It appears that Nikon has more in stock. I ordered one the 2nd or 3rd day after the announcement and didn't get one the first go round but I did get a notice this morning that they have one in stock for me and will be shipped soon. I'm looking forward to getting to use it.
Mike
Yep, it's being delivered on Thursday. I guess Nikon is again shipping a few of them. Yay.
gear-nut wrote:
No offense, but if you look at the rope gate sweeping down behind the old Nun, you can clearly see the line-fringing in it that Suteetat describes. To me, that's the most obvious part of a busy bokeh.
No offense at all however I don't think that the 105 VR bokeh is "so busy".
Bokeh depends on so many factors, including the apertures (see Thom Hogan review whose link I gave previously).
Then, we should compare same scenes at same aperture to make meaningful comparisons.
For sure, the bokeh of my 100/2 Zeiss Makro-Planar is better than AF-S 105 VR's, and probably 105 MC bokeh is even better. The side-by-side comparison posted here shows more line-doubling in the 105 MC shot.
gear-nut wrote:
My take is this new Z 105 is pretty nice -- definitely sharper than the older one, and significantly smoother bokeh.
Significantly? it can't be said without extensive side-by-side comparisons performed looking at many pictures, taken at different distances and apertures. A couple of images of different subjects can't tell the whole story.
Anyway, I have no interest in saying which lens has the best bokeh; simply I don't I like to tell lies (for this reason I post pictures)
I see peripheral onion rings in the 105 MC bokeh; the reviewer call them "outlining": f/2.8 bokeh f/4 bokeh f/5.6 bokeh
Are they due to the rear aspherical element
EDIT: VR ON could alter (negatively) the appearance of bokeh.
I have massive coverage of this useful FL across three mounts, and in F mount with several Nikkor zooms, so was planning to ignore the 105 MC. However, the color correction and blur rendition is truly amazing. The correction appears to equal the mighty V/C Macro Apo-Lanthar 110/2.5 that I've resisted because I don't want to invest in FE mount. Plus, this MC offers AF which is icing on the cake. Now I have to make a commitment.
Ripolini wrote:
I see peripheral onion rings in the 105 MC bokeh...
Thom Hogan review (https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/nikkor-lenses/nikon-z-mount-lens-reviews/nikon-105mm-f28-lens-review.html) confirms a bokeh with onion skin and colored edge, a couple of cm shorter working distance than AF-S 105 VR's, and missing focus limiter, with occasional hunting, at long distances ("I'd want to force it to focus only in the longer distance range if I could").
His subjective evaluation of sharpness confirms MTF plots: it's sharper than AF-S 105 VR, which is still a very strong performer.
105 MC is sharpest @ f/4 (infinity) and f/8 (macro). At 1:1 the max aperture is f/4.5; consequently, both at long and macro distances, maximum sharpness is obtained by closing the aperture by 1-1.5 stops.
About sharpness evenness across the frame, Thom concludes: "The corners never quite match the center until diffraction sets in, but that’s a fairly standard result." OK; my Zeiss 135/2 Apo Sonnar is not a "standard" lens
Anyone notice a clunking sound in their copy? Was mounting it today and heard it for the first time. Assuming it’s the OIS group as it wasn’t as loud when mounted. Haven’t been able to recreate the sound after mounting and unmounting a couple times so hopefully I don’t have to RMA it.
mach250 wrote:
Anyone notice a clunking sound in their copy? Was mounting it today and heard it for the first time. Assuming it’s the OIS group as it wasn’t as loud when mounted. Haven’t been able to recreate the sound after mounting and unmounting a couple times so hopefully I don’t have to RMA it.
If I move the unmounted lens side to side gently, I can hear a soft "clunking" sound and when on the camera a very, very faint sound. If I hadn't jiggled the camera, I would never have heard it.
mach250 wrote:
I'd agree that the sound towards the end of my video is normal like Lance mentioned but the louder sound in the beginning is anything but normal.
I hadn't listen to the video. I agree that have never heard anything like that. Send it in.
Is anyone able to comment on the general-purpose focus speed of this lens? I like the rendering I'm seeing and like the 105mm focal length, but would be using it very rarely for actual macro - wondering if AF on this is slow as some other older macro-specific lenses, or if it should serve well as a general-purpose medium tele?
darthalal wrote:
Is anyone able to comment on the general-purpose focus speed of this lens? I like the rendering I'm seeing and like the 105mm focal length, but would be using it very rarely for actual macro - wondering if AF on this is slow as some other older macro-specific lenses, or if it should serve well as a general-purpose medium tele?
I think the general purpose AF speed is very good. Certainly a step up from a lot of older macro lenses.
The only downside is if the camera misses focus and the focus racks, as you'd expect it's a pretty long wait, and the only available focus limiter is to restrict it to macro range. You can't keep it out of the macro range, which would help the racking problem.
As a general purpose lens, I think it's really pretty good. If you were making your living shooting action from it, though, the occasional full focus rack would get annoying.
Lance B wrote:
I received mine today but have only just been able to try it out late in the day on our pet rabbit that doesn't like to pose for the camera. Nothing ground breaking here, other than to say so far is that from wide open it is idiotically sharp and has great bokeh.
