VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm: Voted Best Professional Lens

[flipfrog]

May 2006:
Nikon Wins Prestigious TIPA Awards!
Nikon Canada Inc. is proud to announce the Nikkor AF-S 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED Micro lens has been chosen by Technical Imaging Press Association (TIPA) for coveted European Photo & Imaging Awards.


AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED



Voted Best Professional Lens

“This 105mm f/2.8 reaches a life-size reproduction ratio of 1:1 with an ambitious optical construction of 14 elements in 12 groups. It sports an ED lens and features new Nano Crystal coating technology, which is designed to further minimize flare. With internal focusing and a gyroscope for the optical stabilization, this Micro Nikkor lens shows nearly a 4-stop gain in speed if compared to the same lens without the Vibration Reduction feature. The lens is large and robust, but its filter thread is a mere 62mm. With an attractive price, it comes complete with a soft case and lens hood, and will be the lens of choice for discerning macro photographers.” - TIPA

[padey]

I think this has been posted before.

My guess is this category will be harder to win down the years, as lens companies realise that they can make more money investing engineering into entry-mid level zooms.

At best we only get 1 pro lens from Canon/Nikon every year.

How I'd love an 28/85mm f1.4 AFS VR...

[birddog114]

How I'd love an 28/85mm f1.4 AFS VR...

Do we really need VR on these range?

[shutterbug]

padey wrote:

How I'd love an 28/85mm f1.4 AFS VR...

Do we really need VR on these range?

Yes we do...will be useful in those dark churchs

[birddog114]

padey wrote:

How I'd love an 28/85mm f1.4 AFS VR...

Do we really need VR on these range?

Yes we do...will be useful in those dark churchs

Not sure on these 28 or 85 will be helpful with VR, at 1.4 and bumping the ISO to 400 or little bit higher, then you're in the game.

Shutterbug,
Have you ever shoot with the 28 or 85/ 1.4?

[MattC]

A good tripod is the best VR money can buy. Granted that it is not always practical or convenient to use one though, but it should always be the first option/choice.

Cheers

[padey]

I shoot in dark churches with a 28mm f1.4 on one S3 and a 85mm f1.4 on the other S3. Carry both S3's over my shoulder, ruling out tripods.

There are other issues with tripods. Some old churches are very restrictive on where you can and can't go, and how you can get there. Sometimes carrying a tripod isn't usable.

My style is an ambient light shooter, so I find 80% of dark church shots are above 800iso and between f1.4 and f2.8 at no less then 1/60sec.

Here is an example. ISO1600 f1.4 and ISO1250 f2




I'd like AFS not for the speed, but the silent focus (very noticeable during a silent moment during the ceremony) and ability to manual focus without the painful push-button and then turn to M action.

VR would be nice so i could push beyond 1/60th sec.

[shutterbug]

Have not used the 28mm, but I have with the 85 1.4, but not on a job....

[shutterbug]

Very nice Andrew

[MattC]

....

Very well understood... and I did qualify my statement by noting that it is not always practical or convenient.

Cheers

[gstark]

There are other issues with tripods. Some old churches are very restrictive on where you can and can't go, and how you can get there. Sometimes carrying a tripod isn't usable.

This is very true. We're very lucky these days, where, withdigital we can switch to a higher ISO on demand.

When I was shooting weddings I was using VPS 100 or Fuji CN100. No VR. No way to change ISO mid-roll.

A small beanbag in your pocket can be very useful, as can your elbows as you kneel behind a railing or row of pews. I was regularly able to handhold with acceptable result to 1/8 se; with VR i can get to a helf second, and was absobloodylutely amazed to see, when looking at my shots from last weekend, one of my test shots from PIW, using the 18-200 VRII, was accetably sharp shooting ISO200, f/8 and 1 second.

[Heath Bennett]

and was absobloodylutely amazed to see, when looking at my shots from last weekend, one of my test shots from PIW, using the 18-200 VRII, was accetably sharp shooting ISO200, f/8 and 1 second.

Impressive indeed. Fast primes could be interesting with VR, biggest problem with long exposures being the movement of the subject, especially in wedding biz. Can look cool though.

[johnd]

and was absobloodylutely amazed to see, when looking at my shots from last weekend, one of my test shots from PIW, using the 18-200 VRII, was accetably sharp shooting ISO200, f/8 and 1 second.

Impressive indeed. Fast primes could be interesting with VR, biggest problem with long exposures being the movement of the subject, especially in wedding biz. Can look cool though.

On a similar note, when I got my 80-400VR from Birdy the other day, I did a test shot of our cat at night with just normal room lighting. It was a 1 sec exposure hand held at 80mm. Well the cat moved didn't she, but the woven rug she was sitting on was tack sharp. I was amazed.

Cheers
John

[gstark]

On a similar note, when I got my 80-400VR from Birdy the other day, I did a test shot of our cat at night with just normal room lighting. It was a 1 sec exposure hand held at 80mm. Well the cat moved didn't she, but the woven rug she was sitting on was tack sharp. I was amazed.

There's a difference between cats and rugs? I've not noticed this.

[marcotrov]

Very impressive Gary, 1 sec I see I'll have to improve my hanholding technique Gary do you hold breath when firing shutter or fire shutter whilst exhaling?
John I have the 80-400VR its a damn fine lens VR or not
cheers
marco

[Greg B]

There's a difference between cats and rugs? I've not noticed this.

It can be hard to see if you don't have your glasses on

[Greg B]

and was absobloodylutely amazed to see, when looking at my shots from last weekend, one of my test shots from PIW, using the 18-200 VRII, was accetably sharp shooting ISO200, f/8 and 1 second.

Gary, I am hanging out to get this lens, what was your overall impression?

[Manta]

On a similar note, when I got my 80-400VR from Birdy the other day, I did a test shot of our cat at night with just normal room lighting. It was a 1 sec exposure hand held at 80mm. Well the cat moved didn't she, but the woven rug she was sitting on was tack sharp. I was amazed.

There's a difference between cats and rugs? I've not noticed this.

One of them can be cleaned by hanging it on the clothesline and beating it with a big stick....

[MattC]

Which one would that be?

[Manta]

Which one would that be?

[Grev]

Interesting. I learnt new things today.

[johnd]

Aforementioned cat and rug (before beating). The cat breathed, the rug didn't.
The rug is pretty sharp in #2 which isn't too bad for 0.7 sec hand held.

#1: 1 sec, hand held with 80-400VR, 80mm


#2: 0.7 sec, hand held with 80-400VR, 80mm



Cheers
John

[gstark]

Very impressive Gary, 1 sec I see I'll have to improve my hanholding technique Gary do you hold breath when firing shutter or fire shutter whilst exhaling?

Hi Marco.

I was discussing exactly this techniquie with someone just a day or two ago.

I usually hold my breath, but I've heard others swear by exahaling, and then holding with no breath. Bottom line is that I think it doesn't matter so much whether you're holding air or not, the point being that you don't start or end a breath, because that is (thinking about it logiclly) where you're most likely to induce movement.

But I think at least equally important is correct camera holding technique. If you haven't got that right, then all bets are off anyway.

And the interesting thing about this particular image, which I hope to post over the weekend, was that I was suprised by the actual shutter speed recorded, because I was just shooting grabs, not paying particular attention to the settings, but more paying attention to the way the lens was behaving on the camera, and subsequently how the camera was misbehaving with this lens mounted.

I noticed though that I was getting slower than desirable shutter speeds so I switched on the flash for some of the images ...

Greg,

My first impression was "which camera is the lens on?". I'd been told that it was on 2 d70s bodies "over there". So I went "over there" but all of the cameras had small lenses on them. Which was the 18-200? The lens is truly that small, and impressively so. Small enough that no casual passer-by will guess that, at rest, you have the reach that this lens provides.

At extension it looks a bit like a PHD in the way that it pushes itself out, but for me that's not an issue at all, unless you truly care about such things as size and looking like a real photographer.

Sharpness at f/8 was very impressive. I didn't have a chance to have a serious play - this was at PIW and the lens was affixed to a demo D70s and tethered to the stand and the D70s. I pulled the lens off their camera and attached it to mine and just started shooting at basically faces and feet. That was a challenge, because I needed to ensure that I didn't drop the demo camera that was now sitting on a small stand but tehered to my camera via the lens.

The images that I've got looked quite sharp when chimping, which is always a good sign. I was very pleasantly surprised at the results when I threw them onto the PC and had a good (pixel)peep.

This is a lens that will work very well in the outdoors, but due its (lack of) optical speed, it hunted a bit within the confines of PIW. It felt somewhat slow to me - more like shooting with the F801 - but with this lens and its pricing, this is one of the compromises that you need to consider.

The hunting bothered me a tad, because it was, I think, the most I'd ever expereinced with any lens on the D70. It wasn't as bad as the 5700, but I'd certainly be wanting to have a bit more of a play with this were I to use it on a D70 or a D50. I think it would be fine on a D200 or better, because of the better in-camera focussing systems.

I'll post a couple of sample images into this thread over the weekend.

I mentioned earlier in the message some camera misbehaviour: this has me concerned, and I'm not yet sure of what the actual issue is.

After shooting a few images, upon shooting one, the viewfinder went black and the top panel LCD gave me an Err message.

I've had this happen to me before on my camera, and releasing the shutter button again cured the problem.

But where in the past this was an isolated instance, this happened maybe six or eight times on Saturday with the 18-200 affixed.

I remounted my 24-120 after doing this shooting, and within PIW took a few more shots and had the problem another two times. Afterwards, at our minimeet, I shot another 80 or so frames, with the 24-120 and 80-400, with no further issues.

Was the lens causing problems with my body? I dunno. I am concerned, especially as my D70 is also showing issues with its top panel LCD (lost its battery display), so I'm not sure what's afoot here, nor whether this is a camera, lens, or parhaps some interchangability issue.

And yes, I'm aware that there are focussing issues between the D70 and 18-200 lens but that only applies to cameras using V1.x firmware; I'm using V2, and the problems I experienced were outside the scope of the service notice issued by Nikon on this matter.

[robboh]

On a similar note, when I got my 80-400VR from Birdy the other day, I did a test shot of our cat at night with just normal room lighting. It was a 1 sec exposure hand held at 80mm. Well the cat moved didn't she, but the woven rug she was sitting on was tack sharp. I was amazed.

There's a difference between cats and rugs? I've not noticed this.

Not much at all. Both are great for standing on, the cat just generates a much more satisfying result