Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 19, 2008, 2:51 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Hello to all of you. Going macro. After renting both Nikkor 60mm (old) and 105mm VR, I almost decided to go 105. But some reviews say this lens has its flaws like purple fringing which I can say is true. I was most surprised to find PF on a near 1000$ lens. Plus it's true VR is not effective doing macro. But it's the only issue. Weight and bulkiness is no matter to me. Since I have the 50mm 1.8, I was suggested not to go with the 60mm. But I don't like this issue with CA. Does someone owns the 105 VR here and could give me some hints please. "PF" is an original photo without any post-treatment. The fringing is obvious. Thanks many times my friends. Germain. PS. body is D50.
Attached Images
 
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 19, 2008, 2:52 PM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Hi again, I can see that the PF has diminished during the upload process. But believe me it's there. In any case, here's another photo, "Red" that needed some (PF was in the sequins). Still, the quality of the photo is amazing.
Attached Images
 
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2008, 3:42 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

I own the older 105 micro (the non Vr version). It's tack sharp and I haven't had any issues with fringing. Many say this version is slightly better, especially for closeup work. It's also about half the price of the Vr version. 105mm provides a much better working distance than a 60mm micro, making the subject easier to light. It's certainly a viable option if you can find one.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2008, 7:58 AM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I highly recommend the two Sigma's they are probably top in their class at this moment:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/180/cat/30
"In the Nikon lineup, we recently tested the Nikkor 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF, which proved to be an excellent lens, albeit not quite as prickly sharp as the Sigma 150, and with slightly higher CA and distortion numbers. The Nikon lens sells online for $100-200 more than the Sigma."

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/964/cat/30
Nikon 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S VR Micro ~$735-899
"As we've said elsewhere, we lament the passing of the non-VR version of this lens, as it was an excellent optic at an affordable price. The VR version is very good as well, but the price paid for the VR feature gives us a little pause. (Still though, VR can be very helpful when hand-holding close-in macro shots of little bugs and beasties.) While the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 VR is an excellent lens though, it doesn't match the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 for sharpness. It gets close, with the aperture closed down a couple of stops, but never quite catches the Sigma. The Nikon does have somewhat lower chromatic aberration, and edges the Tamron on geometric distortion, while the Tamron has slightly lower shading at maximum aperture. If you need VR for macro shooting on the Nikon platform, the 105mm f/2.8 VR Nikkor is the only way to go. If you can get by without the VR (or just can't afford it), the Sigma again represents an unbeatable bargain."

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:32 PM.