Nikon 105mm VR

[Hacker]

Having seen Kendo's thread on his latest purchase I wanted to know of any others who have this lens and how they rate it, I'm seriously toying with getting one of these as I can imagine it would be very useful for weddings etc not just as a portrait/prime lens but for all those close up shots (rings, bridal preparations etc).

The Sigma 180mm is very, very good for insect and the like but a bit of a lump to carry round for the above work.

 

[Brains]

I own one and do like it for macro work. TBH I do not use it at weddings - preferring the 17-55 and 70-200. It may be a bit long for bridal prep work (?), but I suppose that depends on distance to subject and what you want to achieve with it. I use the 70-200 extensively now and get some really good candids with it (I see that you already have this lens). Great for isolating the subject and getting a great full frame shot....but you already know that!

The 105 is roughly the same size as the 17-55 and feels pretty much the same weight.

 

[chuckles]

It's a stonker! We've had one from about the time they came out and I've never been disappointed in it......

This thread I posted this morning .... all the pink gergeras and shot #5 we're taken with it yesterday - some handheld, some with a tripod. Incidentally, the others were taken with a Sigma 180mm Macro ....

VR is great but with macro you could really do with VR'ing the breeze! Subject movement is still a problem!

Marianne uses it at our weddings (inside mainly) for candids of the wedding guests whilst I'm doing more formal stuff like The Vows, Rings, Kiss etc,. Works a treat...... I can't praise it high enough, sits nicely alongside the 70-200mm VR.... (although Marianne finds this too heavy for her so the 105mm is perfect)

 

[Venomator]

Don't know about weddings 'n stuff like that but the 105 VR is a superb lens imgo ... :shrug: ... fast, quiet and sharp as your eye ... ... shooting the breeze is always going to be problem in Macro but heyho no lens can cope with that on its own ...

If you want to try afore you buy you are welcome to use mine Colin ...

 

[kendo]

Just getting some of this afternoon's shots ready for posting.

Hacker, got mine from Kerso for £439.00 incl P&P. couldn't find it cheaper than that anywhere.

As Ven says, its fast and quiet.

 

[irw1]

We got one fairly recently, purchased mostly on the strength of some of the stunning images on here! Although I've not had time to take anything "post worthy" yet, ( because my wife keeps nicking it,:bang it really is a superb lens, as others have already said.

You won't be disappointed imo.

 

[Druid]

For what it's apparently designed to do, it's absolutely brilliant. Deadly sharp from say f4 to f8 in regular tele range (see e.g. the almost off-the-scale MTF50 test here) excellent macro capabilities (maybe a bit short of the 200/4 but you'd have to be really pushing it to see a difference), wonderful colour and contrast, very pretty out of focus areas, fairly resistant to flare and ghosting (and with a huge but very effective hood for zero flare)

As far as I can work out, it was designed as the perfect one-lens solution for a walk in the woods and similar kinds of short-tele nature/macro photography. The VR feature doesn't work at all for 1:1 macro, but it's not supposed to. If you stick it on a tripod and use MLU it's going to work just fine as a full-on macro lens. What the VR is there for is to support more general usage sans tripod, including moderate closeup work like chasing butterflies or taking flower photos someplace where a tripod would be inconvenient. I'm also told it works superbly with the Nikon macro flash R1C1 etc. Framing does change a bit as you focus, due to the IF design (I think) which is the one real fault I've found using it on a tripod and the place where a 70-180 micro (if you can find one) or one of the older micro-nikkors or adding a focussing rail would probably work rather better. It's also a G lens, so it's useless with Nikon extension tubes.

For sheer usability, versatility and clinical accuracy in the moderate tele range though, the 105 VR is very hard to beat. I find it works very well as a 2-lens general use kit with the 17-55, or as part of a three lens kit e.g. add say a 85/1.4 for shallow DoF or a 180/2.8 or maybe a 300/4 if you need extra reach

Having said that, for weddings, I'd go for the 105/2 DC or 135/2 DC. (Ffordes have a mint 105/2 DC going for £499 right now) The 105 VR is not what I'd call a 'romantic' lens. It's more suited to naturalists and forensic pathologists than wedding photographers I suspect. For 'romantic', I'd favour one of the DC lenses, or if you're very skilled the 85/1.4 (similar issues when stopped down, but you can mask them with clever DoF tricks). The extraordinary detail rendition and micro-contrast of the 105 VR will show every blotch and vein with perfect accuracy, the 'portrait' nikkors, if used artfully, will make them vanish.