DSLRUsers.com

It is my first time doing a lens review. Im no expert at all in this, so please dont fire at me if you find what I wrote is wrong. Correct me if you find any error as well. Im still learning in this!!

I had this lens borrowed over the weekend, fired it off for a review since many may be interested in this new lens.

All images shown below are under this gallery, they are all clickable for a larger version.
http://yiph.zenfolio.com/p44142600/
*** Original 6MP sized samples are downloadable from the gallery***



Nikon Nikkor Micro 105mm f/2.8G ED IF VR Nano-Crystal
What a name!!



Specifications:
f/Stop Range: 2.8 – 32
Minimum Focus Distance: 1’ (0.31m)
Maximum Magnification: 1:1
Angle of View: 23 Degrees
Groups/Elements: 14/32
Filter Size: 62mm
Length: 4.6” (116mm)
Maximum Diameter: 3.3” (83mm)
Weight: 1.6lb (720g)


Introduction
This is the very first Nikon Micro that incorporates a Vibration Reduction feature. Nikon has gone wild on the design of this lens by throwing everything they've got to think of into it. That is, AF-S, ED Glass, VR-II mechanism, and a new "Nano-Crystal" Coating.

Build
Simple word for this lens, it is MASSIVE! The entire body is made of metal, a standard Gold-Ring 'pro' finish on the cosmetic side similar to the 70-200VR. The focus ring is pretty well dampened, focus is smooth while working in macro. The lens barrel does not extend at all when focusing down to the amazing 1:1 ratio. Probably this is the reason for the incredible size of this lens. The weight is so much that even when I mount it on my 055PROB + 488RC2 tripod, I get vibration on the view at 1:1, I will much prefer it to have a tripod collar which balances the weight with a light body as the D70.
Holding this lens for the first time will give you a "WOW" impression of its build quality and whooping 720g weight (!!). The lens itself seems to be dust and moisture sealed, it has a rubber sealing around the lens mount and it is self contained (does not extend).

----


Interfaces
On the side of the lens, it has 3 switches.
1- M/A or M focus mode
2- Infinity to 0.5m focus limiter
3- VR: ON/OFF



Top of the lens, it is the focus scale window. It contains information in Metric and imperial scales, along with a magnification ratio scale. The scale starts from infinity, then immediately down to 3m and 1.5, 1m then slowly down to 0.314m.




The HOOD
Something I don’t like about is the MASSIVE hood on this lens. It does provide excellent shelter for the lens and protection while reversed or mounted in the front. Adding the hood will increase the length of the lens by about 3/4 of its size, yes that is almost doubled its original length!
With the hood reversed, you have successfully shelled up the lens with the hood. No buttons, focus information or manual focus is accessible due to the oversized hood in place.
Using onboard flash is never a good way with this super lens hood. A SB800 onboard and the -7deg pitch can save your day.
----

Performance

Optics
Without doubt, this is a very nice piece of optical glass. The sharpness of the lens is maintained mostly throughout the entire range. While having sweet spots at aperture near f/9 to f/11. It is very sharp for anything you shoot at.
As for a dedicated macro lens design, the lens itself does not stay at f/2.8 throughout the entire focusing range. From 3m to infinity, you can achieve f/2.8, below 3m focus, the aperture starts to drop from f/2.8 to f/3 and all way down to f/4.8 when focused down to 0.314m (1:1 magnification). It will be better if the aperture drops down at focus less than 1.5m, which at 3m distance I find shooting portrait a good distance but I can no longer achieve f/2.8.
It has a 9 bladed diaphragm mechanism, makes a very nice bokeh at most ranges.


Lens Flare and Chromatic Aberrations
Thanks to Nikon's "Nano-Crystal" Coating, lens flare and CA is kept to the very minimum (Almost inexistence)! With the massive lens hood, there is not much to worry about flaring.




Vibration Reduction
This is where it hurts most. Many wonders how a VR will work in macro close-ups. Simple answer is, it does not work as it should be. I must say that Nikon did a very nice job on the VR, it works very well normally throughout the 'normal' focus range. Once focus distance is below 0.5m, the VR effect deliberately reduces due to magnified image and vibration.
It will still work in close up focus with VR (probably a slight 1-2 stops performance), just that it is a little bit disappointing to pay the $400-500 premium for something you'd expect it to do the job not working well.
The VR does a good job in outdoor situations where focus is beyond 1.5m, everything works magically with this VR's 4 stop correction, allowing speed low as 1/25 or 1/10 to be shot.


Auto-Focus
I am not very happy with the autofocus in this lens on my D70 body. When I'm out there in the fields, focusing at subjects further than 1m is blazing fast (as expected from an AF-S lens). But what about lower light and closer range? Forget it, the lens hunts too much when working in macro distances (1m or less). I’m surprised that this dedicated macro lens has no focus limit for focus less than 1m to 0.3m. When it hunts for focus, it travels from 0.314m all the way back to infinity and back again, then it may grab a focus somehow if you're lucky with the light. While working in macro, I just turn the lens to manual focus, its much more pleasant working this way and its better yet in macro work for selective focus.

Conclusion
This is a very fine piece optics with a few flaws. First, the VR does not work as it suppose to do when you are at 1:1 magnification (simply too much vibration to cancel out). A tripod can always win on this one.

AF hunts when focus is closer than 1m and dim lights (at least on my D70 body).

Optic is perfectly sharp and stellar. Built like a tank with its oversized lens hood. Lack of tripod collar with heavy weight makes tripod handling on light body difficult (unless remote controlled). It works great for candid shot around the streets (thaks to AFS and VRII), but its size is bit giveaway and intimidating.

All in all, this is a very fine glass. Nikon have thrown everything inside to make it high selling point. I dont see why you pay the premium for AFS and VR if you plan to take macro on tripod and manual focus IMHO.

Samples
Here are some Samples taken with the lens.


----
--------

A Sample test shot with my lens resolution chart:
WARNING LARGE FILE!!



Ok, spent I 3 hours on this review!?!?
All types of questions are welcomed!! I didnt type this for nothing

I deserve a break for now.

Yi-P,

A great review and very interesting to me as I am in the hunt for a macro lens. After reading your review I think the cheaper 105mm F/2.8 without VR is a better option.

Many thanks for the time and effort you put in to this.

Stuart

Thanks Yi-P,

great review, I too was looking for info on the lens. Will look for second-hand with VR, if they can be found. Probably will have to wait for Christmas for this one

cheers,

Andre

Indeed a great review Yi-P.

I have been very critical of a micro with VR - the physics of this combination of mechanics and optics at magnification just did not ring true.

I can see from your review that it is a superb lens especially with the IF. VR with macro NO, VR for use at 1.5m or more YES

Well done Yi-p - very thorough!!

Nice one, Yi-P. We need to get more thorough reviews like yours

I am a long way off affording more lenses... though I was already leaning towards getting the non-VR version. I think your review just confirms what I already thought!!!

Yi-P wrote:Forget it, the lens hunts too much when working in macro distances (1m or less). I’m surprised that this dedicated macro lens has no focus limit for focus less than 1m to 0.3m. When it hunts for focus, it travels from 0.314m all the way back to infinity and back again, then it may grab a focus somehow if you're lucky with the light. While working in macro, I just turn the lens to manual focus, its much more pleasant working this way and its better yet in macro work for selective focus.

Thanks for the review, and the lend of the lens on Sunday! For what it's worth, it exhibited exactly the same hunting behaviour on the D200 as well. Given that this was the first time I've used a macro lens, I'm not sure whether this is to be expected or not, but certainly I found MF to be the way to go (or at least get the focus there or there abouts manually, then use AF. When it works, AF is very fast, no complaints about AF-S as per usual. I agree with your VR comments, as always VR is useful but only for a stop or two below normal handholding shutterspeeds, which is really rather limited. Certainly there are times when it can help, but surely any serious macro photographer would also have a dedicated flash of some description (my SB800 was great).

Thanks for your personal review,

I have mentioned this few times before:

- Who's going to shoot macro with AF? None.
- What VR can do for macro lens? Nothing and make it worst.
- Handholding technique should be very stable in macro or VR by tripod.
- Its built and glass does not surpass the 105 macro non VR version.
- Cost more expensive than the non VR version
- It's the way how Nikon try to lure new macro players into their marketing game with VR on macro.

Buy the non VR macro or search some old non AF (AI-S) macro lenses, these will provide more qualities and great photo production than the 105 VR.

Excellent review - thanks for taking the time to post it.

Most photographers would manually focus macro shots and many of these pix would be taken with the lens on a tripod.

I suppose the VR is Nikon's attempt to allow more "in the field" macro shots without a tripod. Sounds like the AF needs to improve for this to work properly though.

Terrific review Yi-P. Thanks for the huge effort in putting it together.

One small question that perhaps one of the others could answer... You mentioned the VR 105 doesn't maintain f2.8 at close range. Does anyone know if the non-VR has the same characteristic or does it hold the wide aperture all the way through?

I realise this is probably academic as most users will be shooting at much smaller apertures for increased DOF on macro subjects. Just curious. (I also questioned the value of VR in this type of lens when we were first discussing it)

Great review I must say. Congratulations!

I'm pretty sure that Nikon don't make any claims that the VR works well at macro distances. In fact I'm sure I've read in Nikon press releases that VR isn't useful in macro.

I also find it strange that there is no focus limiter switch. Although I can't remember the last time I used autofocus when at macro distances.

Thanks for the review and good luck with the new toy

Paul

Manta,
Macro is always achieved with f.16 and above.
And none of macro lens has the constant 2.8 all the way thru.

Thanks Birdy.

Thanks for the review Yi-P, I had wondered how useful the VR would be on a macro lens and now you've confirmed my suspicions. I've got the normal 105mm macro and always use a tripod and M/F rather than A/F.

Bob.
.

Congratulations Yi-P excellent review
This is and would be the most precise review that I have seen on any lens .The bad news for Nikon is due to your review I for one will not be pursuing this lens thanks for saving my tax return.


LOZ

Great review Yi-P,

you covered allot of details I didn't know about this lens. I can see how the AFS and VR would be handy for some of my non Macro shooting, but the question is, is it worth the extra $$$?

Thanks Yi P for a very comprehensive review

Manta wrote:...
One small question that perhaps one of the others could answer... You mentioned the VR 105 doesn't maintain f2.8 at close range. Does anyone know if the non-VR has the same characteristic or does it hold the wide aperture all the way through? ...

The non VR also does not stay at f/2.8 in close focus, and nor does any other lens!
Its a bugger when the laws of physics get in the way of what you want

As you focus on closer subjects the lens extends (except in IF models) and the image scale increases (ie the effective focal length increases), but the actual diameter of the lens does not, and since the f/ratio is just the ratio of focal length/diameter of lens, it must by definition increase the f/number.
This happens in all lenses, but the close focus distance of most non-macro lenses is far enough that the effect is very minor.

Gordon

Thanks all, I hope you all found this review useful somehow.

DStrom wrote:Great review Yi-P,

you covered allot of details I didn't know about this lens. I can see how the AFS and VR would be handy for some of my non Macro shooting, but the question is, is it worth the extra $$$?

Question bounce back to yourself, will you be willing to pay the extra $$ for VR and AFS then a nano-crystal coat??

I am not able to answer your question about comparing to the older 105/2.8D as I dont have that lens at my disposal.

From my point of view, this is a great lens to work with candids outdoor. VR works great outdoors, f/2.8 is achievable for fast speed, and optic is very sharp. I wouldnt mind having this lens for use in concerts (yeah, the VR + f/2.8 will make a difference in the dark concert). Its size is not as big as the 70-200 without the lens hood.

Once again, this is a great medium-telephoto lens with VRII and constant f/2.8 (assuming you using it as telephoto). The focus at far objects, I dont know how accurate it is, the focus scale reads 3m then infinity straight away, but AFS is there to help you with blazing fast AF (again, at telephoto range).

If you plan on a dedicated macro lens and not a medium-telephoto use, then this is a play around with your tax returns. The choice is always on your side. If you want new technology and a 'wow' looking lens with great sex appeal, this is your choice as well. It gives female the impression in its "Big, Long, and Black" shape

I have just done an eBay check on prices - all around $1,200 = check out d-d-digital he has a great price

Gordon wrote:The non VR also does not stay at f/2.8 in close focus, and nor does any other lens!
Its a bugger when the laws of physics get in the way of what you want

Sorry Gordon, I beg to differ.

Gordon wrote:As you focus on closer subjects the lens extends (except in IF models) and the image scale increases (ie the effective focal length increases),

This does not follow. A lens' focal length does not depend on the focussing distance, if focusing is done by extending the lens. In IF designs, on the other hand, the focal length does change, along with the whole optical formula of the lens, as lens groups gets shifted relative to each other.

Gordon wrote:This happens in all lenses, but the close focus distance of most non-macro lenses is far enough that the effect is very minor.Gordon

No, it only happens with lens designs that change their formula during focusing, esp IF designs. Among the Micro Nikkors the 60mm f/2.8 AF was the first to show this behaviour. Although not really an IF lens, a lot was going on inside the lens during focusing (apart from extension) that the actual focal length at close focus was more like 80mm, with the according reduction in relative aperture.

The 55mm Micro Nikkors however are focused merely by lens extension, and do not change their focal length. Same with most non-IF/RF prime Nikkors. Including the Ai-S and AF Micro Nikkors 105/f2.8. Those where straight-forward and simple focusing designs, unlike the AF-S VR lens, which is IF and has a massive 14 lens elements in 10 groups (something normally only seen in fast super-wides or zooms).

Cheers
Steffen.

Steffen wrote:...
Sorry Gordon, I beg to differ.

Gordon wrote:As you focus on closer subjects the lens extends (except in IF models) and the image scale increases (ie the effective focal length increases),

This does not follow. A lens' focal length does not depend on the focussing distance, if focusing is done by extending the lens. In IF designs, on the other hand, the focal length does change, along with the whole optical formula of the lens, as lens groups gets shifted relative to each other.

Sorry you disagree Steffan, but the laws of optics apply to all lenses!
I didnt say the focal length changes, I said the effective focal length changes. Yes IF designs do different things with fl as you adjust focus, but the overall effect is the same.
To explain what I mean in more detail- the focal length engraved on the lens applies to focusing at infinity. However if you look through a lens as you adjust focus to closer distances, things appear to get larger (although out of focus unless you stop it down enough). At large distances relative to the lens focal length the effect is minor, but as you get noticeable magnification the f/ratio must increase.

I believe the formula is something like actual f/ratio = f/# on lens * (1 + magnification). (I don't have my reference books handy so cant check the details.)
So, if you are working at 1:1 reproduction, ie 1 magnification, the f/# is multiplied by 2.
This definitely applies to my old 55mm MicroNikkor, which I have used for 5:1 magnification work, just as much as it applies to my new 105 MicroNikkor, only the 105 displays the changing f/ratio because it is a D lens, which tells the camera body what distance it is focused to. If the distance measurement isnt reported to the camera body then the true f/ratio cannot be displayed.

Gordon

Gordon wrote:Sorry you disagree Steffan, but the laws of optics apply to all lenses!
I didnt say the focal length changes, I said the effective focal length changes.

No, the focal length doesn't change. I think I know what you're referring to, though. The amount of light hitting the film or sensor depends on the picture angle. The relative aperture ("f-stop") only accurately describes this amount for parallel rays, i.e. infinity focus. For closer focus, and non-TTL metering, one has to use the effective aperture ("t-stop") in exposure calculations, rather than the relative one.

Gordon wrote:To explain what I mean in more detail- the focal length engraved on the lens applies to focusing at infinity.

Well, it denotes the f-stop, which is a geometric property and doesn't change on the 55mm Mikro.

Gordon wrote:However if you look through a lens as you adjust focus to closer distances, things appear to get larger (although out of focus unless you stop it down enough). At large distances relative to the lens focal length the effect is minor, but as you get noticeable magnification the f/ratio must increase.

I don't believe that's the case with simple lens designs (i.e. 55mm Micro). The reason the effective aperture diminishes is that more and more light hits the lens at flatter angles of incidence, as you focus closer. This affects the illumination of the film/sensor, hence the image gets dimmer, despite constant f-stop.

Gordon wrote:I believe the formula is something like actual f/ratio = f/# on lens * (1 + magnification). (I don't have my reference books handy so cant check the details.)

That's correct.

Gordon wrote:So, if you are working at 1:1 reproduction, ie 1 magnification, the f/# is multiplied by 2.
This definitely applies to my old 55mm MicroNikkor, which I have used for 5:1 magnification work, just as much as it applies to my new 105 MicroNikkor, only the 105 displays the changing f/ratio because it is a D lens, which tells the camera body what distance it is focused to. If the distance measurement isnt reported to the camera body then the true f/ratio cannot be displayed.

Again, I don't think that's true. I believe the 105 AF Mikro Nikkor actually changes its focal length when focussing close, i.e. the f-top does change. Otherwise the camera should not adjust the displayed aperture. If it did then it would be compensating twice, since it already mesures the light through the lens. Obviously, t-stop correction must not be applied to TTL measurements.

Cheers
Steffen.

Steffen wrote:...If it did then it would be compensating twice, since it already mesures the light through the lens. Obviously, t-stop correction must not be applied to TTL measurements.

Its not compensating twice, the display is merely the actual effective aperture that the D lens is reporting to the camera- due to focusing closely enough for appreciable magnification, whether or not the user beleives it

f/ratio = f/# on lens * (1 + magnification) applies to all lenses, whether it is IF (internal focusing) or merely extending the lens away from the focal plane is irrelevant. That is why the displayed f/stop on the 105mm changes as you focus more closely. Look at the tables included with the lens- at 1:1 reproduction the f/stop is multiplied by 2, exactly as per the above formula. If the focal length was appreciably changing it would be some other value.

I think that t-stops are more to do with transmission due to large numbers of optical elements decreasing the amount of light being transmitted- or optical obstructions such as in a reflecting telescope/cat. lens. For example my geometric f/4.1 Newtonian telescope has an effective t-stop of f/4.5 due to the obstruction of the secondary mirror.

Gordon

Yi-P - Thanks for your comprehensive review.

Gordon, Steffen - My brain hurts

stubbsy wrote:...

Gordon, Steffen - My brain hurts

OK, I'm not going to say any more on the subject, no matter what hooks I see dangling

Its only my legs hurting, from commuting 229km to work yesterday!

Gordon

Gordon wrote:

Steffen wrote:...If it did then it would be compensating twice, since it already mesures the light through the lens. Obviously, t-stop correction must not be applied to TTL measurements.

Its not compensating twice, the display is merely the actual effective aperture that the D lens is reporting to the camera- due to focusing closely enough for appreciable magnification, whether or not the user beleives it

But the TTL meter already sees the light loss due to extension, imperfect lens transmission, ND filter, whatever. It knows the EV wide open. Dialling in f/8 on an f/2.8 lens just tells the meter that the shot is going to be taken at three stops dimmer than what it sees. Hence, moving from f/8 to f/16 when focusing at close range doesn't make sense, unless the focal length actually changes in the process. The light loss due to lens extension may give you f/16 light at f/8 setting, but it will certainly not give you f/16 DOF.

Gordon wrote:f/ratio = f/# on lens * (1 + magnification) applies to all lenses, whether it is IF (internal focusing) or merely extending the lens away from the focal plane is irrelevant.

"f/# on lens" isn't actually a term you'll find in text books on optics. What you'll find is terms like relative aperture and effective aperture. Relative aperture (commonly called f-stop) is the ratio between a lens' focal length and it's entry pupil diameter. It is a geometric property of the lens and has nothing to do with how it is held relative to the film plane or subject. Under ideal circumstances (infinity focus, circular aperture, no transmission loss, etc.) it can be used in exposure calculations, because it accurately describes the film illumination.

Under real circumstances (closer than infinity focus, irregularly shaped aperture, light loss due to lens transmission, filters, etc) is has to be corrected to yield the effective aperture (commonly called t-stop) in order to be useful for exposure calculation.

The great thing about TTL metering is that none of these corrections need to be applied by the photographer, since the TTL meter sees light affected by the t-stop, not the f-stop, and the linear relationship between f-stops (doubling/halving illumination with each full stop) isn't affected by the corrections that lead to t-stops. And that has been the case since long before AF-D or other kind of CPU lenses were introduced.

Gordon wrote:That is why the displayed f/stop on the 105mm changes as you focus more closely. Look at the tables included with the lens- at 1:1 reproduction the f/stop is multiplied by 2, exactly as per the above formula. If the focal length was appreciably changing it would be some other value.

I don't have an AF Micro-Nikkor to play with, but on my AiS 55/f2.8 the aperture display certainly doesn't change throughout the focussing range, and metering is correct at all focussing distances. If the AF Micro-Nikkors facilitate changes to the aperture display on the camera body somehow, for reasons other than change in focal length, I can only presume that this is to assist the photographer in setting up manual strobes and other lighting, where the t-stop needs to be known. If the displayed aperture value changes for reasons other than change in focal length, the change will not and cannot affect the camera's auto-exposure. Otherwise Ai(S) Micro-Nikkors (that don't communicate distance info to the camera) wouldn't work.

Gordon wrote:I think that t-stops are more to do with transmission due to large numbers of optical elements decreasing the amount of light being transmitted- or optical obstructions such as in a reflecting telescope/cat. lens.

All of that plus extension factor (1 + m).

Gordon wrote:For example my geometric f/4.1 Newtonian telescope has an effective t-stop of f/4.5 due to the obstruction of the secondary mirror.

Geometric f/4.1 (that's fast!) probably means focal length divided by mirror diameter. If you calculated the area of the donut-shaped entry pupil and used the diameter of a circle of equal area instead of the mirror diameter, you'd get the true geometric relative aperture of the scope. Since the scope will always be focused at infinity, all you have to take into acount to arrive at the t-stop is transmission loss.

Cheers
Steffen.

Gordon wrote:

stubbsy wrote:...

Gordon, Steffen - My brain hurts

OK, I'm not going to say any more on the subject, no matter what hooks I see dangling
Gordon

We'll see about that...

Seriously, I get easily carried away on subjects like this, so don't tempt me . I realise that this discussion will seem pointless and boring to a lot of people. I also apologise to Yi-P for effectively hi-jacking his beautiful review. I also apologise for having the last word (presumably?) before apologising

I, too, promise to drop it and agree to disagree if we have to.

Peace,
Steffen.

Steffen wrote:I also apologise to Yi-P for effectively hi-jacking his beautiful review. I also apologise for having the last word (presumably?) before apologising

Peace,
Steffen.

Oh Sh!T, we got terrorist onboard...


Haha, j/k...

its okay, thanks to you Steffen, you and Gordon filled up my review with plenty more 'knowledable' readings for macro lenses