
samples: Nikkor 105 micro VRModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
35 posts
• Page 1 of 1
samples: Nikkor 105 micro VR![]() Last edited by flipfrog on Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:48 pm, edited 3 times in total.
hi dee
very nice, looks very sharp, love the colours, and composition. thnaks for sharing your work, your passion christian check my website>> http://www.6701.sunpixs.com
All great Dee! However, in order of preference, I'd choose #3 then #2 then #1. I love the extended depth of field you've shown in #3 - so many shots with this lens have such narrow DOF and they always leave me wanting more. With #3, you've really delivered. Well done.
Simon
D300 l MB-D10 l D70 l SB-800 l 70-200 VR l TC 17-E l 18-70 f3.5-4.5 l 70-300 f4-5.6 l 50 f1.4 l 90 Macro f2.8 l 12-24 f4 http://www.redbubble.com/people/manta
the macro with VR?,,must be new version.i loved tha first one cuz of its abstract deepness and colors.the 2 is also very romantic. "3" well i dont like flat DOF much but it DOF is enough deep to kept everthing in focus.how less you can go with VR keeping thing tack sharp,, i uses 1/160 handheld mostly.
Pall.A.
to answer your question, i only just got the lens, and i have only shot with tripod and VR off to this point....
will make my way around with it this coming weekend, do some testing with the VR on and hand held this was one of the toys i bought with cash i won from a nikon photo contest
hi dee
woooowww in very jelous, great shots with your new lens. those shots are just amazing, could easily be in the cover of a book. thanks for sharing christian check my website>> http://www.6701.sunpixs.com
Geez! That's a bit scary! But a great shot. I realy like the colour treatment of this one Dee.
Simon
D300 l MB-D10 l D70 l SB-800 l 70-200 VR l TC 17-E l 18-70 f3.5-4.5 l 70-300 f4-5.6 l 50 f1.4 l 90 Macro f2.8 l 12-24 f4 http://www.redbubble.com/people/manta
looks like the lens does the business.
wonder if you have tried the non vr version and can comment on any differences Steve check out my image gallery @
http://photography.avkomp.com/gallery3
Great shots and nice lens but pity, why Nikon bundle the VR into macro lens.
I see there's no use of VR on macro lenses and prefer to shoot macro on tripod, so macro with VR is out with me. Quality built is not parallel with the old Nikkor 105 macro. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Birdy makes a good point here. Sounds like a good idea in principle but I'd be interested to hear from our other macro gurus (eg BlacknStormy, Finch, Slider, Oneputt, Mitedo plus anyone else I've forgotten) as to whether they think the VR feature is redundant - would it be that good that it would replace manual focus?
Sorry, a bit OT. Mods - feel free to move this to its own thread if you think that's more appropriate. Simon
D300 l MB-D10 l D70 l SB-800 l 70-200 VR l TC 17-E l 18-70 f3.5-4.5 l 70-300 f4-5.6 l 50 f1.4 l 90 Macro f2.8 l 12-24 f4 http://www.redbubble.com/people/manta
Dee - was the last shot indicative of the pain that us mere mortals will experience in purchasing this lens
![]() ![]() Looks good - but I have to agree on the VR being redundant - most macros would be shot from f/22 and up with flash ![]() Chris
-------------------------------- I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
Great shots Dee - you are going to love this lens.
I've got the old version of the lens (which is pure heaven ![]() Just my 2 cents worth, but I'd rather have VR on the zoom lenses I have (I don't but it would be good), and not the macro. Rel Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships! -Ansel Adams
http://www.redbubble.com/people/blacknstormy
I shoot a bit of macro with the 105 non VR and my old 55 micro nikkor and dont really see the need for VR for this sort of photography. Most of my macro work is done with flash, or fill flash, and shutter speeds of 1/125 or faster.
It would be quite useful for low light portrait work or for short telephoto outdoor shots on dull days though. Gordon D70, D200, CP5700
Also would be great using it for detail capture in a wedding ![]()
105mm is a bit too long for portrait works on DSLR.
Perhaps it's good to use for portrait of whale or white heron. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
So Birdy -I should be using it for my self portrait exercise this month
![]() ![]() Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships! -Ansel Adams
http://www.redbubble.com/people/blacknstormy
I'm not a great fan of VR and, like some of you, don't really see it as necessary for this lens. What bothers me more is that the new 105 VR is a 14/12 design and the old one is a simpler 9/8 design. For macro lenses, it seems to me that, the simpler cleaner designs produce better performing lenses and the Nikkor 105 is certainly a classic performer. I wonder if the new one will prove to be as good in the long run?
regards
Mike Parker Frederick, MD Take Only Pictures, Leave Only Footprints
to echo the sentiments above, i'm not greatly inspired by the thought of VR on a macro lens. I was a bit surprised that Nikon included it on the new 105m.
maybe VR, IS, anti shake etc are being seen as indispensable in terms of marketing; you gotta have it if you wanna sell your lens. D200, 12-24DX, 28-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, 105M/2.8, SB800, Rollei 2.8F
I can see tremendous value in VR macro for those of us who like to shoot little critters. Stationary but impatient models. You see it sitting on that flower but by the time you've got the tripod in position it's gone.
Imagine what a 105VR could do to dragon flies in Slider's hands... Cheers Steffen.
Apologies flipfrog, I just realised this is the IRC forum, not general discussion (although it has turned a bit that way). I didn't mean to invade your thread by posting an image. If you wish I can take the picture off. Cheers Steffen.
Sorry Dee, once more post: Steffen, Serious macro or amateur macro works, If serious macro shooter, they always shoot with tripod, flashes and list of equipments. Fun or amateur shooter, maybe it'll suit and time to time or may use in all occassion. Portrait works: agreed that any lens can take portrait, but what type of portrait and how do you shoot and use your photos for. The ideal range is 85 - 105 and the best lens in Nikkor range is the 85/1.4 or the 105 DC. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
in the end i chose the vr over the previous 105 b/c it was less than 200 bucks more, so why not.....? i was thinking about the times when i would be at a wedding or crawling around without a tripod handy. i also thought about the opportunites it would provide for unconventional or abstract portraits (detail images). Sure, i might not use the VR half the time, but still... why not have it on the lens in case of those less frequenst scenarios.
does anyone in this forum agree ??? ![]()
The next generation of Nikon DSLR body (coming soon) will have VR built-in as compulsory and compliance
![]() Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Nice photos Dee. As soon as the flower start blossoming here, I'll be using my 105mm macro more often.
Johnny
D200, D70, 18-70mm, 85mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8, 24-120mm VR, 12-24mm Tokina, 70-300mm Tamron, Lens Baby 2.0, Peleng Fisheye 8mm, SB800, Alien Bees Studio Setup: 1 B400, 2 B800, 1 B1600, Sekonic L-358 http://www.jtimagesonline.com
I certainly understand your choice Dee and, initially, I thought what a cool lens to have! Now, having thought more about it, if adding VR to a lens that doesn't really need it detracts from the usability, servicability and overall longevity of that lens then why pay the extra for it? I supppose only time will tell whether there are any negatives with it or that it just becomes something of a curiosity by having a feature that doesn't get used much. Still, your choice is exactly that: your choice. VR or no VR - the images above are great, regardless, and I hope you get plenty more from this interesting piece of kit. ![]() Simon
D300 l MB-D10 l D70 l SB-800 l 70-200 VR l TC 17-E l 18-70 f3.5-4.5 l 70-300 f4-5.6 l 50 f1.4 l 90 Macro f2.8 l 12-24 f4 http://www.redbubble.com/people/manta
Nice shots. I like 2 and 3. Not a big fan of the abstract ones.
Same here. 99.9% of my macro shots are handheld. I think VR might be useful in rare cases. Dee, let us know how the VR goes in practice.
Previous topic • Next topic
35 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|