Seeking advice: New lens: Nikon 105 f2 DC or Fuji 90 f2

I am fairly new to Fuji. I have an X-T1 (coming from Nikon film for the past two years: N90S, which I still own and use; yes, I am just getting into digital). I own the following lenses: Fuji 23 f2, Nikon 50 f1.8, Nikon 135 f3.5, and Nikon 80-200 f4.5. Then I have a speed booster so that I can use my Nikon lenses on my Fuji.

I just got started working as a professional artist, specializing in painting, drawing, and illustration (sometimes sculpture, but mostly for fun). My photography informs that work and other than that I shoot portraits and landscapes and abstracts for fun.

I would like to buy a new lens and it makes sense to buy the Fuji 90mm, but I have always wanted to buy the Nikon 105mm f2 DC. I cannot buy both. I am comfortable using manual focus, because that is all I have used. So, I am looking for some advice.

Would the Nikon be a better "investment" lens (as in re-sale value)?

Is the Nikon lens so great that it would make sense over buying a lens that is specifically designed for my X-T1?

I am looking to invest in a quality portrait lens. Do you have other suggestions?

I look forward to your responses and thank you for taking the time to read my post.

I have the Fuji XF90mm and I previously had the Nikkor AF-D 105mm DC.

As good as the Nikkor was/is, the Fuji is just better, from ALL points of view.

Marco

Nikkor 135 f2 DC.

Pros: It is one of the best lenses Nikon has ever produced. The Defocus Control (DC) allows you to control the defocused area. This allows you to optimize the Boken for the scene.   The only other lens I know of that has this is the Nikkor 105 DC f2.  It is a unique capability. The 135 f2 DC is probably the best portrait lens ever made. It is also a stop faster then the Fuji 90.

Cons:  Ignore  AF on a Fuji since you state you don't mane shooting manual. However, this lens design is aged and was designed.  It is a 1990's vintage design.  One would think that some updates would be made to this classic lens.  The age of the design is the only thing I see as a con.

Fuji 90 f2

Pros: This might be Fuji's best lens.  It has rapid AF.  It is a fast lens for an APSC format although it is a stop slower than the Nikkor 135 f2.  It is a design for modern digital camera with state of the art multi coatings.

Cons: Slower than the Nikkor.

In reality you cannot go wrong with either - especially if AF is not an issue with you.

Truman Prevatt wrote:

Fuji 90 f2

Pros: This might be Fuji's best lens. It has rapid AF. It is a fast lens for an APSC format although it is a stop slower than the Nikkor 135 f2. It is a design for modern digital camera with state of the art multi coatings.

Cons: Slower than the Nikkor.

They're both f/2 lenses.

sdbrock wrote:

I am fairly new to Fuji. I have an X-T1 (coming from Nikon film for the past two years: N90S, which I still own and use; yes, I am just getting into digital). I own the following lenses: Fuji 23 f2, Nikon 50 f1.8, Nikon 135 f3.5, and Nikon 80-200 f4.5. Then I have a speed booster so that I can use my Nikon lenses on my Fuji.

I just got started working as a professional artist, specializing in painting, drawing, and illustration (sometimes sculpture, but mostly for fun). My photography informs that work and other than that I shoot portraits and landscapes and abstracts for fun.

I would like to buy a new lens and it makes sense to buy the Fuji 90mm, but I have always wanted to buy the Nikon 105mm f2 DC. I cannot buy both. I am comfortable using manual focus, because that is all I have used. So, I am looking for some advice.

Would the Nikon be a better "investment" lens (as in re-sale value)?

Is the Nikon lens so great that it would make sense over buying a lens that is specifically designed for my X-T1?

I am looking to invest in a quality portrait lens. Do you have other suggestions?

I look forward to your responses and thank you for taking the time to read my post.

If you will only shoot in manual I don't see the point in getting the Fuji 90mm when you can find the Nikon for less than $700.  I have it and it is a beautiful fun lens, on FF.  Keep in mind that 105mm on APS-C will be very tight, so if you have plenty of space to use this prime lens then go for it otherwise a 50 or 85 1.4 might be better for you.

Having said that, me personally, I don't like using manual focus lenses on Fuji bodies and it is definitely better to use Fuji lenses instead for full optimum IQ performance.

In fact, if you want to shoot in manual save more money and get Samyang lenses that already come in Fuji mount.

Thank you for taking the time to share your experience with the Fuji 90mm. I have read only good things about this lens. The more I read, the more I am inclined to buy it. Just got to wait for the right price. 

I am surprised to hear that the Fuji is better, but I believe you, and that gives me more confidence to invest in that lens. I appreciate you taking the time out of your day to reply to my post.

Thanks for the reply. It is good to know that no matter which lens I choose, I'll be making a good choice.

Are the Samyangs just as good as the Nikon or Fuji?

I thought speeds booster attachments would account for the crop factor, thereby making "full-frame" lenses more relevant on mirrorless bodies. So, wouldn't the 105 or 135 be fine?

I am glad you are bringing up these points. Thanks.

I own both the DC lenses by Nikon and all I can say is that these are a special kind of breed that will be extinct in the near future. I honestly can't comment on the 90mm Fuji, but those Nikons have that special something extra that I can't pin point (beyond the Defocus Control). You can do a lens search in Flickr to see what people are doing with these lenses. If you can get a mint one second hand, I would highly recommend it. Even new, they hold their value quite well.

sdbrock wrote:

Are the Samyangs just as good as the Nikon or Fuji?

The Samyang obviously won't be as good as the Fuji, maybe close to the old nikkor optically, possibly slightly better.  I'm not sure because I know Samyang "updated" their coatings so you might want to ask in the Nikon lens forum.  I do know certain Samyang lenses are better than others.  You will have to do a little research.

I thought speeds booster attachments would account for the crop factor, thereby making "full-frame" lenses more relevant on mirrorless bodies. So, wouldn't the 105 or 135 be fine?

Honestly I'm not sure what speed booster you are talking about.  I'm not familiar with that and someone else might want to answer your question.

I am glad you are bringing up these points. Thanks.

Thanks for informing about the Samyang lenses.

I have an adapter for my X-T1 that allows me to use full frame Nikon lenses such as the 105 or 135 f2 at their proper focal lengths (that is without the crop factor). I have used my own Nikon lenses and it works quiet well under most circumstances. Occasionally, I have experienced vignetting, which can be corrected in post. But overall I am very pleased with the adapter.

That was one of my thoughts: That owning one of the Defocus Control lenses may be a good investment, especially if, as you mention, they stop making them.

I'll take the time to check out Flickr posts.

Thank you; I appreciate you taking the time to respond and provide your perspective.

If it was me - Fuji 90/2 without a doubt. It's a new, modern lens with modern optics, coatings, etc. It's sharper than old Nikkor. Not that Nikkor is bad, but Fuji is better in this situation. And, of course, AF. It might be a joy sometimes to use MF lens, but it's just so much easier to take photo with AF lens. And none of them will have missfocus as it can be (and will be) with MF lens. As for DC, I don't think you will use this feature much. I don't find any real use for this, just a thing to play with at first.

So, I would recommend AF and Fuji 90 hands down.

SpacemanUA wrote:

Truman Prevatt wrote:

Fuji 90 f2

Pros: This might be Fuji's best lens. It has rapid AF. It is a fast lens for an APSC format although it is a stop slower than the Nikkor 135 f2. It is a design for modern digital camera with state of the art multi coatings.

Cons: Slower than the Nikkor.

They're both f/2 lenses.

135/2 > 90/2. The 135 has an aperture which is 2.25 x as large by area.

Lets more light in.

Is faster.

Is this because the f-stop is a ratio?

You make a really good point that even if I do not need to use auto focus, it is good to have nonetheless.

Thank you for taking the time to add your opinion here.

MisterHairy wrote:

135/2 > 90/2. The 135 has an aperture which is 2.25 x as large by area.

Lets more light in.

Is faster.

You're messing up DoF with light transmission. And the "aperture area" is a nonsense.

f/2 means that a lens transmits 1/2 of incoming light through itself, and it doesn't matter, if its made for m4/3 or FF or MF or how big is that lens is. If its f/2, its always f/2. F-number always and only means the amount of light transmitted. 90/2 and 135/2 lenses transmit 1/2 of incoming light through themselves hence they're have same "speed". As for lens diameter (not aperture diameter or area) - F-number depends on it too, so if you're counting it twice, you're obviously wrong.

As for DoF - 135/2 will have harrower DoF than 90/2 obviously.