|
論壇主選單 >
器材版 >
新版的105mm MacroVR對macro攝影很有用
|
|
|
作者
|
討論話題
|
網路會員
|
new micro-nikkor 105: VR works well for macro I have seen skeptical posts on dpreview on the effectiveness of VR for macro shots, in complete contradiction with my own experience with the 80-400VR+Canon 500D close-up in the field. A french guy had actually the opportunity to try the new AF-S 105 VR, and he posted his impressions on his site (in french) with some examples shot handheld at slow shutter speeds: http://simpho.free.fr/forum/vr105.html http://simpho.free.fr/forum/vr105_2.html His initial impression is that VR helps a lot, even close to 1:1 magnification. He said that most images he took were simply impossible without VR. Another really interesting point is that the AF was really fast with his D2Hs, fast enough in continuous AF-C to compensate for translational (subject to lens) motion !! Wow, if this holds true, I think Nikon has a real winner here :) Pierre http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=17684773His initial impression is that VR helps a lot, even close to 1:1 magnification. He said that most images he took were simply impossible without VR. 此君認為防震功能在近距離近到1:1的範圍還是有用的.
推薦者: adammfc, cc5, chinphoto, 葉0503, daniel0211, Raywang123, 黑松, ko440301
|
網路會員
|
Todd, Due in large part to your review, I purchased the 70-200 and I'm in love with it. I've been thinking about adding a macro (err... micro) to the list. I believe I will now have a tough choice between the Tamron 90 and the 105VR.(我相信我有Tamron 90 及 105VR之間選擇上的難题) Recommendations? (有什麼建意?) Thanks you! -- Nick http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=18943221 thanks everyone, hope this was useful; nick Thanks for the comments, polarizeer, Emeka, and everyone, I'm glad to share these images and opinions. Hope it was useful ;) Nick, re:Tamron 90 vs the Nikon 105VR -- independent of price, I would pick the 105VR. I have no hesitation recommending the lens.(除了價位,我會選105VR.我不猶豫的推薦這支鏡頭) If I were in the market for a close up lens, I'd simply buy the 105VR and be done with it. It's not a flawless tool, but it's incredibly solid and quite utilitarian. Todd http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=18949402 |
網路會員
| |
網路會員
|
105mm VR Annoying? I don't have one yet and can't pick one up in South Australia to try for about a month. Nor have I done any macro photography before! How have you found focusing on a tripod (1:1)? I hear adjusting the focus changes the framing of the subject. How have you found the larger barrel? Of course I would prefer to hold one myself but I think I'm going to have to order one to actually get to see one! What teleconverters can I use with this lens and is it worth it? I don't exactly know what im looking at.... -- Matthew O'Keyes http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19031291 Re: 105mm VR Annoying? I haven't used a tripod with the lens. I hand hold macro shots with AF-C and flash (if I have to use it, in my other hand, wirelesss mode). I love it as a pseudo portrait lens. The color, contrast and sharpness are great. VR is great. The barrel is a thick one but not difficult to work with. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19033685Re: 105mm VR Annoying? Here's a 1:1 shot, handheld, just like somebody here said you have to move it up/down until its focused. Shake? ...no worry, VR will help you. Cheers. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19037127 |
網路會員
|
The change in image size when you focus is a little disconcerting, at first. The 105VR is my first dedicated macro lens, and I'm still getting used to it. Having said that, here are my initial impressions: I don't find that the magnification shift when focussing is too awful, but I can definitely see where it might drive some people batty. I think someone already mentioned that "serious" macro photographers would be likely to use a focusing rail or stage, anyway. I may look into one of those. As you might expect, the effect is more noticeable the higher the magnification you use. I don't notice it for shots from a meter or so distance, and it's no big deal even for 1:2 shots of flowers and the like. I'm not sure how much of the effect is simply due to changing subject distance, and how much is due to the reduction in focal length of the lens. The lens barrel is very comfortable for me, but I have big hands. The lens handles great, and for non 1:1 shots, the VR really makes a difference when hand-holding. I haven't tried a teleconverter on the lens, since I don't own one. mark http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19036831 |
網路會員
|
I Hate You !!! As a result of your scriblings I went out and ordered this lens. It popped up at B&H and I just did it. That would all have been OK, but I recently also bought some (too many) other lenses. Just as well I'm unattached ! Maybe I will forgive you once I have used it a bit. In fact, I may be very grateful. I like the travel kit idea : 17-55DX, 105VR and TC1.4 or TC1.7. Hmm ... tao.design wrote: > Thanks for the comments, polarizeer, Emeka, and everyone, I'm glad > to share these images and opinions. Hope it was useful ;) > > Nick, re:Tamron 90 vs the Nikon 105VR -- independent of price, I > would pick the 105VR. I have no hesitation recommending the lens. > > If I were in the market for a close up lens, I'd simply buy the > 105VR and be done with it. It's not a flawless tool, but it's > incredibly solid and quite utilitarian. > > Todd http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19012317I need a disclaimer and limit of liability... Skidpan wrote: > As a result of your scriblings I went out and ordered this lens. > It popped up at B&H and I just did it. > > That would all have been OK, but I recently also bought some (too > many) other lenses. Just as well I'm unattached ! Ha, best to live it up while we can. ;) > Maybe I will forgive you once I have used it a bit. In fact, I may > be very grateful. Well let's hope it's the latter in this case! I hope you enjoy the lens, it's really a lot of fun to shoot with. At first, I almost found the lens boring, simply because it was so obedient -- it did exactly what I wanted, without issue, and it did it well. > I like the travel kit idea : 17-55DX, 105VR and TC1.4 or TC1.7. That would probably be quite good. Wide, tele, detail, and a bit of reach when necessary. Todd http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19022260 |
網路會員
|
hey Kaj, it would be a great travel setup Kaj E wrote: > ...for the thorough review. Very interesting lens due to its > versatility as you said from macro to portraits and more distant > shots. Could be a good companion to the 17-55 for a two lens > versatile travel pack (despite the bulk). I think the 17-55 + 105VR would actually be a pretty nice travel setup if f/2.8 glass were enough (and VR helps there, too). The 105VR is great at a distance from my testing, so that shouldn't even be a consideration -- one can use it through the focus range with confidence as far as I'm concerned. I know I'd be well covered with just those two lenses. > PS. Very nice pictures. Thanks, I had a lot of fun shooting with the lens after I got used to it. Todd http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=18900203 |
網路會員
|
|
網路會員
| |
網路會員
| |
網路會員
| |
網路會員
|
these are sharpened! http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=19080747Better... and also, with macro, focus placement is very important for "appropriate" DOF. Your sharpened images look better, but in your originals, I wonder if there was any breeze (ie, movement of the flower), or where you placed the focus point. Particularly, #3 (pink) and #5 (yellow). Most of the center area of the yellow flower appears to be out of focus. I wouldn't expect the center and the petals to be all in focus, but I think I would have concentrated on the center part. Also, do you use DOF preview? That can help immensely with determining where exactly to focus. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=19081100 |
網路會員
|
True magnification of 105 VR Lens lust has won – When I visited my local dealer, a Nikkor 105 VR Micro has just arrived and I could not resist the temptation. I also ordered the Sigma 50-500 with 1.4TC. I am very impressed with the sharpness of the 105 VR. I have two questions on this lens: 1. The specification shows that it has a maximum magnification of 1:1. The focus ring can be manually adjusted for a magnification of ∞:1 up to 1:1. I have noticed that the focusing ring could be adjusted some way past the 1:1 mark. Does this mean that it can magnify bigger than 1:1? 2. I quote from the 105 VR user’s manual: ‘The reproduction ratio is the relation between the size of the image recorded on film and actual subject size’. The 1:1 ratio is true if the lens is used on a film camera, but when it is used on a DSLR it will fill a bigger proportion of the sensor than with a 35mm frame. Does this mean that the 1:1 ratio becomes 0.67:1 on a Nikon DSLR? Regards Grobler du Preez http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=190669591 to 1 is 1 to 1 G du Preez wrote: > > Does this mean that the 1:1 ratio becomes 0.67:1 on a Nikon DSLR? I don't think so, because the image size is the same whether or not it gets cropped by a smaller sensor. So in effect I think that 1:1 is 1:1 regardless of sensor size. It has instead to do with image size. -- Cheers, Joe http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19067922See this thread... I posted comparative images in a prior thread. I saw that the 105 VR provided a little more magnification than the 105 2.8. You can also see the difference on a DX sensor size vs a full frame. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1026&message=17810072 great lense. -- ********************* http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19068221 |
網路會員
|
Macro critique - 105mm 2.8 VR Hi. I just got back from a trip to the Humboldt forests in northern california. These shots were taken with my brand new BROKEN Nikkor 105mm Micro f2.8 VR lens (autofocus died on the first day). All manual focus. These are my first attempts at macro photography, so I would appreciate any constructive critiques. Thanks! http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19080923 |
網路會員
| |
網路會員
|
AF-S nikkor 105 VR Focusing vs AF-D nikkor 105mm I read other post about this lens http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=18896052 but my concers are about how performs the lens versus my classsic AF-D 105 micro. I use the lens only in near distances, always below 1 meter and I use AF because underwater I have no access to manual focus mode. How performs lens versus the classic AF-D? Do you think that it's a recommendable upgrade for my "classic" 105 ? VR don't have any importance for me. But I suppose that AF was very faster than in the older lens. Many thanks http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19089638AF performance fRAS05 wrote: > I read other post about this lens > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=18896052 > > but my concers are about how performs the lens versus > my classsic AF-D 105 micro. You've read my write up on the new 105VR, but I just wanted to suggest that you take my comments about the AF performance with a grain of salt, as I use MF exclusively for my close up work. It's clear enough that AF performance declines at higher magnfications with all macro lenses by simple virtue of the AF system's optimization, not to mention the mechanics of the lenses themselves; I would be quite surprised if the 105VR did not offer some of the best AF performance of all close up lenses of the 90-105mm range. How much of an improvement the new lens may offer, I can't say. Hopefully some folks who use AF for close ups can chime in here about the performance of the new lens. Todd http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19089829 |
網路會員
|
Nikon 105VR: Initial Impressions [22] http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=18896052Todd - What f stop did you use ??? Todd, I have just received a 105 VR myself and looking forward to images as good as yours, may take a few 1000 clicks though ! Can you tell us what f-stop your images were taken at ? Thanks http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=18949078 shoot wide open colourperfect wrote: > Todd, > > I have just received a 105 VR myself and looking forward to images > as good as yours, may take a few 1000 clicks though ! It's a really fun lens. Shoot often, shoot a lot :) > Can you tell us what f-stop your images were taken at ? These were shot between roughly f/3.2 and f/5.6. Most were shot below f/4.2. I often shoot wide open because my other lenses for macro let me do so -- they deliver the sharpness if I deliver the correct focus. The 105VR is not quite so sharp wide open as my favorite macro lens, but it's still quite good. It's quite sharp at f/4. Thanks, and have fun! Todd http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=18949472 |
網路會員
|
Yes, talk is cheap... ... but your photos are priceless! :-) Another fantastic review Todd - I enjoyed reading it and looking at all the gorgeous images you created. Even if you started doing reviews of lenses that don't interest me (not that I can think of any), I'd still read them for the pictures... err, if that makes any sense... :-p My picks from this review are: 2, 5, 10, 13 and 22. They all have the "TAO-factor". I'm curious about one thing - some of the shots have quite a strong vignette - is this just from your background choice or added/enhanced in Photoshop? Either way, it's very effective. I'm late to the party here so I think just about everything else has been said/asked but I must say, after reading through this thread, I'm very tempted by this lens, even though I have the Vivitar 90mm F/2.8 1:1. The thing that interests me the most is the flexibility of the lens that you mention - I love my 70-200 VR but sometimes its bulk and lack of close focusing ability can be a drawback. Definitely one more for the list... I suspect the 85/1.4 might be next. I just have to keep reminding myself: it's the photographer, not the lens! Cheers, Stephen http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19098016 |
網路會員
|
一個禮拜前訂購一顆...不知道何時才會來...等待...等待...再等待...快來吧...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
來了吧? |
網路會員
|
Yes, talk is cheap... http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19098016hey Stephen Hybrid wrote: > ... but your photos are priceless! :-) Ha, thanks, Stephen. ;) > My picks from this review are: 2, 5, 10, 13 and 22. They all have > the "TAO-factor". I'm curious about one thing - some of the shots > have quite a strong vignette - is this just from your background > choice or added/enhanced in Photoshop? Either way, it's very > effective. Thanks for the picks! Yes, I added this vignetting effect by burning in the edges, though some images had this naturally, like 6 and 11. > I'm late to the party here so I think just about everything else > has been said/asked but I must say, after reading through this > thread, I'm very tempted by this lens, even though I have the > Vivitar 90mm F/2.8 1:1. The thing that interests me the most is the > flexibility of the lens that you mention - I love my 70-200 VR but > sometimes its bulk and lack of close focusing ability can be a > drawback. It's a nice lens. If I didn't own any other close up lenses, it would be quite easy to just buy this 105vr and be done with it. The lens delivers well in most all regards. The lens is a nice short tele and performs well at distance, so it really is quite utilitarian. > Definitely one more for the list... I suspect the 85/1.4 might be > next. I just have to keep reminding myself: it's the photographer, > not the lens! Certainly. Lenses are just tools that enable the photographer to do certain work -- some lenses make some jobs easier by virtue of their performance, characteristics, and specifications, but it doesn't mean that other lenses are inappropriate. Todd http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=19101133 |
網路會員
| |
|
|
