I want a brand new 135mm :-)

Msmoto

Agree on the hunting for focus of the AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED...it will search almost unpredictably, especially in lower light levels. Practically speaking, I have the 105, the 135/2, and the 70-200/2.8. I am becoming convinced the most versatile is the 70-200 and would pick this one as the first to purchase. It is IMO as sharp as either of the others, can be used with an extension tube for macro.

Having said all this, there is something special about the 135/2.0 DC Nikkor, and will be on my camera from time to time. I do not think one can go wrong with this lens, and purchased used if one can test the less or return it if not acceptable; this would be the way to go, IMO.

PB_PM

You really need to use the focus limiter on the 105mm VR, otherwise it hunts like crazy.

Msmoto

Even with the focus limiter on it hunts more than most lenses, IMO. Off, it is like a wild bull ride...LOL

henrik1963

Never had that issue with my 105 VR micro. I have only used it in daylight. I will try it out in dim light.

jimmyboy

The Nikon 105 f/2.8 VR macro. This lens will (piss you off ) if you use it for this type of work. There's no doubt it's a beautiful lens. It was my first Nikon lens I bought. I mounted this lens on Nikon 300/700/800E. I've shot thousands of pic's with this lens. It will HUNT. It's just the way this lens is. The limiter switch it don't matter, or what's in the menu for auto/focus. It won't help you, it's just the way this lens is. If it were me, buy the 135 D.C It's quick fast. This is what this lens was built for this type of work.

autofocus

Has there been any rumor about Sigma producing a 135mm Art soon? I don't know why I want this focal length so much but have since I bought the Zeiss 100mm F2. I know, that sounds crazy. I love the Sigma 50mm and 35mm Art series. Already have the Nikon 85mm 1.4G. I would buy the Zeiss 135mm but really want AF at that focal length.

haroldp

I ave been using the 105/2.0 DC for 15 years as a portrait lens and I am completely satisfied with it's performance for that purpose. It is perfect for 'head and shoulders', and for tight head shots, it's sharpness and modern cameras give me ample cropping capability.

If I did lot of tight head shots, I would go for the 135, but it is very occasional for me.

At weddings, I have used the 70-200/2.8 for portraits, at 100-150mm wide open it is very satisfactory.

.... H

nek4life

I'd love to try out a 135mm at some point. Just getting my new 105mm with VR I think I'd want it to have VR. If not I'd probably just opt for the 70-200mm VRii. I bet it would come down to 135mm vs 70-200mm for a lot of people based on the size and price of the lens.

WestEndFoto

I would never pick VR over the portrait advantages of a real portrait lens. You can easily correct for lack of VR. Most of the time you are shooting it at 1/125 or 1/160 or even higher and you shouldn't need VR for that. There are other techniques if you are using a slower shutter speed. You can't correct for the qualities of the 135 lacking in the 70-200.

VR has its uses, but sometimes I think it is a gimmick when people think they can't live without it.

FrenchRiviera

VR is a great thing , it permits to keep low iso performances when light is scarce , 2 step at least , that means better noise and better dynamique . ( or close 2 stops for wider DOF )
No need to carry a heavy and slow installation tripod .
I would prefer Nikon to implement stabilization in camera , smaller lenses , works for every lenses ( 1.8 G for example ) .

A 135mm on D800E needs 1/250s at least , stabilized 1/60 ... for such performance today at 135mm , you don't have other choice than the wonderful but bulky 70-200VRII

FrenchRiviera

Sigma Rumors is listing a 135/2.0 or 135/1.8 as the most likely upcoming Art series lens.

I already want it :-)

WestEndFoto

VR is a great thing , it permits to keep low iso performances when light is scarce , 2 step at least , that means better noise and better dynamique . ( or close 2 stops for wider DOF )
No need to carry a heavy and slow installation tripod .
I would prefer Nikon to implement stabilization in camera , smaller lenses , works for every lenses ( 1.8 G for example ) .

A 135mm on D800E needs 1/250s at least , stabilized 1/60 ... for such performance today at 135mm , you don't have other choice than the wonderful but bulky 70-200VRII

There is a reason that Nikon did not include VR on the 85 1.4G and I think it will be the same reason it will not be on a 135 replacement.

As portrait lenses used as portrait lenses, they are used in situation where the photographer has either complete or some control over the light. With my 85 and 135, if I was shooting in tough light situations, I would expect to see a lot of shots where the ISO is greater than 1,000 (I use auto-ISO a lot). When I go through my thousands of shots in Lightroom with these two lenses, I cannot find any and this seems consistent with what I shoot. That tells me that for my uses, VR would provide no additional utility. I suspect that most (but not all) portrait photographers would say the same thing and the ones that don’t are likely shooting their portraits in an extreme situation with no control over light or use the lens primarily for something else and only a little for portraits (then buy the 70-200 2.8). While there may be some portrait photographers that shoot like this, it would be a very small percentage.

When I go through my shots using my 50mm 1.4G on the other hand, there are lots of shots at 3,200 ISO where the shutter speed is 1/30th as I often use this lens at events where the light is low. VR would be of obvious benefit here. I should note that lots of these 1/30th shots are keepers. In these types of low light environments, I shoot in fast continuous mode until the buffer is full. I am usually guaranteed at least one (and usually more) keepers this way. If you are using VR properly, you will be shooting the same way – just pushing the envelope further.

I think that VR is a wonderful thing for street photography and candid photography. I don’t really see the utility in a portrait lenses and would prefer that Nikon not succumb to its marketing department on this point.

Msmoto

VR is very useful. However, my concern for live subjects is the amount of subject movement, which VR will not help. Thus, I like to use 1/160 sec with up to about 100mm and go to 1/250th for 135mm, and the VR lenses longer....

Essentially, the 135mm f/2 DC Nikkor is great at 1/250th or even 1/160th sec. Below this, the issue of subject and/or camera movement is potentially a problem if a reasonably large print is desired.

FrenchRiviera

...
As portrait lenses used as portrait lenses
...

I use lenses for what they are : a 135mm remains a 135mm , I may like it for portraits , but not only ... so stabilization is very useful for me , just to keep lowest noise and highest dynamic when conditions would ask higher iso .

WestEndFoto

That is a fair point FrenchRiviera.

However, I suspect (but might be wrong) that Nikon will keep VR out of a 135 replacement for the reasons that I have outlined. My premise is that portrait photographers are an important constituency in Nikon’s customer base and this constituency would rather pay for more IQ than VR. Nikon will want to be able to say to this constituency that they are making lenses for their specific needs and not “pimping it out” to sell more to the masses. Otherwise, I think that they would have included VR in the 85 and perhaps even the 58.

The 105 2.8 Macro is an interesting lens of note that is often used for portraits (though if you were primarily shooting portraits, then I would recommend the 105 DC 2.0). While I prefer not to have VR (I currently own the 200 F/4 Macro), I can see how it would be helpful when shooting macro handheld. However, with the right flash setup (I am figuring out what that will look like), light is controlled and again the need for VR is negated.

FrenchRiviera

As I travel a lot , I would also prefer the 135 not to be VR ( for a smaller lens ) ... just because I would like NIKON to make a A7II like for F-mount lenses ... stabilized by sensor

WestEndFoto

Hmm……I wonder what the technical pros and cons of VR in lenses vs sensors is?

It would certainly seem that there is less mass to move if it is sensor based, so it should be more efficient.

Does anybody know what the upside of putting it in the lens is?

nek4life

The 105 2.8 Macro is an interesting lens of note that is often used for portraits (though if you were primarily shooting portraits, then I would recommend the 105 DC 2.0). While I prefer not to have VR (I currently own the 200 F/4 Macro), I can see how it would be helpful when shooting macro handheld. However, with the right flash setup (I am figuring out what that will look like), light is controlled and again the need for VR is negated.

I just purchased this lens and thought I wouldn't use the VR at all, but I've been using it more than I thought. I will say though that it is NOT that useful for macro shots as it doesn't really work well at macro distances. I do use it a lot for static subjects when I want to make sure I get a sharp photo and don't have to crank my ISO like crazy. I definitely need to practice with the lens more, I'm not used to holding it steady enough yet for use with the D810. One thing I also like is the noise it makes, which I didn't at first, but it let's me know when I have it activated and I can switch it off easy enough if I don't need it, which with VR is always an option.

WestEndFoto

Interesting. Macro lenses take a lot of practice. I have owned mine for less than a year and I am still at the bottom of a very steep learning curve. I haven’t even tried my Kenko extension tubes on it yet. My next purchase will probably involve a lighting setup for this lens. Something at RRS has caught my eye……again….sigh……

The upside, I will not be bored anytime soon.

nek4life

Interesting. Macro lenses take a lot of practice.

Yes they do. I hope you have some patience! This image took me at least half an hour to set it, getting the angle just right then the lighting. Then I checked the image while I still had it setup on my computer screen and realized there was a bunch of stray sugar so I had to lift up the red gumdrop and sweep that out of the frame...



So yeah you definitely won't be bored anytime soon!

nek4life

Sigma Rumors is listing a 135/2.0 or 135/1.8 as the most likely upcoming Art series lens.

Why can't they just put in a $2 rubber gasket and weather seal their Art series (I'm sure there's more to it than that...) I live in Vermont and do a lot of photography in inclement weather. It's a bummer they couldn't just go this extra step. The 35mm Art series looks gorgeous. I bet a 135 would look stunning as well.

WestEndFoto

There IS always an exception and one can count on users like yourself Pitchblack to come up with one.

I suppose that there is always a balance between alternatives that must be weighed in design.

One question Pitchblack, would a monopod have helped that particular shot? I know that is not your style of shooting as you will feel that a monopod will interrupt your spontaneity. However, if you could set that aside for a moment as in the real world we all have to work around the technical limitations of our equipment. This may be useful for other shooters.

FrenchRiviera

There IS always an exception ...

There might be 2 , if you want background to be part of the picture , you must expose for it , even thought you use a studio flash , a too low speed would reveal ghost effects ...

300mm 1/160s f/5.6 iso 100 on D800E
http://christophe-nober.photodeck.com/-/galleries/portraits/-/medias/0f318a2a-b511-11e3-9b7d-f2b86e40979d-helene-aux-arenes-de-frejus

FrenchRiviera

Why is that a joke?

See PitchBlack response ...

WestEndFoto

Hmmm.....I did not see a joke in that. That is what I expected Pitchblack to say because I know that given his shooting style, the last thing he wants is to be tied down to something. That is why I tried to see if he could consider other shooting styles.

What I was trying to say was that if I was in that situation where I was producing an image that was intended to be spectacular (as Pitchblack's is) where technical quality is paramount and light is low, I would look for a way to slow shutter speed but still maintain sharpness. If your lens and camera has VR, great!

However, without VR, I might try using a monopod to gain an extra stop or two. That would certainly not suit Pitchblack's style and even I would find it awkward. But we work with the tools that we have.......

Also, I am speaking to the people that may be reading this thread but not commenting. A monopod, or even a tripod, might work for some of them in that situation.