Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Nikon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Nikon Lenses
Thread started 25 Jul 2016 (Monday) 13:29
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

New Nikon 105 f1.4E....Thoughts (besides Freaking Awesome!)?

 
Thorrulz
Goldmember
Thorrulz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2009
The Land of the "Go Big Red!"
Oct 21, 2016 18:26 |  #31

Dj R wrote in post #18112734 (external link)
look out 200 f2!

now, 200 f2 vs 105 f1.4
they are completely different tools
similar to RPG vs M16.

one can do a little more damage than the other, but both are dangerous.

one is a little easier to manage on a daily basis.

therefore, the 105e may become the new "go-to" special weapon for the mobile guys. guys who shoot weddings and engagement sessions, people who shoot their families, or do portrait sessions with kids (who don't want to be so far away).

I think of it as the 85L
while the 85 1.4g is amazing, it doesn't have that "it" factor.
the 105e does, it's just special.

main take away regarding the 105e is that it has the swirl and bokeh of the 58mm 1.4g, but the 105e is sharper wide open.


I don't deny that the 105 f1.4 is a better choice for day to day shooting vs the 200 f2 but to compare it to the 200 f2 by saying the 200 does "a little more damage" is a bit of a stretch. The comparison between these two lens has been made on several other sites with what I believe to be the best one over on the FredMiranda forums. The individual who has a 105 f1.4 actually likens it more to the 85 f1.8G rather than the 200 f2. They posted photos taken between the 105 and 85 wide open and while there is a slight difference of course in bokeh and compression the sharpness of the 85 f1.8 even at f1.8 definitely held up quite well when comparing the like images making it a negligible factor when considering either lens. The contrast of the 105, especially at f1.4 was more noticeable so that was a plus factor for anyone considering a 105 f1.4.

However, the 200 f2 is better than either of those lens when you consider the overall quality of the bokeh, contrast and sharpness of the lens. A huge weakness of the 200 f2 if one was shooting handheld all day would be the weight, I've done so and it is telling on the arms/neck/shoulders. Of course if you own a 200 f2 then you know this before making the decision to own one.

Please don't take what I've said the wrong way, I would love to own the 105 f1.4 and do plan on purchasing one when I can find one for around $1500. It may be a few years from now after the lens has been out for awhile and either a used or refurbished copy but I do plan on owning one at some point. I love primes and the 105 f1.4 has changed my plans for my next high dollar lens purchase.


Flickr (external link)
D800 I Nikon 200 f2 VR 1 I Nikon 200 f2 ED AI-S I Nikon 135 f2 DC I Nikon 28-70 f/2.8 I Nikon 50 f/1.4G I Nikon 85 f/1.8G
My sister, the professional baker and cake decorator once told me that my camera takes great pics. My reply was that I thought her oven baked great cakes.:lol:

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Dj ­ R
Goldmember
Dj R's Avatar
Joined Aug 2009
Philaburbia
Oct 21, 2016 21:20 |  #32

Thorrulz wrote in post #18163337 (external link)
I don't deny that the 105 f1.4 is a better choice for day to day shooting vs the 200 f2 but to compare it to the 200 f2 by saying the 200 does "a little more damage" is a bit of a stretch. The comparison between these two lens has been made on several other sites with what I believe to be the best one over on the FredMiranda forums. The individual who has a 105 f1.4 actually likens it more to the 85 f1.8G rather than the 200 f2. They posted photos taken between the 105 and 85 wide open and while there is a slight difference of course in bokeh and compression the sharpness of the 85 f1.8 even at f1.8 definitely held up quite well when comparing the like images making it a negligible factor when considering either lens. The contrast of the 105, especially at f1.4 was more noticeable so that was a plus factor for anyone considering a 105 f1.4.

However, the 200 f2 is better than either of those lens when you consider the overall quality of the bokeh, contrast and sharpness of the lens. A huge weakness of the 200 f2 if one was shooting handheld all day would be the weight, I've done so and it is telling on the arms/neck/shoulders. Of course if you own a 200 f2 then you know this before making the decision to own one.

Please don't take what I've said the wrong way, I would love to own the 105 f1.4 and do plan on purchasing one when I can find one for around $1500. It may be a few years from now after the lens has been out for awhile and either a used or refurbished copy but I do plan on owning one at some point. I love primes and the 105 f1.4 has changed my plans for my next high dollar lens purchase.


I think you mean 85 1.4g


BAG Reviews, master list!
Nikon D850/750, Sigma 12-24 f4 Art, Nikkor Glass: 20 f1.8G ED, 28 f1.4E ED FL, 58 f1.4G, 105 f1.4E ED FL, 70-200 f2.8E VR ED FL, 24-70 f2.8E VR ED FL
Sony RX100V

LOG IN TO REPLY
spooky ­ action
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Jul 2014
Florida
Oct 22, 2016 06:07 as a reply to Dj R's post |  #33

I think he means the 1.8. It's very sharp; sharper than the 1.4. Many celebrity pros/bloggers have sold the 1.4 in favor of the 1.8 due to the sharpness, quicker AF (typically slower in a 1.4) and, obviously, cost savings. It does 90% of what the 1.4 does (some people do complain that it looks too busy) and though it has higher CA and lower micro contrast, these things are easily fixed in post.


Josh
D810 - 24-70 f/2.8G ED - Zeiss 2/135 APO Sonnar

LOG IN TO REPLY
Thorrulz
Goldmember
Thorrulz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2009
The Land of the "Go Big Red!"
Oct 22, 2016 11:18 |  #34

Dj R wrote in post #18163418 (external link)
I think you mean 85 1.4g


spooky action wrote in post #18163656 (external link)
I think he means the 1.8. It's very sharp; sharper than the 1.4. Many celebrity pros/bloggers have sold the 1.4 in favor of the 1.8 due to the sharpness, quicker AF (typically slower in a 1.4) and, obviously, cost savings. It does 90% of what the 1.4 does (some people do complain that it looks too busy) and though it has higher CA and lower micro contrast, these things are easily fixed in post.

It is the 85 f1.8G and not the f1.4 that was used in the comparison. High praise indeed for a $400 - $500 lens.


Flickr (external link)
D800 I Nikon 200 f2 VR 1 I Nikon 200 f2 ED AI-S I Nikon 135 f2 DC I Nikon 28-70 f/2.8 I Nikon 50 f/1.4G I Nikon 85 f/1.8G
My sister, the professional baker and cake decorator once told me that my camera takes great pics. My reply was that I thought her oven baked great cakes.:lol:

LOG IN TO REPLY
Dj ­ R
Goldmember
Dj R's Avatar
Joined Aug 2009
Philaburbia
Oct 22, 2016 20:33 |  #35

Thorrulz wrote in post #18163837 (external link)
It is the 85 f1.8G and not the f1.4 that was used in the comparison. High praise indeed for a $400 - $500 lens.

that's nuts.

the 105e is as sharp and creamy as the 85L
it's a really special lens for sure


BAG Reviews, master list!
Nikon D850/750, Sigma 12-24 f4 Art, Nikkor Glass: 20 f1.8G ED, 28 f1.4E ED FL, 58 f1.4G, 105 f1.4E ED FL, 70-200 f2.8E VR ED FL, 24-70 f2.8E VR ED FL
Sony RX100V

LOG IN TO REPLY
smythie
I wasn't even trying
Joined Jun 2009
Sydney - Australia
Oct 23, 2016 00:55 |  #36

spooky action wrote in post #18163656 (external link)
I think he means the 1.8. It's very sharp; sharper than the 1.4. Many celebrity pros/bloggers have sold the 1.4 in favor of the 1.8 due to the sharpness, quicker AF (typically slower in a 1.4) and, obviously, cost savings. It does 90% of what the 1.4 does (some people do complain that it looks too busy) and though it has higher CA and lower micro contrast, these things are easily fixed in post.

Really? That convinces me that I won't bother with a used 1.4G. I'll just get the Art after release. The 1.8G I got a week or so ago was less than inspiring last Thursday. It needed f/2.8 to deliver good sharpness and in a situation where I would have really liked 1.4 or 2.0 to reduce noise it was an unnecessary handicap.


Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
spooky ­ action
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Jul 2014
Florida
Post has been edited over 1 year ago by spooky action.
Oct 23, 2016 11:45 as a reply to smythie's post |  #37

Must have been a bad copy. The 1.8 is nothing if not sharp, including wide open. It's a great match for my D810's 36mp.


Josh
D810 - 24-70 f/2.8G ED - Zeiss 2/135 APO Sonnar

LOG IN TO REPLY
Dj ­ R
Goldmember
Dj R's Avatar
Joined Aug 2009
Philaburbia
Post has been edited over 1 year ago by Dj R.
Oct 24, 2016 20:32 |  #38

not everyone needs to own one of these,
it's quite pricey.

the individual who has a 105 f1.4 who likens it more to the 85 f1.8G rather than the 200 f2... he/she is crazy.
FOCAL length wise, sure....
but there is an 85 1.4G with creamy bokeh.
the 85 1.8G, not so much.

the 105E's creamy bokeh is closer to the quality of the 200, and 58 than any other Nikon lenses. No other Nikon lens can come anywhere close to the 105E.

Sharpness wise it's the sharpest pro prime, IMO, that Nikon makes.


BAG Reviews, master list!
Nikon D850/750, Sigma 12-24 f4 Art, Nikkor Glass: 20 f1.8G ED, 28 f1.4E ED FL, 58 f1.4G, 105 f1.4E ED FL, 70-200 f2.8E VR ED FL, 24-70 f2.8E VR ED FL
Sony RX100V

LOG IN TO REPLY
Dj ­ R
Goldmember
Dj R's Avatar
Joined Aug 2009
Philaburbia
Post has been edited 11 months ago by Dj R.
Dec 02, 2016 20:25 |  #39

sign this girl up for modeling
she. is. ten.

metadata won't be accurate until someone here adds this 105 e 1.4

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

BAG Reviews, master list!
Nikon D850/750, Sigma 12-24 f4 Art, Nikkor Glass: 20 f1.8G ED, 28 f1.4E ED FL, 58 f1.4G, 105 f1.4E ED FL, 70-200 f2.8E VR ED FL, 24-70 f2.8E VR ED FL
Sony RX100V

LOG IN TO REPLY
huntersdad
Goldmember
4,440 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Dec 05, 2016 11:40 |  #40

How does this compare to the Canon 135L? I haven't seen anyone comparing these two and it's the one lens that I really miss from my Canon days.


Facebook (external link)

http://WWW.BLENDEDLIGH​TPHOTOGRAPHY.COM (external link)
5D4 / 35 F2 / 50L / 85 1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
Boringjay
Junior Member
22 posts
Joined Apr 2017
Apr 19, 2017 20:47 |  #41

This is the next lens I am saving up for, waiting for Nikon rebate at Blackfriday.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

8,963 views & 8 likes for this thread
New Nikon 105 f1.4E....Thoughts (besides Freaking Awesome!)?
FORUMS Nikon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Nikon Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00148 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
1028 guests, 487 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016