Why a new 105 mm lens?

rmp

If you have the old (current?) 105 mm, will you be upgrading? What makes the new one worth the effort/cost?

WestEndFoto

rmp said:

If you have the old (current?) 105 mm, will you be upgrading? What makes the new one worth the effort/cost?

In a word? Bokeh. If you desire subject isolation, you will get a lot of that at 1.4 at 105mm at a really nice focal length for portraits. If this is the 85 1.4G on steroids, I am in. If it is the 58, I will need to think carefully, but as long as it is quite sharp at f/2.0, I am probably still in.

I am surprised that they went 1.4 with the 105. I was expecting 1.8. It will be really interesting to see what they do with the 135.

I am also glad that they did not put VR on it. This is first and foremost a portrait lens.

The 105 macro is in my mind a tradeoff. It is a decent macro, but not the best (not as long as the 200) and a decent portrait lens as long as you don't need a lot of subject isolation. Heck, with a macro, I would give up the ability to focus past 5 feet if I could get a higher reproduction ratio. However, I do have to acknowledge that the 105 has sold well, is a decent length and has opened up the macro world to photographers.

This new 105 could be a home run for Nikon.

starralazn

@WestEndFoto while the 105mm f2.8 has sold well and is a great portrait lens, ithink a more apt comparison will be to the 105mm f2. i might get this 105mm even if its soft(to some people), still loving the 58mm

NSXTypeR

I think the 105mm 2.8 is a good compromise between price, performance and versatility. I'm sure this lens would be great, but it's close to 3 times the price of the 105mm macro. Not saying there's a time and place for things, but at $2000 I might think about getting a 70-200 2.8 instead of a 105mm prime. Or an 80-400 VR, or a 300 F4. Maybe a better option would be to get two primes, a 300 F4 and then some support or another prime. Perhaps an 85mm 1.8.

There's a lot of options at and below that price range.

pictureted

I'll wait to see the size and weight. If it's sharp in the center at f1.4, then it would be perfect for concerts and the portrait isolation should be superb - perhaps in the rarified 200/2 range (big and too expensive for my taste) and at a perfect focal length.

framer

I've been using a 105 DC f/2 for years. If this 105 has a fast AFS motor it could be a winner in the sports world. It should also be great at portraits @ f/1.4 - 2.

I may consider it after the reviews are in.

framer

WestEndFoto

starralazn said:

@WestEndFoto while the 105mm f2.8 has sold well and is a great portrait lens, ithink a more apt comparison will be to the 105mm f2. i might get this 105mm even if its soft(to some people), still loving the 58mm

I forgot about that! What an idiot as I have the 135 DC 2.0. In that case, it is just more of the same but more isolation and hopefully sharper - not that I have any complaints about my 135.

starralazn

@NSXTypeR yeah, the 70-200 2.8 is great for portraits. would probably be more versatile, and useful for other things.
a lot of options for the same price, but hopefully we'll have some more insight onto the purpose of this lens when the officially announce it.

nek4life

"The AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E ED represents the embodiment of the NIKKOR line of high-quality lenses, giving photographers a robust, well-balanced lens that provides intense sharpness, astounding image quality and background bokeh that is sure to be a favorite among portrait photographers."

Looks like they are marketing it as a portrait lens. Can't wait to see more sample images. At $2,200 USD though it's pretty damn expensive.

Nikoniser

I will be getting this lens.......however there are a few conditions

My hopes :

Usable at f1.4 to enable full length portraits with decent bokeh without having to back up as much as the 70-200 requires you to do at 200mm

- and by usable I mean sharp with decent contrast NOT like the 58mm
- and without massive CA like the 135 f2 and 105f2
- and without lots of green/red color shift in out of focus areas.

If it needs stopping down to f2 or 2.8 - I will stick with my 105VR f2.8

Honestly my Sigma ART glass has spoiled me for anything less.

Focusing should be fast and accurate, the current 105mm f2.8 and 105 f2 are not stellar and neither is the sigma glass, so big improvements hoped for here.

I do trust that Nikon will deliver on the Bokeh....they are masters of this...I just feel that Canon and Sigma are leaving them behind on the sharpness wide open. Canon's new 35mm f1.4 is stunning.

WestEndFoto

I suspect that this lens is the best bokeh machine you can buy for less than the price of a 200 f/2.0. The focal length will trump 1.2 at 85 (Canon).

Vipmediastar_JZ

A few sample images.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-nikkor-105mm-f%2f1.4e-ed.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-Overview

few more from the main blog

Here
and
Here

Vipmediastar_JZ

I actually like my 105mm 2.8 macro lens as I do both portraits and details shots for events and some product shots here and there.

I like the bokeh on the sample shots. Right now I use several lens for bokeh including the 300mm f4. going to the 105 1.4 will not be economical for me but if I could I would consider this lens since I can be closer to the model and also possibly get better bokeh. However I preffer longer focal lengths usually 135-200-300 for portraits. 85mm 1.8 does the job too but its not always used.
I wonder for those of you have the 105dc and 135dc if you would consider the 105 1.4 if money is not an issue.

WestEndFoto

I have the 135 and I am absolutely considering it. However my first priority is a refresh of the 200 f/2.0 or 300 f/2.8, probably the latter but then I don't have an excuse to get the 400.......

starralazn

guys... the 105mm 1.4G is 925 g... thats almost the weight of a d810 or more than a 24-70mm @_@

still looking forward to it..

Ironheart

Those dang f/1.4 lenses have so much glass. Good thing it wasn't a 1.2 or you would need to mount it in the back of a pickup truck

WestEndFoto

Nice to know about the weight. I derive a lot of pleasure holding a big heavy firm prime in my hand - so I don't mind. This makes me wonder what their plans are for 135.

Also, a 105 1.8 (and perhaps a 135 1.8 if they bring out a 135 1.4) seems like a natural edition to Nikon's 1.8 lineup.

NSXTypeR

At this price it's hard to justify for a non-pro. I think I really would go for a 70-200 2.8 first before I'd even consider a 105mm 1.4.

WestEndFoto

When you compare the MTF charts of the 58, 85 and 105, seems like it is a lot sharper than the 85, which in turn is a lot sharper than the 58. This lens looks like it is going to be a winner.

pictureted

I wonder if it takes TC's? Could increase it's usefulness, then when the rebates hit $400…, It certainly would be fun to have DOF that shallow.

DaveyJ

Looks like a good lens for some pros.....no interest here though!

WestEndFoto

Or an avid amateur.

pictureted

WestEndFoto said:

Or an avid amateur.

+1

WestEndFoto

Yup, pretty damn sharp! It seems that Nikon has learned from its "58 mistake".

https://photographylife.com/nikon-105mm-f1-4e-ed-announcement

vtc2002

@WestEndFoto and @pictureted I am not necessarily disagreeing with you guys about an avid amateur but would qualify it with avid amateur with deep pockets. I question whether most avid and semi professionals will see enough difference to justify spending this much for a specialty lens unless they shoot mostly portraits. It looks like an awesome lens and it will be interesting to see more photos and reviews. There will be a lot of demand for this lens which will drive down the cost of the 85, 105 and 135 lenses which will be a good choice for most avid amateurs and semi professionals that do not have the resources for such an expensive lens. If there truly is a significant difference it the cost will be justified and it will be a great lens to have in your bag.

WestEndFoto

I agree with that. In fact, I hope that Nikon brings out at 105 1.8 for portrait photographers on a budget. The 85 1.8G represents incredible value.

For most people that want to shoot in this range, I would recommend one of the 70-200s.