• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Next PZ lens test report: Nikon AF-S 105mm f/1.4E ED (FX)


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,953 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 28 January 2017 - 11:48 AM

Enjoy :)

http://www.photozone...ikkorafs10514ff

-- Markus
  • polizonte likes this
Editor (Nikon, Leica, Samsung reviews)
photozone.de

#2 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,581 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 28 January 2017 - 12:16 PM

"Apart from size and weight, it is indeed very similar to it's closest siblings, which means it comes with a outer barrel" Typo, should be "an".

"As is is the case for all new Nikkors for many years now, the AF-S 105/1.4E is a G-type lens and thus does not offer an aperture ring."

 

Nice lens, well written review.



#3 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,953 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 28 January 2017 - 12:29 PM

Thanks, BC! Corrected the typos.

-- Markus
Editor (Nikon, Leica, Samsung reviews)
photozone.de

#4 you2

you2

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 974 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 01:57 PM

If only they could produce a 21mm 5* lens :)-

 

More serious I see 3 flaws; the vignetting is a bit high at f1.4; it is not APO (or even close to APO) and the front bokeh looks er off (but perhaps I'm being unfair here - i'm looking at the ruler not the bokeh shot).  

 

The vignet does seem  high to myself for a short tele. THe canon 85f1.2 for example has less vignet but is a stop faster but maybe taht is not a fair comparison. -

 

There is no doubt that this lens has very good resolution and is in general a very good lens but is it one that is destined to be a classic ?



#5 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,581 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 28 January 2017 - 02:23 PM

 

 

The vignet does seem  high to myself for a short tele. THe canon 85f1.2 for example has less vignet but is a stop faster but maybe taht is not a fair comparison. -

 

 

The Canon has a wider mount diameter and lbetter placement of contacts They have more room, and also the aperture of a 105mm f1.4 is a tad bigger, making the narrow mount a bigger issue.



#6 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,445 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 28 January 2017 - 03:28 PM

More serious I see 3 flaws; the vignetting is a bit high at f1.4; it is not APO (or even close to APO) and the front bokeh looks er off (but perhaps I'm being unfair here - i'm looking at the ruler not the bokeh shot).

The vignet does seem high to myself for a short tele. THe canon 85f1.2 for example has less vignet but is a stop faster but maybe that is not a fair comparison. -

1.2 vs 1.4 isn't a stop of difference... It's 1/3 or maybe 1/2 stop. :o

There is no doubt that this lens has very good resolution and is in general a very good lens but is it one that is destined to be a classic ?

Give me your definition of a classic. :)
Mine says it will be one, much like the 14-24 that has already sealed its legacy.

And in order to use that Nerdy Editor moment... Sorry Markus. :)

Nikon restricted this modern aperture variant to it's high end long primes, the PC-E tilt shift lenses and the recently announced 70-200/2.8E VR.

I think it's not a restriction, especially since there is the new 16-80/2.8-4E. :)

Re:the lens itself, looks like a rad unit, the resolution is almost too good to be true.
As a fun "aside", among your 5 recent reviews seen on the main page (mobile version - I'm on vacation) none there is one lens from each of the most important manufacturers. :)

#7 obican

obican

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 327 posts

Posted 29 January 2017 - 10:24 AM

That resolution chart is simply ridiculous!



#8 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,549 posts

Posted 29 January 2017 - 10:40 AM

  OK, This sharpness of the lens is just plain ludicrous...almost off the scale!

 

 LOCAs are likely to be the only practical flaw in some "jewel laden" models images. I've seen many images on DPreviews forums and the results wide open are fabulous with the softest and butteryest bokeh, truly impressive akin to the AF-S 200mm F2.

 

Here's the link to Lensrental's strip down of the lens, in which Roger Cicala states that the barrel is of "polycarbonate over a metal core" It's worth a look!

 

 

https://www.lensrent...-f1-4e-ed-af-s/

 

  There was a bit of a stir over Nikon's claim of the AF system having a gear-less SWD ring motor, after Roger's strip down Nikon changed their AF motor description within 24 hours!

 

What portrait photographer would not aspire to this lens? 

  

 

 

 

 

    BTW.     It's worth to mention X.........  It's worth mentioning!    Pardon me Markus but!

 

 



#9 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,953 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 29 January 2017 - 05:12 PM

BTW.     It's worth to mention X.........  It's worth mentioning!    Pardon me Markus but!
 


No worries, dave, I really appreciate such advice.

About the resolution: yes, unbelievably high. I redid the test twice to be sure there wasn't something wrong with the workflow, even revitalized the D7000 to make sure nothing is wrong with the settings in the D3x menu that might have lead to too high numbers. But the lens performs in a very similar way on the DX camera, too.

-- Markus
  • polizonte likes this
Editor (Nikon, Leica, Samsung reviews)
photozone.de

#10 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,445 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 29 January 2017 - 06:20 PM

So there's going to be a DX review as well?

#11 Universal Creations

Universal Creations

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 29 January 2017 - 07:51 PM

Hmmm, strange results. The 105/1.4 is a really great lens, but the sharpness is way higher than in other tests: http://www.lenstip.c...resolution.html

http://www.the-digit...omp=0&APIComp=0

and my own test: https://www.flickr.c...157677769293345

Sharpness at inifinity is really good, but at portrait distance (about 2m) at 1/3 of the frame, it really needs to be stopped down:

https://www.flickr.c...57677769293345/



#12 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,953 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 30 January 2017 - 02:26 PM

and my own test: https://www.flickr.c...157677769293345


Well... I don't think we're the only review site praising this lens...
 
How did you set up your test shots and aim for peak resolution?
 

So there's going to be a DX review as well?

 
Definitely. The DX section is my next big task.
 
-- Markus
  • polizonte likes this
Editor (Nikon, Leica, Samsung reviews)
photozone.de

#13 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,581 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 30 January 2017 - 03:20 PM

Hmmm, strange results. The 105/1.4 is a really great lens, but the sharpness is way higher than in other tests: http://www.lenstip.c...resolution.html

http://www.the-digit...omp=0&APIComp=0

and my own test: https://www.flickr.c...157677769293345

Sharpness at inifinity is really good, but at portrait distance (about 2m) at 1/3 of the frame, it really needs to be stopped down:

https://www.flickr.c...57677769293345/

Lenstip says the resiolution is sensational, close to the record set by an Otus. What lenstip does not do is sharpen the MTF images, which explains the difference between PZ and lenstip.

TDP crops are useless as always.

 

Cameralabs says it is close to Otus 85mm f1.4 resolution.

http://www.cameralab...sharpness.shtml

 

ephotozine calls the sharpness "exemplary".

https://www.ephotozi...ed-review-30026



#14 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,549 posts

Posted 31 January 2017 - 04:22 PM

So the Samyang 135mm @ F2 beats the Nikor(s),  in "sharpness across the frame"!  Grey market it's 509 euros here.... Wowser!



#15 Universal Creations

Universal Creations

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 31 January 2017 - 10:57 PM

Peak resolution =/= sharpness across the frame at every focus distance. Lens rentals only uses measurements at infinity. As my tests show (manual focus with live view zoomed in), the Nikon 105/1.4 is very good at infinity, but not so great at portrait distance as the Sigma 85A and Zeiss 100/2 (just like cameralabs shows). The Otus 85 is also beaten by the Milvus 85 at corner to corner sharpness. The Sigma beats the Otus and the Milvus at overall sharpness. According to Ephotozine testcharts many lenses are really great, that's why I never use their reviews as reference material.



#16 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,581 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 01 February 2017 - 04:12 PM

Peak resolution =/= sharpness across the frame at every focus distance. Lens rentals only uses measurements at infinity. As my tests show (manual focus with live view zoomed in), the Nikon 105/1.4 is very good at infinity, but not so great at portrait distance as the Sigma 85A and Zeiss 100/2 (just like cameralabs shows). The Otus 85 is also beaten by the Milvus 85 at corner to corner sharpness. The Sigma beats the Otus and the Milvus at overall sharpness. According to Ephotozine testcharts many lenses are really great, that's why I never use their reviews as reference material.

the cameralabs portrait image does not show the lens to be not so great at portrait distance.



#17 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 542 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 01 February 2017 - 11:44 PM

the cameralabs portrait image does not show the lens to be not so great at portrait distance.

 

As in Boolean algebra, removing double negations makes things a bit more readable ^_^ 

"the cameralabs portrait image does not show the lens to be not so great at portrait distance."


  • dave's clichés likes this

--Florent

Flickr Page


#18 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,581 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 02 February 2017 - 09:07 AM

As in Boolean algebra, removing double negations makes things a bit more readable ^_^

"the cameralabs portrait image does not show the lens to be not so great at portrait distance."

When quoting someone, one quotes someone.

"but not so great at portrait distance as the Sigma 85A and Zeiss 100/2 (just like cameralabs shows)."



#19 polizonte

polizonte

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • LocationNH USA

Posted 16 February 2017 - 03:49 AM

Great review, I have based  most of my lens purchases on photozone.de reviews over the years. The next day I looked at this lens in a store, heavy/expensive but still very tempting. 



#20 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,301 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 17 February 2017 - 12:38 PM

There's a bit more of MTF-candy by good old reliable lensrentals

 

Apparently worth the price. Maybe I really should rent one? Or maybe I should save the money and put in on the GFX-account? 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de