Nikon 105mm: to go with VR or without?

[pkhunter]

Hi. For macro photos, VR is irrelevant I know. Mostly. But if I were to use 105mm as a sort of lightweight replacement for 70-200mm lens (I am now on D300) would the VR feature be useful? What's the general consensus here? Thanks

[Leong23]

Originally Posted by pkhunter Hi. For macro photos, VR is irrelevant I know. Mostly. But if I were to use 105mm as a sort of lightweight replacement for 70-200mm lens (I am now on D300) would the VR feature be useful? What's the general consensus here? Thanks

Yes, the VR will be useful if not shooting macro, the AF and lens coating are better too.

The only thing is that the 105VR is heavier than the 105AFD.

[pkhunter]

Thanks. But how about compared to the now-discontinued 105mm AF-S without VR? It's not an AFD or just AF. It's AF-S.

[Randius]

Originally Posted by pkhunter Thanks. But how about compared to the now-discontinued 105mm AF-S without VR? It's not an AFD or just AF. It's AF-S.

There is no 105 AFS without VR at all. Such a thing did not exist.

[b18]

If you are looking for a light weight replacement of the 70-200 VR, I would recommend to go for the 85/1.4 or 105 VR as you already want.

For low light event work, 85/1.4 might help. But with 105 VR macro and VR function it is more useful in most situation.

Compared to the 105 AF-D .. well .. after you hear the silent focusing and also VR addition, it really make the old 105 AFD like a grandpa lens

[giantcanopy]

The last I tried both, the IQ looks equivalent to me, and on 100% pixel peeping it seems the nano coating VR has an advantage. But I might be biased.

I love the 105mm AF-D for the superb lightness. It is also less bulkier.

In the end i got the AFS

Ryan

[slooow]

Originally Posted by Randius There is no 105 AFS without VR at all. Such a thing did not exist.

dont scold me.... you can turn VR off on 105micro AFS-VR

but for a record, the following lenses are excellent!!
105AF
105AFD
105AFS-VR

i think all are good

~

TS, if you dont need 1:1, why dont you consider getting 500D in front of your 70-200AFS-VR?

still heavy, but better than carrying a few lenses out on a full-day photo shoot

~

for me, i dont do much micro anymore. not good for my old eyes.
i sold away 105AFD, then i sold away 105AFS-VR too...
i kept my 55mm f/3.5
need extreme? reverse a 50mm f/1.8 onto 55mm f/3.5... stunning results

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by giantcanopy The last I tried both, the IQ looks equivalent to me, and on 100% pixel peeping it seems the nano coating VR has an advantage. But I might be biased. I love the 105mm AF-D for the superb lightness. It is also less bulkier. In the end i got the AFS Ryan

The < N > coating gives a slightly better contrast.

[giantcanopy]

Originally Posted by slooow TS, if you dont need 1:1, why dont you consider getting 500D in front of your 70-200AFS-VR? still heavy, but better than carrying a few lenses out on a full-day photo shoot

Woa. If money not an issue and you will be shooting macro abit more than an occassion, the 105mm is much lighter than wielding a 70-200mm with a 500D.

I used to go thru the 70-200mm+(2x) 500D but in the end I was relieved i got the 105mm instead.

Ryan

[diediealsomustdive]

How's the AFS 105 VR in terms of bokeh and shooting non-micro subject? My once upon a time favourite was the 105mm f/2.5 AiS. Would the VR lens be a good portrait lens?

I was impressed with the bokeh of the AFS 60, and the usefulness as an all round lens, unlike the reputation of the AF/AFD 60 Micro that's really only good for micro.

Will either buy the AFS or the AFD version (in the latter case, second hand). In my case I need an extra port for the AFS due to the additional bulk for UW (that's underwater) photography.

[slooow]

Originally Posted by giantcanopy Woa. If money not an issue and you will be shooting macro abit more than an occassion, the 105mm is much lighter than wielding a 70-200mm with a 500D. I used to go thru the 70-200mm+(2x) 500D but in the end I was relieved i got the 105mm instead. Ryan

bro

what i mean was....

i prefer to carry body + 17-55mm + 70-200mmVR + 500D + sb800x2

than to carry body + 17-55mm + 70-200mmVR + 105mmVR + sb800x2

[for occasional close up photos]

~

of cos i will not carry 70-200mmVR + 500D to shoot spiders in SBG from 7am till 5pm lah... hehe that will be tiring... i will use 55mm with a lot of homemade filters

[fatigue]

105mm MF is good enough for me. This lens might outlast all those new micro lenses

I have seen a lot of macro photographers focusing manually even though they got an AF lens.

[lunas]

I will go for 105 VR for the (internal focus) IF. Correct me if I am wrong, as the rest are not IF lens...