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

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Jun 17, 2006.

  1. 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?=, Jun 17, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Rita Ä Berkowitz" <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    [ . . . ]

    Good and interesting write-up, Rita.

    Both lenses are, of course, eBay approved?

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, Jun 17, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Neil Harrington wrote:

    > Good and interesting write-up, Rita.


    Thanks.

    > Both lenses are, of course, eBay approved?


    The new VR version has of yet been officially tested and certified for
    taking eBay auction pics. I don't foresee any problems with it making the
    grade, but you never know. When in doubt, fall back to the older Micro
    Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D for compliance with eBay's strict requirements.







    Rita
     
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Jun 18, 2006
    #3
  4. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    Guest

    In article <>,
    Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:

    > 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


    Thanks for the great analysis.

    I bought the older model at a really great price.

    My thinking was that since much of my micro work is done on a tripod, I
    didn't need the VR. And, on a lot of it I use manual focus to pull final
    focus.

    I really love the lens.

    sjh
     
    , Jun 25, 2006
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. GTABuySell
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    8,257
    GTABuySell
    Jun 7, 2004
  2. Rita  Ä Berkowitz

    Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D vs. 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D IF

    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 26, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    501
    Gadgets
    Sep 27, 2004
  3. Ken Tough

    Micro Nikkor AF 60mm vs 105mm (D70)

    Ken Tough, Mar 18, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    1,108
    Alan Browne
    Mar 29, 2005
  4. NikV

    Nikon D50 + 105mm 2.8 micro

    NikV, Oct 3, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    486
  5. k-man

    Does Nikon 105mm f/2.8D micro do internal focus?

    k-man, Apr 30, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    441
    k-man
    May 1, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page