My local camera shop left a message that they have a 105 AF-S VR waiting for me. Anybody here that has shot this lens? I have the old 105 micro. Is it worth the upgrade if it stretches your budget to buy it?

Thanks.

Hi Dave,

I will certainly get one because I also use mine as a short telephoto and I think this new version will be great for this. However, I would check with your housing manufacturer if they will have a port for it. Check this topic for first impressions from some wetpixel users and sponsors:

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12216&st=20

Luiz

Thanks; I read that thread. I can set up my 17-55 with my Subal set up without a remachined extension tube. Have to mount the camera and lens in the housing and then add the extension tube but it works. If the new 105 is a few mm smaller it should work. I plan on taking my camera, housing, and various ext. rings down to the camera store.

I shot the tour of CA with my old 105.

http://homepage.mac.com/daveburroughs/PhotoAlbum32.html

Part of the reason that I'm interested in getting this lens.

I am very interested on your impressions. According to Dave Marsh (on the thread linked above), it is too wide for the current ports, but maybe you have a different model?

Luiz

got mine yesterday, unfortunately, no housing to try it in as yet, waiting for my Aquatica.
The lens is a chunck!, heavy, fat and moderate length, seems to focus quickly on the surface in good light, low light seemed to give it some slight problem, took a second or two to lock in.
Can't wait to use this with my new system. May 10 in LC!

Hi Guys,

A couple comments concerning the new 105 Micro-nikkor. At the moment I am very undecided about this lens. When I first saw the announcement I was more positive. The pluses vs the older 105mm being that the lens would focus faster, wound not change length while focusing, had ED glass which should give a sharper image, and would allow the AF-S converters to be mounted allowing larger than 1:1 imaging.

(I'm still a film shooter. I still have not seen a price on this lens as I am currently in Australia and heading to Bali in two days.).

However, I became less enchanted when I read on the Nikon website that the lens will not auto-focus with an AF-S tele-converter!! This is a f2.8 lens and meets the technical criteria to provide auto-focusing with the converter. Why would Nikon disable this feature? Perhaps they feel AF would not be accurate enough when focusing very close. Surely the lens must perform OK in AF when using it topside and at near infinity distances. Why not let the user decide when it works well enough and let he decide when to switch to manual focus. Maybe my info is inaccurate. Or if enough of us complained about the lack of AF with the converters Nikon would change this on the lens since it must be something in the computer chip instructions.

Additional drawbacks I see now are that the lens is also virtually double the weight of the older lens as well. And perhaps the price since I haven't heard one yet. And from guys here that the diameter of the lens will make it hard to attach a manual focus gear.

I can already mount my Nikon AF-S converters on the older 105mm by mounting a 20mm (slightly modified) Kenko extension tube between the two. And using the 2x converter in combination with 72mm of Kenko tubes have reached 4.4x magnifications underwater. With manual focus.

So what is the attraction of the new lens now? Zeiss has just started introducing new lenses in the Nikon mount (manual focus only ZF's) which are reputed to be distinctly sharper than either Nikon's or Canon's own lenses. And one pictures shows that a Zeiss macro lens (www.robgalbraith.com) may be in their near future plans. Also an interview at that website suggests that Zeiss wants to have six lenses total by Photokina (this October). So the macro may be among them.

Since my primary interest reason for adding a new 105mm would be increases sharpness at the larger-than-lifesize, and especially above 2x, magnifications where I must use manual focus anyway, I think I'll wait to see what Zeiss does and hope for a chance to shoot comparison tests before buying either.

Divegypsy.

I'm pretty sure that the AF not working is due to the F stop when it reaches 1:1, then the aperture become to slow for AF, just Nikon 's way of doing thing, but I still prefer their approach, when your at 1:1 your aperture display is not lying to you, F:45 is F:45 not F:32 à la Canon or Sigma. going back to the VR it is a chunky fella. I can see where some manufactuer might have a situation, and access to VR & MF/AF will be a handfull if at all feasible. will keep posted about availabillity of gear, port extension and all.

Cheers

Jean,
I don't think this is the issue. The lens should always focus at its max. aperture, i.e. F2.8 in this case. That's why you have the DOF preview button, to stop down the lens to the set aperture.

I'm no expert in this, but I'd say the inability to use the AF functionality with a TC is linked to the wiring of the lens...

The diameter of the 105 AF-SVR is 2.83" Can someone put a caliper on an Ike dome port and see if it will fit?

Thanks,

True, but the effective aperture at 1:1 will be much less, and is what limits autofocus (the effective aperture is displayed in the finder of late model Nikons). This is the point Jean was making. The main pro of this lens over the old one is AFS enabling one to over-ride autofocus without having to use any mechanical switches - at least this is the case with the D70 kit lens. It may take a custom made port to use MF as it looks like the switch panel is in the way so no focusing from the housing proper. One would have to use a port with a knob built-in for the focusing. Maybe the manufacturers will figure out how to connect to the VR switch too. Otherwise, it will be all or none in terms of using VR on a given dive.
Tom

I agree with Tom. Here is a simple demonstration, first, focus your macro lens (either 60 or 105) on infinity and set the aperture at 2.8, focus it at 1:1 and the aperture will change to 4.5 or so, you can't get 2.8 at 1:1 in those lenses. There is a very informative thread (with links to technical articles) about this subject at the Nikonians forum:

http://www.nikonians.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/d...D6&viewmode=all

Luiz

Thanks for the clarification Tom. The misunderstanding comes from the F45 mentioned further in Jean's post.

Based on the Rocha's post, though, barring all other issues, the Kenko TC should still be able to lock focus, as it works with lenses with min. aperture of F5.6.

I have the TC with me, so if anyone would be so kind as to lend me their 105mm AFS VR, I could confirm this

shot with my new d200 and the new 105VR, no flash! waiting for my z-240s to arrive.
will be an interesting setup

I will be back at the store tuesday and plan to check folowing combination
a) 105 Vr + 2X TC Kenko
105 VR + 1.4X TC Kenko
c) 105 VR + 1.4X TC Nikon
c) 105 VR + 2X TC Nikon
d) 105 VR + Extension tubes Kenko

And finally with my Nikon D200, D2h and Fuji S2 pro.
I was getting ready to sell my two Fuji S2 pro but if the lens is hot on them I might keep them for strickly u/w macro. will give you a heads up early next week.

Cheers.

P.S. Luiz, my brother in law is moving to Panama, so you might see my face down there soon.

I'm in Hawaii now! Moved a couple of months ago, but it seems like I am still in Panama, it's been raining ever since I got here, amazing! And I thought it rained a lot in Panama.

Anyways, send me a PM if you need info about Panama.

Luiz

Got the lens. Only my 15 mm ext. ring will go over the lens and get past the MF/AF control. Looks like the 60 mm FC FP should work with the lens when the focus gear is removed. I have to check but looks like it should work with the FE2 dome port.

Lens is fast focusing and sharp. So far I love it.

I did some testing today with the 105 VR and some TC and extension tube. all of the following worked in Auto Focus. test was done with a D70s & Fuji S2 pro.

Nikon 1.7x TC
Nikon 2X TC

Kenko 2x TC
Kenko 1.4x TC

Kenko extension tube 12, 24 & 36mm

I understand the Nikon statement about AF not working with TC, altought I have not read the paperwork on this lens. I know Nikon is pretty uptight about its data and if not up to standard performance is quoted often as incompatible.

So my take on it is, yes it work, not very good but still it work, I bet with some modeling light muscle and a D200 or D2x multicam system you could get pretty good results. the obvious was that the 1.4x and 1.7x which where the best performer of the TC lot, BTW I did not have a Nikon 1.4 TC to test with today but if the 2X works... the extension tubes seemed to perform the best of the lot, which is what I anticipated. Annoying was the fact that in low light my old 105 micro did better at locking the subject than the new one on my Fuji S2pro

I will try the 1.7x and 2x Nikon on the D200 and D2h tomorrow, I didn't have mine with me today, but better since there is a lot more D70s and D100 out there than D200 or D2x.

Next level will be TC 2x and a pair of DS 125 modeling light strapped on my housing. will keep posted.

Regards

This lens (the 105 AF-S VR) works with the Subal FP-120 port. There is maybe a little less than an inch of clearance so maybe the next size smaller might work. The macro mate flip lens will fit over this port so you can get 2:1 magnification.

That's good news Dave, thanks for posting. Do you have any extension ring handy? Can you see it fits with the extension ring? I have a couple of ext. rings and an FP-90 port, and I am wondering if the combination will work, I am not too worried about MF for now (I've always used my old 105 in AF anyways).

Luiz

Is this unique to the S2Pro or was the performance on the D70 equally bad? And are you referring to the lens by itself or in combination with a TC/extension tube? Fast autofocus esp. in low-light would be THE reason to upgrade my existing 105mm.

Thanks

As I mentioned in a previous post the Subal FP-120 port is the correct port length wise for the Nikon 105 VR lens BUT the port will not mount on the housing with this lens installed. The control panel on the side of the 105 VR sticks out far enough to prevent the port from being installed on the housing.

My camera shop just called and said my 105 VR is in. Should I get it?

I only have a 60mm for macro use right now.

Don't get it yet, first ask Ikelite if they will have a port for it (I am assuming you will get an Ikelite for your D200, since your signature says that you have an Ikelite for the D100). This lens is very wide and it may not fit inside the Ikelite ports. If this is the case, I recommend you get a used last generation 105, the prices on those will come down considerably now that the AFS 105 started shipping.

Luiz

Thanks Luis

I originally was getting the Ikelite housing for the D200, but now that the Aquatica is avail......

I'm not sure now.
more gear lust!!!!!!

I've mounted the Subal 120 FP with the 105 AF-S VR lens on my Subal D2X housing. You pull out the MF knob a little (it is spring loaded) slide the camera in and then release the MF knob.

Alternatively you can mount the camera in the housing without the lens attached then mount the lens and then the FP 120. You can do this without having to pull out the MF knob on the housing. The gear turns a very little when you mount the lens but it doesn't push the knob out any.

Is there a reason you are not suppose to do this?

I tried all my ext. rings with this lens. The 20 mm ext ring fits over the lenses MF/AF switch. The 33, 40, 50, 60 and 66 mm ext. rings do not fit over this switch. To use the 60 focus FP you would have to have the focusing gear removed.

Note; it looks as if the 60 mm focus FP with the 20 mm ext. ring would be long enough for this lens. though as I didn't have the focus gear on my 60 mm port removed I cannot actually try this combo out.

I tried this lens yesterday with my Subal D2X - and it did not fit.

It is not a port issue - more that the MF/Zoom gear on the side of the housing hits the switches on the side of the lens. I was not prepared to put as much pressure on the knob as Dave. Maybe if I had it would not have fitted.

I don't think that there will be a problem with the Subal D70 as the MF/Zoom gear is in a different place (further back) on that housing.

Alex

I didn't try on the D70s, this was more of a personal test to see if I keep my two S2pro or sell them. the lens was without accessories, no filter, nada. my conclusion is until I have time to do a proper side by side test, not just a grab and point one, i'll refrain from selling the cameras. The locking on the subject in low light with a Fuji S2pro was better on my old 105, that's all I conclude for now.

A test quicky with the D200 in low light demonstrated quite the opposite, I think the Fuji steam powered multicam system is Flintstone technology and thus is hard pressed to deal with industrial revolution material.

BTW Aquatica just got their lens yesterday and tell me the lens fits in the Aquatica macro port and extension.

Hi Dave,

Good news that the lens will mount on the Subal D2X housing. I tried the lens on a D200 and a D70 housing and the FP-120 port would not mount at all. I did have to pull back on the Zoom/MF gear quite a bit to install the lens on the body.

The cog for the Zoom/MF gear is contacting the switch control plate on the side of the lens. Turning this control will obviously damage the finish on the switch plate.

I've been in touch with Subal on this issue, I'm confident that once they get the lens in their hands they will make the necessary modifications so that this lens will work in their housings properly.

So that Subal don't get inundated with emails, Dave (M), could you ask if the you can easily take off the gear from the end of the Zoom/MF control. It has a screw in the end that looks very simple to remove, but I thought it is probably best to ask first?

Obviously I could just email them. But so that they don't have to answer the same question many times - it might be better if you forward this on and then post an answer?

Alex

As I service these housings as well as sell them, I can answer the question w/o bothering the fine folks at Subal. The screw you're referring to not only holds the drive cog in place it also holds the entire knob and shaft in place. You could remove the gear, replace it with a washer so that the coil spring behind it stays in place and then secure it with the screw. But this does not sound like an ideal situation to me, you may want the gear for manual focus or zoom control with another lens. I think it's best to wait for Subal to do their testing and come up with a more workable solution.

I'm trying to follow this but not sure if I'm understanding it all. My question is:

If I put a 2xtc on the body, then the lens, does this extend the switch out far enough to put the port on and clear the zoom geaer? My thought is, since I use MF exclusively with the TC, will this combo work?

Rand

You may wish to reconsider your "MF exclusively" approach. This puppy focuses fast enough to pick off those little blennies when they pop out of the hole and I know you wouldn't want me to get those shots first.

I am going to wait on Ike to fix the extension problem and count on Ike's iTTL to catch those little puppies in action.

Tom

Hi Tom,

Does the new 105 AFS even fit into the Ikelite port? That's an important detail :-)

Cheers
James

Hi Tom,

The problem (Well it's a problem to me ) is the AF will lock on the wrong area. Yes, you can lock focus and re-compose but...try it on a Pygmy. LOL! Your window to snap the shutter is milliseconds. But, you could be right.

I've got to make sure it will fit my current set-up before I purchase one for Lembeh. I leave in two weeks so, time is short. Not even sure it's available to the "common" man.

Rand

Rand,

I don't have all the pieces of the puzzle (no 105VR in stock) to test this at this time but you're scenario should work. The 2X TC should move the lens out far enough to clear the gear. BUT, It may still have a problem hitting against the mount if an extension ring is being used with your Focus Control port. AND, I have not tested MF operation yet, I'm hoping it will setup similar to the Canon 100 USM and be driven directly by the ports focus cog against the lenses grip rubber (with a minor build up of the lens grip rubber if necessary).

Rand,
If you are going through LA this uncommon man has one he could lend you.

I tried to track fish in my fish tank from about 12" away. I was able to catch a 1/2" fish with relative ease. simply by setting the AF to the center and centering on the subject. Now if you want to do some fancy composing, well, good luck. Me, i just crop.

Tom

Here is a picture of the housing with the camera and lens mounted. You slide the camera gently into the housing until the front of the MF/Zoom gear touches the switches on the side of the lens. You then gently pull out the MF/Zoom knob about 3 mm and then slide the camera/lens/tray all the way in and lock it. The MF/Zoom knob doesn't rest on the lens switches. It rest just behind them. You can see this in the picture. I didn't apply a lot of pressure on the MF/Zoom gear knob. It has a spring on the shaft and pulls in and out. It just barely doesn't clear the switches on the lens. As I said you probably have to pull it out 2 or 3 mm. It appears that the MF/Zoom gear and knob is not pushed out by the lens when the camera and lens are fully mounted in the housing. You just have to pull it out a little to get by the panel with the switches on the lens.

A closer picture.Click to view attachment

That is one fat lens! And you can actually attach the FP120 with only that much clearance between the housing and the lens?? Amazing!

Now, after more than 4,000 shots with my D2x, I was comparing pictures taken with my 105 to others taken with the 60 and 17-55 (of similar subjects, usually fish). The ones taken with the 105 are invariably softer and lots of them appear backfocussed. Have you guys ever noticed anything similar? I was thinking about sending my 105 for service, but I remember that I bought it a loooong time ago and it was a grey market lens, so I think Nikon USA won't touch it. I also thought about sending my D2x for focus callibration, but it focusses perfectly with my other lenses... Decisions...

Luiz

Yes, the FP 120 fits fine. It's not close at all to being a tight fit.

My old style 105 I have found to be my sharpest lens. Maybe you have a bad copy. Or maybe I'm a poor judge of what a sharp lens is.

That's great Dave, in that case I will get one for me. I hope that subal comes up with a port with a manual focussing knob, I am sure they will, as I think this will be a very popular lens among UW photographers. I've been thinking of adding a 1.7x (or 2x) TC to my system, do you have any of these? Do you know how long they are? I mean, would they fit with the 20mm EXR and the FP120?

Yes, I think you are right, and I do think I have a bad 105. I was reviewing some slides, and I think they are not as sharp as the ones I took with the 60 or even other lesser zoom lenses. I am anxious to getting one of these. Dave Marsh (sorry for the last name, too many Daves around here ), do you have any idea when Nikon is going to send you more of these? PM me...

Luiz

Thanks for posting that picture Dave B. It is very encouraging! Although I have the early ND2(H) housing - which does have slightly different controls - which may be the difference? I'll try it again sometime without 3 Nikon guys breathing down my neck (the lens has not been released yet in the UK)! I'll try your technique of mounting the lens on the camera first.

Luiz, I don't think that this applies to you, and I do agree with you that the 105mm is not quite as sharp as the 60mm, but one of the reasons that people get softer images with the 105mm underwater is that they shoot it through too much water. I mention this to make a general point as I see far to many photographers shooting 100/105mm on muck dives when the less fashionable 50/55/60mm would yield much better results.

To quote from Martin Edge's new book that is on my desk "From the outset, let us be quite clear... with our subjects we must endevour to get close physically...if we simply zoom in then our pictures will lack colour, contrast and sharpness".

Alex

According to our sales rep, the 105VR's allocation should not be as tight at the D200's and the 18-200's. With that said... we have many on order and have so far only received one!

Couldn't get out on a boat this weekend. Weather was too rough to try a Kayak dive. So I shot the 105 AF-S in a 7 ft pool this weekend.

As you see you can shoot this lens with a D2X in a Subal housing. You have to be careful not to knock the AF/MF knob to manual focus when you mount the camera in the housing. It is VERY easy to do this.

As a secondary question I include three shots. At F22, F16, and F11. My question is; is the sharpness of the D2X diffraction limited to F16 and less?

First was at F22. This one is F16

Last; F11.

Yes, according to Herb's math. Check here:

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12305

But I never felt my images at f22 or above were bad. I guess I will find out when Nikon comes out with a full frame camera, that's only when I will upgrade as I am very please with what I have now...

Luiz

P.S.: Don't avoid shooting at f22 or above because of this. My 1st place macro shot at the Scuba Diving contest was taken with the D2x at f25.

Look at the pictures and tell me where the diffraction limitation is. I don't care about theoretical calculations. I'm a photographer not an engineer.

As an Optometrist I can tell you engineers make the worst patients. ALL Optometrist agree with this.

In further explanation I ran the diffraction theory by several professionally trained photographers. They all looked at me like I was nuts and asked "Where are the photo tests to prove this?"

So here they are. Rather informally I have been shooting both F16 and F22. The better depth of focus makes the F22 images seem sharper to me. These shots lack depth so I was wondering if you can see a difference in sharpness. Yes I realize they are low res. Jpegs. But can you tell anything from them?

Frankly, I don't see it. Are those 100% crops?