135mm 1.8 ART, the Zeiss OTUS 85mm 1.4 from CameraLabs.

I can also confirm there is zero image degradation on a Nikkor 200mm F2 VR1, or Nikkor 300mm 2.8 VR1 at 45mp. The Nikon 28mm 1.4E likewise shows no difference between 36 and 45mp. Nothing like we are seeing here.

Sharpness vs Resolving Power:

We consider that certain lenses are designed to be softer wide open. These lenses are softer on 36mp, and on 46mp. They are "portrait" lenses. Some people even make claims that "clinical sharpness" is not preferred in portrait lenses.

However, the 200mm F/2 dispels these nonsense claims, as does the OTUS 85mm 1.4. If those lenses resolve 46mp with the quality of images they produce then the Nikon 105mm 1.4E should be able to do so as well.

Just as importantly --- a lens that is a certain sharpness at 24, or 36mp should be the same level of sharpness at 45mp if it is capable of resolving 45mp.

We should not see this level of image degradation moving to 46mp on the Nikon 105mm 1.4E.

The Nikon 105mm 1.4E is simply not capable of fully resolving 46mp (it can barely resolve 36mp), and is barely sharper than the outdated Nikon 85mm 1.4G --- which is also incapable of resolving 46mp.

Many, Many lenses from Nikon and others are struggling to resolve higher megapixel sensors.

Do your research. Carefully evaluate the bodies and lenses you plan to use.

Click to expand...

Field curvature / misfocused chart. Obviously you would not expect much more CA in the center than at the edges, so to me that is a giveaway that something is wrong with this test.

I always look at different sources to see if they align.

DxO has a different take, that 1) shows that YES the 105 mm f1.4 lens resolves significantly more detail at 45 MP than at 36 MP, so YES more pixels matters a lot. This is NOT true e.g. for the 24mm F1.4g (23 MP vs. 25MP)

2) although the 105mm lens is slightly compromised by having to open up to f1.4 compared to the shorter and easier to design 85mm f1.8 s .... these two are virtually identical at f2.8. And the 85mm f1.8 s is very highly regarded.

So I do not agree with your conclusion.



















In my opinion...

The 105mm f1.4 is a dedicated portrait lens with emphasis on center sharpness wide open, bokeh and smooth rendering. The 85mm f1.8s is more of a landscape lens comparable to the F-mount 85mm f.1.8 that I own. The 85mm f1.8s appears to have gotten rid of most of the longitudinal CA that the 85mm f1.8g suffers from and enhanced resolution even more that the already excellent 85mm f1.,8g



--
Smile and the world smiles back!

Looks like missed focus at least on the 45 MP. Looks poor on 36 MP too, so likely missed focus there too.

Hasa said:

Field curvature / misfocused chart. Obviously you would not expect much more CA in the center than at the edges, so to me that is a giveaway that something is wrong with this test.

I always look at different sources to see if they align.

DxO has a different take, that 1) shows that YES the 105 mm f1.4 lens resolves significantly more detail at 45 MP than at 36 MP, so YES more pixels matters a lot. This is NOT true e.g. for the 24mm F1.4g (23 MP vs. 25MP)

2) although the 105mm lens is slightly compromised by having to open up to f1.4 compared to the shorter and easier to design 85mm f1.8 s .... these two are virtually identical at f2.8. And the 85mm f1.8 s is very highly regarded.

So I do not agree with your conclusion.

In my opinion...

The 105mm f1.4 is a dedicated portrait lens with emphasis on center sharpness wide open, bokeh and smooth rendering. The 85mm f1.8s is more of a landscape lens comparable to the F-mount 85mm f.1.8 that I own. The 85mm f1.8s appears to have gotten rid of most of the longitudinal CA that the 85mm f1.8g suffers from and enhanced resolution even more that the already excellent 85mm f1.,8g

Click to expand...

DXO Mark claims the 105mm 1.4E on the D850 sharpness is 40

DXO Mark claims the 200mm F2 on the D850 is 41.

DXO Mark claims the 300mm F2.8 on the D850 is 38.

Except that the 200mm F2, 300mm F2.8 make the 105mm 1.4E look blurry by comparison. That was the reason I didn't keep the lens.

When you look at the MTF Charts of the 105mm Nikkor, this is made clear why. It is simply not capable of resolving 46mp. When you look at the MTF of the Sigma, it is clear why it is.

I've used the three lenses side by side. You clearly haven't.

Again, your claim that this is a "dedicated portrait lens with emphasis on center sharpness wide open" blows your theory out of the water. The lens is clearly struggling at 45mp vs 36mp. It does not explain why the 105mm is LESS SHARP on 46 mp than it is at 36mp when other lenses do NOT have these issues just by switching to a larger sensor.

The 85mm 1.8G is simply another lens that does not resolve 46mp, and has nothing to do with this conversation.

You are in denial. The 105mm 1.4E Nikon cannot resolve 46mp.

TOF guy said:

Misfocused chart

Click to expand...

You say that to derail the thread --- likely because you own a 105mm 1.4 Nikon and are in denial - but sadly this is not the case.

When I tested my copy of the Nikon 105mm 1.4E it was no where near as sharp as the 200mm F2.

The chart tests you see aren't mine. They're to demonstrate the point : The Nikon 105mm 1.4E is a low resolving lens, with poor image quality even at 36mp, let alone 45mp.

Fast forward to the 28mm 1.4E, which is just as sharp as the 200mm F2, 300mm F2.8 --- and yes, the Sigma 105mm 1.4.

If your claim is that it was a mis-test, you are deluding yourselves.

MrNikkor said:

TOF guy said:

Misfocused chart

Click to expand...

likely because you own a 105mm 1.4 Nikon and are in denial

Click to expand...

No, I don’t (see gear listed in my profile), nor do I intend to buy one

MrNikkor said:

When I tested my copy of the Nikon 105mm 1.4E it was no where near as sharp as the 200mm F2.

Click to expand...

Please share your methodology and results

MrNikkor said:

The chart tests you see aren't mine. They're to demonstrate the point : The Nikon 105mm 1.4E is a low resolving lens, with poor image quality even at 36mp, let alone 45mp.

Click to expand...

Because the test chart is misfocused

MrNikkor said:

If your claim is that it was a mis-test, you are deluding yourselves.

Click to expand...

Or I can recognize a flawed test when I see one

John Crowe said:

Looks like missed focus at least on the 45 MP. Looks poor on 36 MP too, so likely missed focus there too.

Click to expand...

Yes that’s 100.% obvious

I find it hard to believe that any of those lenses is sharp as a 200/2. I would be shocked if the 105 was anywhere near as sharp as the 200/2. The 200/2 is in a league of it's own. I assume you are testing for the same subject view, hence different subject/sensor plane distances.

I am actually more inclined to look at real world sample images rather than rely on these charts.

The sample shots in the link provided by OP are pretty decent.

MrNikkor said:

It has a "great" reputation as one of the "sharpest lenses" with dreamy bokeh, and all that nonsense. I won't address the lens defects for this thread.

Click to expand...

If I ever get a 105mm/1.4, it will be because of the big aperture, the bokeh and whatever you will call nonsense. Not how it reproduce test charts, because test charts is not what I will use it for.

For reprodusing test charts, I would choose another lens, not a f/1.4-lens.

For most photgraphers, a better tripod is probably just as important than the lens.

Sorry - but - your perception of how image resolution is created is contradicted by optical physics.

The lens and the sensor/film each separately contribute to image resolution.

A higher resolving lens contributes more to image resolution, as does a higher resolving sensor. Even so image resolution never reaches 100% of what a lens can resolve without a body attached; or what a sensor can resolve without a lens attached.

What you are saying seems similar to claiming if you fall gravity pulls you up toward the sky and not down toward the ground.

You're so utterly clueless about lens performance and evaluation it isn't even worth bothering to deal with you. Goodbye.

-m

The "outdated" 85/1.4G, another lens rubbished by the OP, and apparently incapable of resolving past 36 Mp.

I used mine a couple of days ago on my D850 for a portrait session. Window light, very close up, f4.0.

It didn't resolve anything. At all. The OP must be right.

... and so your post is totally worthless.

And to the mod TOFguy:
Can't you see the obvious here?

___________________
always good light

If a bunch of people really dig a camera and/or lens, and they get fantastic results using that camera and/or lens...you can bet a ton of cash that someone will post something like this. It's like the first law of thermodynamics. Contrarians can neither be created nor destroyed...they just visit different forums. -Julius Mayer/Émilie du Châtelet

LOL

Everyone who is claiming mis-focus is just in denial.

The MTF of the lenses show that the Nikon 105 1.4E is barely any sharper than the 85mm 1.4G. The 85mm 1.4G is very soft wide open, but it also cannot resolve 46mp. There is significant sharpness loss from 36 to 45.

Lens sharpness should remain consistent, despite whatever camera its attached to. If a lens is less sharp at 45mp, than 36mp where other lenses do not suffer the same issue then it's easy to determine the cause, isn't it?

The Nikon 28mm F1.4E does not suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45 mp.

The Nikon 200mm F2 does not suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45 mp.

The Nikon 300mm F2.8 does not suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45 mp.

The Nikon 105mm DOES suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45 mp.

The Sigma 105mm 1.4 does NOT suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45mp.

Clearly, the lot of you have no understanding of logic, design, or are simply lacking any intelligence. This is fundamental basics of optics.

It is nothing short of failure to resolve past a certain megapixel range. The lens is simply too old of a design, or a poor design in the case of the Nikkor 105mm 1.4E.

Stay in denial all you like. The Nikon 105mm 1.4E cannot resolve 46 megapixels. It is a terrible, terrible lens. It simply lacks the capability of it based on its resolving power. Again, review the MTFs --- it is BARELY sharper than the 85mm 1.4G, which has the same issues with resolving power.

If you use it below 36mp, it's acceptable. Otherwise, the sensor is wildly outperforming the capability of the lens.

MrNikkor said:

Everyone who is claiming mis-focus is just in denial.

The MTF of the lenses show that the Nikon 105 1.4E is barely any sharper than the 85mm 1.4G. The 85mm 1.4G is very soft wide open, but it also cannot resolve 46mp. There is significant sharpness loss from 36 to 45.

Lens sharpness should remain consistent, despite whatever camera its attached to. If a lens is less sharp at 45mp, than 36mp where other lenses do not suffer the same issue then it's easy to determine the cause, isn't it?

The Nikon 28mm F1.4E does not suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45 mp.

The Nikon 200mm F2 does not suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45 mp.

The Nikon 300mm F2.8 does not suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45 mp.

The Nikon 105mm DOES suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45 mp.

The Sigma 105mm 1.4 does NOT suffer from this issue going from 36 to 45mp.

Clearly, the lot of you have no understanding of logic, design, or are simply lacking any intelligence. This is fundamental basics of optics.

It is nothing short of failure to resolve past a certain megapixel range. The lens is simply too old of a design, or a poor design in the case of the Nikkor 105mm 1.4E.

Stay in denial all you like. The Nikon 105mm 1.4E cannot resolve 46 megapixels. It is a terrible, terrible lens. It simply lacks the capability of it based on its resolving power. Again, review the MTFs --- it is BARELY sharper than the 85mm 1.4G, which has the same issues with resolving power.

If you use it below 36mp, it's acceptable. Otherwise, the sensor is wildly outperforming the capability of the lens.

Click to expand...

Yes, the 85/1.4G (use it on my D850) and the 105/1.4E are terrible lenses.

Hope this helps.

--
I'll play it first, and tell you what it is later