Opinions on lens selection (105mm lenses, FX)

[AtacanErgin]

I'm considering to buy one of the following for my D750. Questions or next to each item... Please give me some advice, I'm a hobbyist.

Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR: For portraits and macro (versatility). I don't have a macro lens so this would fill in the need. Is this sharp at f2.8 to f3.5 for portraits? Do you think this does a worse job than 85mm f1.8G considering the skin tones? I would like to have a more artistic background blur so I thought 105 can do a better job than 85mm f1.8G, since it is a 105. (I have 85mm f1.8G too, I will keep it, if 105 DC is not as sharp).

I have the Nikon 70-200mm f4. Considering distance to subject is the same, would 70-200mm f4 @105mm show very similar optical performance, or similar blurred background-look compared to 105mm VR, both at f4? Not talking about bookeh quality, just the general look. Other macro lenses not considered.

Nikon 105mm f2 DC: Would this make sharper portraits than 85mm f1.8G at (f2-f2.8); and 105mm VR f2.8 both at f2.8? Does defocus controlling have any negative impact on the sharpness at the focused area? I mean do I sacrifice something while smoothing the background blur? For example portraits (eyes). 135DC is too expensive, not considered. Only Nikon

Thanks for opinions!

 

[calson]

Having owned and used the 105mm f2 DC and the 85mm f1.4 lenses I greatly prefer the 105mm DC lens for several reasons. The 105mm focal length works better on a FX camera in terms of the picture angle and working distances. The working distance is shorter than with the 85mm on a DX camera where it function like a 135mm lens but longer than with the 85mm on a FX camera.

The DC is great as you can defocus either the foreground or background without needing to use a large aperture as with a standard lens. I can have the lens at f5.6 for the subject and still have the background or foreground out of focus.

With my lens the autofocus was quick and precise and accurate.

Working distance is important as most subjects don't react well when the camera is a few feet from their face. I find 135mm too long for indoor use and 85mm too short and 105mm just right. The increased working distance also makes it easier to use modifier like flash and reflectors between the camera and the subject and keep them out of the frame.

If you have a 24-120, 28-300, 70-300, 70-200, or other zoom lens that covers the range from 85mm to 135mm you can do your own experiment with a subject indoors and outside and get a sense of the differences in the resulting images and the working distances involved.

 

[Wintergreen]

Hi,

I own the Macro and I'm very pleased with what I'm getting from it in term of portraits.

I have some that you can check here : https://www.flickr.com/photos/100940323@N07/sets/72157654545157401

I can't compare with the DC but all I can tell is that the Macro is very, very, very sharp, quick to focus (I have the 24-70 2.8) and heavy. It's a fat metal lens!

Good luck if you still on the fence...

Arnaud

 

[noerager]

Hi,

if you do not intend to use the lens for macro i would chose the AF 105mm f/2D it is sharp at f/2 and have a very nice bokeh (perhaps you have to micro adjust to get it completely sharp at f/2). My 105mm f/2.8G micro offend focus hunt which is pretty well known problem with this lens, but it is also very sharp at f/2.8, but the lens is very bulgy compared to the DC. If you already have the 85mm you can also use crop.

Regards Jan

 

[Cenk]

I'm considering to buy one of the following for my D750. Questions or next to each item... Please give me some advice, I'm a hobbyist.

Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR: For portraits and macro (versatility). I don't have a macro lens so this would fill in the need. Is this sharp at f2.8 to f3.5 for portraits? Do you think this does a worse job than 85mm f1.8G considering the skin tones? I would like to have a more artistic background blur so I thought 105 can do a better job than 85mm f1.8G, since it is a 105. (I have 85mm f1.8G too, I will keep it, if 105 DC is not as sharp).

I have the Nikon 70-200mm f4. Considering distance to subject is the same, would 70-200mm f4 @105mm show very similar optical performance, or similar blurred background-look compared to 105mm VR, both at f4? Not talking about bookeh quality, just the general look. Other macro lenses not considered.

Nikon 105mm f2 DC: Would this make sharper portraits than 85mm f1.8G at (f2-f2.8); and 105mm VR f2.8 both at f2.8? Does defocus controlling have any negative impact on the sharpness at the focused area? I mean do I sacrifice something while smoothing the background blur? For example portraits (eyes). 135DC is too expensive, not considered. Only Nikon

Thanks for opinions!

If you have a Nikon 105 micro, you don't need another extra portrait lens... The Focal lenghth, sharpness, VR and bokeh features of 105 micro are simply excellent...

Check www.lenscore.org test results...

--
Cenk Ogurtani
facebook.com/CenkOgurtaniWildlifePhotography

 

[ruifonikon]

The "Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro" was my own choice. It has one of the better bokeh among the macro lenses, so it's great for portraits as well, and it's possibly the sharpest 105mm macro lens at very high f/#, managing difraction really well, and better than other similar lenses. Working on high f/# is key for macro work.

Here my sample shots with this lens and the D810/D5200:https://www.flickr.com/photos/ruimc/sets/72157643820222145

Moreover, read this review comparing 8 different macro lenses for Nikon:http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/best-macro-lens-8-tested-1041461/13

 

[knightmelodic]

The micro (macro) will give you, well, macro. Also not so pleasing bokeh IMO. The DC will give you exceptional bokeh maybe not as sharp as the micro but portraits don't really need to be IME. Be prepared for a fairly steep learning curve with the DC lens. It comes down to your needs but unless you really need macro I'd say the DC.

 

[Cenk]

The micro (macro) will give you, well, macro. Also not so pleasing bokeh IMO. The DC will give you exceptional bokeh maybe not as sharp as the micro but portraits don't really need to be IME. Be prepared for a fairly steep learning curve with the DC lens. It comes down to your needs but unless you really need macro I'd say the DC.

--
Just keep clicking, something will turn out fantastic.

Bokeh score of DC lens is: 890

Bokeh score of micro lens is: 982

--
Cenk Ogurtani
facebook.com/CenkOgurtaniWildlifePhotography

 

[knightmelodic]

The micro (macro) will give you, well, macro. Also not so pleasing bokeh IMO. The DC will give you exceptional bokeh maybe not as sharp as the micro but portraits don't really need to be IME. Be prepared for a fairly steep learning curve with the DC lens. It comes down to your needs but unless you really need macro I'd say the DC.

 

[snellius]

The 105 DC is a superb lens, but you should be able to deal with it well. One knows to get the best out but the other sees only the worst of this lens. To understand it well you have to realize that the beauty of this lens is obtained from something ugly, and you have to play with these ingredients to bring out what is in it. The beautiful soft bokeh is obtained with spherical aberration. This spherical aberration course also some blur of course. It also creates a third phenomenon namely focus shift. To understand this better, you can also take a look here.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/30440737

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54152769

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54152539

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54146659

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54146517

 

[Van Griff]

The micro (macro) will give you, well, macro. Also not so pleasing bokeh IMO. The DC will give you exceptional bokeh maybe not as sharp as the micro but portraits don't really need to be IME. Be prepared for a fairly steep learning curve with the DC lens. It comes down to your needs but unless you really need macro I'd say the DC.

 

[AtacanErgin]

I got the 105 macro VR. I already have the 85mm f1.8G, so I thought I don't need another portrait lens. 105 macro is more versatile and I'm quite happy with results for macro and portraits. It is sharp enough wide open for portraits. My only disappointment is that VR is not good enough at very close. But usually a tripod is good and necessary tool for macros anyway

Thanks for comments and tips. Cheers!

 

[Cenk]

The micro (macro) will give you, well, macro. Also not so pleasing bokeh IMO. The DC will give you exceptional bokeh maybe not as sharp as the micro but portraits don't really need to be IME. Be prepared for a fairly steep learning curve with the DC lens. It comes down to your needs but unless you really need macro I'd say the DC.

 

[Cenk]

I got the 105 macro VR. I already have the 85mm f1.8G, so I thought I don't need another portrait lens. 105 macro is more versatile and I'm quite happy with results for macro and portraits. It is sharp enough wide open for portraits. My only disappointment is that VR is not good enough at very close. But usually a tripod is good and necessary tool for macros anyway
Thanks for comments and tips. Cheers!

In fact, Nikon 105 micro lens is one of the sharpest lenses of the Nikon lens lineup... In addition bokeh scores of this lens is excellent & it has VR...

www.lenscore.org

 

[Van Griff]

The micro (macro) will give you, well, macro. Also not so pleasing bokeh IMO. The DC will give you exceptional bokeh maybe not as sharp as the micro but portraits don't really need to be IME. Be prepared for a fairly steep learning curve with the DC lens. It comes down to your needs but unless you really need macro I'd say the DC.