logo

Info

Reviewbucket.co.uk scanned the internet for Nikon 105mm f/2.8G AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor reviews.
You can find all Nikon 105mm f/2.8G AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor reviews and ratings on this page.

Read the reviews.

Analysis

For Nikon 105mm f/2.8G AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor, 222 customer reviews collected from 2 e-commerce sites, and the average score is 4.8.

Detailed seller stats;
Amazon has 192 customer reviews and the average score is 4.8. Go to this seller.
Ebay has 30 customer reviews and the average score is 4.9. Go to this seller.

Detail

Click to list all products in this category.

Similar Items

12.1.2014

I bought this lens locally to me as they gave such great support that I decided that it would be unfair to buy it online after the amount of time and trust they gave me (they let me take it outside into a busy high street to try out before I bought it). I thought I'd write a review here all the same as I use Amazon a lot and it's a good place to come for customer reviews, as well as purchasing stuff. I also press upon you all that I'm using this with a Nikon D5200 APS-C body (which I somewhat oddly, in some people's eyes, chose over the D7100). I haven't tried any of the lenses i'll mention on a full frame. Also, although I've never owned the competing lenses, I've tried them all over the past two months,relatively extensively, and decided on the 70-200 f4 over the f/2.8 offerings for the following reasons.I don't doubt that anyone considering buying this lens will be fighting with themselves between choosing this or an f/2.8 version. Either Tamron's newer 70-200 VC, the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR, or the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 OS. With respect to the Sigma I bailed early as it's sharpness at 200mm was noticeably inferior "on close inspection". Great lens but if you're going to hulk a beast around with you, then make it count. I value the 200mm end a lot so unless there is another reason to accept a softer 70-200mm lens at 200mm then i'll forgo the current version (as of the end 2013).The Nikon 700-200 f/2.8 is virtually flawless and produces fantastic results in all the areas I tried it out on... other than it's poor close focusing, due to extreme focus breathing (140mm long end at closest focus is disappointing, to say the least). Something the Tamron experiences, although slightly less so, which should rightfully put you off if you like getting closer to smaller objects (which I do!) or expecting that the lens is indeed 200mm at the long end, which much of the time they're not. The Tamron produces images extremely similar to the way that the Nikon f/2.8 does although I noticed that the Tamron, although very quick at focusing in general, suffered in focusing speed with moving subjects. So...Love the Tamron though I do, it struggles with fast focusing on fast moving subjects that are moving towards you (or away from you) or across you (i've tried this on two different Tamron's on two different cameras being the Canon 700D and the Nikon D5200, with very similar results). The F4 was noticeably better than the Tamron in conditions with half decent light, which was one of the main reasons it chose it over the Tamron. I can't say how the Nikon f/2.8 performed in this situation as I never had the chance to try that out, although if it's even half as decent at the Nikon F4 at focusing accuracy and speed then it's can only be considered as impressive!More on the focus breathing. I took a couple of photos in the shop and showed them to the guys there. One of them was from the closest focus on the f/4 and the other the Tamron f/2.8. The closest focus from the f/4 produced almost a twice size image of some text on a shop brochure than the Tamron. Considering this is reportedly better than the Nikon f/2.8 then i'd say that the f/4 beats them both massively as a closer focus lens. The image was clearer than the Tamron hand held and the Bokeh appeared very similar.So. You want the Tamron or Nikon f/2.8 (or maybe the Sigma) as they're reportedly sharp and fast although like the rest of us, you're worried about the weight and the visual impact that it may have on your subjects due to it's chunky appearance. If you're primarily shooting indoor sports events then an f/2.8 is going to be a better bet. You'd likely end up having it on a mono pod anyway, to take the stress off your forearms and therefore you'd likely think that lugging it around in general every day situations is going to be unlikely after you've spent ten minutes or so with one of them. I struggled to work out whether it was worth the extra weight and the attention it brought and I slowly lost interest the more I used the f/4.Ten minutes of using the Tamron in the aforementioned high street virtually broke me (the Nikon is a little larger and heavier). I'm physically fit and stronger than most but sheesh... those things are heavy! Also, if you're trying to take pictures of people without them noticing so much, then the size of the f/2.8's are going to terrify your subjects more than the f/4. The f/4 isn't small, or particularly light but it's totally doable. The image quality was the final thing that got me, as well the VR III..The VR III is exceptional. Extremely low light pictures, hand held at 200mm, of a static image are very impressive. It's like no image stabilisation i've ever tried. The Tamron is impressive as well but it clearly doesn't `stop' the image as well as the Nikon's VR III. For static images between 70-200 the f/2.8 has no advantage at all. On top of that, the image quality of the f/4 is amazing. The sharpness and speed the lens can capture is as good as the f/2.8. If anything, I felt the handling of the f/4 to be much better than the f/2.8 which made it easier to get to "the shot" due to the size/weight and the way your hands wrap around the barrel more naturally. It's easier to work with.The image quality is a-mazing! I have a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 which is very sharp. I also have a Nikon f/1.8, 35mm which is very sharp also. The images you get from the f/4 are epic. If you get your shutter speed correct and freeze an image, zooming in way past 100% is quite jaw dropping. The images are somehow more engaging than my other lenses.So. If you're tossing up the heres and theres of the f/2.8 options and wondering if you're going to miss anything by getting the f/4 then do decide what you're seriously going to be spending the majority of your time doing and why you're buying a proper pro 70-200 lens for. If it's tons and tons of low light `moving subjects' and you don't care about the increased weight and it's more noticeable physical appearance, then the f/2.8 is likely for you. If you're like the rest of us and you want an amazing quality, walk around, portrait/landscape lens, with great low light performance, especially with static subjects, then the f/4 is an amazing piece of machinery you'd be a fool not to try out. It's a great low light lens as well, if you have a camera that you can ramp up the ISO up. It's seriously no slouch. It's no way a day light only lens. It just lacks a stop of light on the f/2.8 alternatives. However, it's benefits from closer focusing, better VR and a much more handleable size and weight toppled the scales for me and i'm glad I took that all on board and bought it over the alternatives.
Read more..

3.5.2010

Macro lenses tend to be put in the "Special-purpose lenses that I won't need because I don't do that specific type of photography" category without much thought, but this is a big mistake because if anything, the macro functionality seems like more of an useful addition to an already-great telephoto lens. Let me explain:Build:The 105mm VR lens is solid. It's one of Nikon's best built lenses. From front to back it is solid metal. The focus ring is wonderfully fluid, and yet has a damped enough feeling to know it will resist even the most penetrating of dust and moisture. The focus index is useless, don't use it. When you're doing macro work all those equations go out the window any way.At the rear of the lens, it is rubber lined so that when you mount it on a camera it creates another seal. Looking at it closely, the seal is strong but don't rely on it to hold up against everything. The lens hood is plastic, and about the length of the lens itself. I never use it, reason being that it doubles the length of the lens, and your effective working distance is that much shorter before you scare away bugs and insects, just use your hand to remove stray light if you really need to. All focusing is done internally so that the lens never extends when focusing, and the SWM motor means that it hardly makes a sound, good for not scaring little critters.Optics:It's no secret to say that Macro lenses have some of the clearest, sharpest, most precise optics around. In fact, there is basically no fault with this lens, optically. You will find that due to it's flat-focusing nature, in-focus objects are sharp across the entireframe, even at wide-open apertures like F/2.8 Speaking of which, this lens will only ever be F/2.8 at infinity focus, as you get closer, and eventually up to 1:1 focus, the minimum aperture increases past F/2.8 This is no mistake, and no fault with your lens, it's a simple optical trick that all (yes, all) macro lenses need to do in order to do what they do. You won't get flare with this lens, and ghost are very well controlled until you are shooting directly into a large light source, in which case the smallest amount will come in to play. The front element is smaller than the filter diameter, which means that even filters with a very large, thick ring will not cause you any vignetting. Speaking of which, even at F/2.8 vignetting is not a problem at all on DX and very slight on FX. This is normal.Features/Performance:This lens, according to the manual features VR II technology, although the VR icon on the lens barrel is red, and not gold as the new VR II lens models have. I don't know or care which it is, because it works perfectly. There are a lot of reviews saying that VR is 'nearly useless when doing close macro stuff' and to 'turn it off to save battery'. I'll admit the VR isn't as effective as when used at infinity focus, but it still works very well at 1:1 and really can make the difference, I assure you. Don't be put off. As for the battery-draining, a close friend of mine says that the VR on this lens eats his D200's battery alive, and he can literally see the bars going disappearing with use. On my D3s, it is not a problem, it hardly has any impact on the battery level at all, and I can comfortably use it all day long on a full charge, and have plenty for the next day.Autofocus speed is good, but it's hardly stellar. This is not a fault with your lens, all (yes, all) macro lenses have quite poor (in comparison to $4000 zoom lenses) focusing due to the extreme range in which they have to work. This will often lead to 'hunting' which is where the lens struggles to find the focus point and moves back and forth between near and far. Fortunately, the lens does have a focus lock but this won't help you in macro as it locks way past where macro really begins. What will help you, however, is that the lens has a full-time manual focus override on that beautifully large focus ring, meaning that you can have the last say, every time. It works without failure, and it's a useful feature.Moving away from macro, this lens can be used as a stunning prime-telephoto lens for portrait work. The bokeh is nice, but not as good as an 85mm 1.8 lens, against a plain background however it is much sharper and with less distortion, and obviously VR helps in every situation.I hope this helps
Read more..

2.4.2010

Unfortunately the version Amazon sent me looked like it was second hand (lens barrel dirty, front and rear elements dirty), so I sent it back for refund and got another from Jessops. But don't let that put you off, because this is an excellent lens.As others have said this lens is wonderfully sharp and doubles as both a macro and walkabout lens for portrait and other uses. Fully compatible with both FX and DX format, on DX cameras you will of course get a 1.5x boost in magnification compared to FX. It's expensive, but it's top quality glass and a good investment in my view. If you have a DX format SLR you will have a lens which will upgrade to FX if/when you decide to.One day I'm going to go for a D700 (or whatever semi-pro FX SLR Nikon is selling at the time), so when I do the 105 will step up with me without me having to pay again.A nice fast f/2.8 aperture, although you may notice the camera body showing a smaller aperture (higher f/number) when working in macro ranges - apparently the effective aperture at macro distances decreases (by 2x if working at 1:1 magnification). This is the law of physics and applies to all macro lenses, it's not a defect (and besides, you're unlikely to be using wide apertures when taking macros anyway, so nothing to lose sleep about).In normal ranges the AF is very quick on my D300, but this is with the limit switch on (which limits AF from 0.5M to infinity, therefore excluding macro). I found that at macro range or at normal range with the limit switch off that the lens can sometimes hunt. At macro I'm mostly working with manual focus anyway, so this isn't a problem for me. If you're using the reach of the 105 for fast action shots just keep the limit switch on. Simple.Bokeh on this lens is lovely - I've only had it a week, but have already taken some wonderful flower macros with it, with beautiful creamy bokeh. The lens is very sharp but at macro range the DoF takes some getting used to - the field of view changes at macro range with just minor movements of the lens (breathing), but given the results you get I'm prepared to live with that.It's a big lens, heavy and fairly large for a prime, but doesn't look out of place on my D300 (and well worth the size/weight inconvenience IMO). It's very well built, and looks like it would stand up to the roughest of treatment. More pro-like than the other (DX) lenses that I have. I haven't tried it on smaller SLRs, but I expect that on something like a D40 or D3000 it would make the camera feel very front heavy - my advice would be to try it out in person on the high street and see how you get on.Recommended.
Read more..

17.6.2013

I bought this lens after a LOT of deliberation. I read the reviews and watched videos trying to convince myself that this lens was what I was looking for. I'd previously bought the Nikkor 50mm f1.8 and was blown away by that lens with the sharpness and bokeh, but wanted something with more reach especially when photographing birds on the river.I only have a Nikon D60 and read the recommendations that it's best to buy lenses that are the best you can afford and will suit any camera that you may upgrade to. So, I bought it from Amazon at the best price I could find online and that it would not be a grey import.:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)Assoon as the lens arrived I unpacked it and put a Hoya UV filter on, then mounted it to the camera. Blimey. I'd heard this lens was heavy and thought it would be a bit of a handful trying to take photo's with it. I took it out into the garden and a pigeon obligingly landed on the neighbour's roof edge. Several snaps later and I was looking at some very impressive images that were sharp and with excellent colour. I then proceeded to snap away at the flowers in the garden and the bokeh was astounding. After a while I hadn't noticed the weight and found that the lens was surprisingly easy to hold steady (helped by the excellent VRII system).:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)Taking the camera with this lens attached to it on walks means that the strap around the neck is a serious no-no if you don't want a bout of neck ache. I carry it by the tripod mount with the neck strap wound around my wrist and find it quite comfortable, though long walks are interspersed with regular stops to photograph anything that moves, and a lot of what doesn't so I can give my wrist a rest (that sound bad, doesn't it).:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)In a nutshell, I am really satisfied with this lens. It gives me everything I need out of a lens and sooooo much more. Plus it'll be fantastic on any Nikon camera I may upgrade to in the future.If you're ummming and ahhhing over whether to but this lens or not, take it from someone that has done the same, then took the plunge and hasn't regretted it one iota.This is without a doubt for me been the best camera related purchase I have made. I just hope I can do the same with a DSLR upgrade in the future.Thanks for reading this review.
Read more..

20.2.2014

I use this lens on a DX format camera (Nikon D5200), so effectively it is a 105mm-300mm f/6 lens (whereas the AF-S VR 70-300 f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED lens is effectively 105-450mm and f/9-11).Lots of general reviews and data around, so I will concentrate on comparisons with the (already good) 70-300mm:Pros:+ Better low light performance+ More robust, and a fixed length when zooming (so no dust inhalation)+ Sharp throughout the range (I never used the 70-300 much beyond 200mm as I like the sharpness and the greater ability to crop on a 24MP camera body) - so better for cropping.+ better VR - though you still need to be sensible - but really is useful handheld.+ Better IQ in my opinion. Less flaring,chromatic aberration, and nicer bokeh.+ superfast autofocus - good for faster sports and birds in flight, for example.Cons:- a bit longer and heavier (but not hugely - still very useable handheld - I am fit but neither big nor young!)- more expensive (but you definitely get what you pay for)- stops at 200mm, so less range (offset by higher definition).- not so useful for macro as you need to stay 1m away from a subject - the 70-300 is much more useful for this.I don't regret the purchase at all. But the 70-300 is a pretty good lens too. In a nutshell, this is better but more expensive.It is also more forgiving of poor technique!! Helpful for those of us who don't get it right every time, with the extra stop of VR, and the sharpness across the range meaning less thought required about what you should use the lens for and what you should avoid. Basically, it is always good, except shooting backlit shots close to the sun you get some CA.I sometimes go out with only this lens. It then gets used as a fixed 105mm lens, with an option to zoom up to 300mm. So you have to think as with a prime, but with more flexibility. I do like the zoom then, because while a prime can make you walk about more and think about composition better, sometimes you just need to use the zoom to get things closer together or arrange them how you like. For me a zoom is better, provided I don't get lazy with it!Update after 5 months:Still love the lens, use it far too often!It certainly uses all the 24MP of my camera - when the camera managed to switch itself from fine to normal jpegs (6 MB), I thought the lens was broken the difference was so clear on cropping. But just some software glitch in the camera body. That should say enough about the lens IQ. The lens will not be the limiting factor on sharpness.
Read more..

23.11.2013

- This lens perfectly compliments my Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8 with performance that you would expect from a professional lens.- You don't need biceps the size of mount Everest to use it; It doesn't weigh a ton and can be easily used hand held for long periods, being about half the weight of the f/2.8- VRIII really does help keep things steady, better than the VRII of the f/2.8 and this is really useful when you want to keep the ISO as low as possible for maximum image quality (Although the F/2.8 can have an advantage under certain conditions, especially if one needs a higher shutter speed in very low light).- Auto-focus is fast and deadly accurate and consistent; It locks on targetlike an Exocet missile: I gave this lens a real workout under a variety of demanding conditions and I was impressed by the auto-focus performance; it's not fool proof, but very nearly. There is a switch on the lens to limit the minimum focus to 3m for even faster focusing on more distant subjects; on full focus range setting minimum focus is 1m, better than the f/2.8- Optical performance is truly excellent and the bokeh is really pleasing, the lens is very sharp wide open at f/4 (as is also the f/2.8).- It gives you a true 200mm zoom on close up and does not suffer from the focus breathing of the f/2.8- It's significantly cheaper than the f/2.8 so it won't feel like it has cost you the Earth, although it's not cheap by any means.So what's no so good about this lens? Hmm! Nothing really as far as the lens goes, but there's one little niggle and that is Nikon only provides a soft pouch and not a professional case to protect this lens and for a professional grade lens at this price, that's a bit disappointing; Nikon provides a decent case with the f/2.8, but not for the f/4 model.The main reasons why I did not go for the f/2.8 was the focus breathing issue which does not give a true 200mm on closely focused subjects and also the fact that the minimum focus distance was limited to 4.5 feet. I could live with the weight of the f/2.8 but when you buy a 200mm zoom you expect to get 200mm no matter how far, or near the subject is and often one needs to get in a little bit closer; the f/4 model does the job nicely. The f/4 is in my view a very good lens for portrait work and more comfortable to use being lighter than the f/2.8
Read more..

21.11.2015

To give the context. I'm a perfectionist amateur with more the thirty years on photography. Always used Nikon equipment, at least after my initial Pentax Camera, and it is very rare that I make a comment here. Nothing special about this only that I find I cannot add much to what others said. Also to add to the context, till half an year ago I had about all the best Nikon lenses, including the legendary 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 2.8G.This said, half an year ago I decided to sell my 14-24 and 70-200 2.8G VRII. The first I only used a couple of times. The second was a different story. It was my best loved lenses, but I was feeling it too heavy,and more than this that it was impossible to be unnoticed with it.Six months later I was missing so much my Nikon 70-200 VRII that I considered buying a new one! That was when I found this f4 as a possible alternative. Had many droughts on going to this lower cost brother, but at the end I bought it.WHAT A GREAT SURPRISE! This Nikon 70-200 f4 VRIII is absolutely incredible. Not only it gives results quite similar to the older f2.8G VRII, but it seems to me to be still better. Higher consistency in terms of sharpness and the obvious lower weight and lower dimensions making it easer to disguise putting it closer to myself when I'm walking with it.So for half the price this f4 is still better than the f2.8. This said, the only exceptions to this are the following ones, and you should go thru them if you are considering buying one:(1) bokeh, due to not going to f2.8, and optics?... the bokeh is not very different to f2.8, but not as great as the one you achieve with f2.8(2) less one stop point, although this is not dramatic, with new highly sensitive sensors, still for weddings and other low light situations f2.8 is a better choice(3) construction... the f4 is not sealed against moisture and rain, nor with a professional lenses structure, it has more plastic, body is more on the consumer side.Okay if these are things that do not affect your decision, all others comparing the f2.8 to the f4 are in favour of the second one.Make a good and happy choice, and hope this was useful for you.
Read more..

16.8.2009

I originally bought this lens strictly for macro use, and for this it is extremely competent. It is just so sharp, and autofocus works well, even when in macro mode. If you are not using a tripod, then the VR function is a very great assistance even when shooting macro shots. This makes ad-hoc macro photography a possibility where having to unpack a tripod would be bothersome.It didn't take me long though, to appreciate the fantastic potential this lens has for portraiture. The 105mm focal length and f2.8 maximum aperture are very useful for portraiture, and out-of-focus areas are rendered very softly with an attractive bokeh, approaching what you'll get from the masters of bokeh - the 70-200mm f2.8 VR and 85mm f1.4.In addition to this, in-focus areas are tack-sharp, though if you do want to soften the shot, or reasons of flattery, this can of course be done in post very easily. This ability effectively doubles the usefulness of this lens, and makes it one of the top performers in the Nikon range. I would put it in the top 5 most competent lenses along with the 14-24mm f2.8, 24-70mm f2.8, 70-200mm f2.8 VR and 50mm f1.4 - some might insist the 85mm f1.4 be included, but I'd put this at no.6 because it's such a specialist item.I have also used this lens for landscape photography. Its sharpness lends it well to this application, as long as you can achieve the crop you want with its fixed focal length. Yet another, if minor, string to its bow. It is, of course, fully corrected for FX, so you can use it with your D700, D3, or D3X with confidence.The one negative point, and reason for only giving 4 stars, is that when shooting at the macro end of its range, adjusting focus also increases and decreases the size of the image in the frame - often quite significantly. This makes achieving a precise crop in frame at exact focus more difficult than it need otherwise be, and may prove irritating if you are a full time macro photographer. For me though, it's a worthwhile compromise for the very positive features of the lens, so I can strongly recommend it.
Read more..

7.6.2013

So, the big decision was the f4 or the f2.8 70-200mm lens? I wasn't so worried about the price difference, although I can appreciate this will be a consideration for some. I wanted to choose the right lens on practical merit and suitability to my needs. I am a keen (amateur) photographer, been a Nikon user for over 20 years and historically used Nikon primes or Sigma zooms. I read the global reviews on this lens and after careful consideration, decided the f4 would be utilised far more than the larger and heavier f2.8. So the purchase was made.Well, to say I am impressed with this lens is an understatement! Extremely sharp with an almost 'tripod like' VR system, I love using this lens. In fact,I have not taken it off my camera since purchasing it a month ago! The controls are well placed, have a quality feel, as does the reassuringly smooth zoom ring. Focus is quick and accurate. I am using the lens mainly at f4, as this was a crucial deciding factor in purchasing a 70-200mm lens. I am more than pleased with the results, so much so, that I now have the difficult decision of deciding whether to purchase the 24-120mm f4 or to go with my original thoughts, the 24-70mm f2.8? I really do not think the additional stop makes a huge amount of difference, for my needs anyway (particularly these days with great VR & high ISO's), although I do love good bokeh and the 70-200mm f4 does a great job in this area! Very pleasing results.Another consideration for some is the lack of tripod collar on this lens. Trust me, you do not need it - the lens is so well balanced on the camera and the VR so impressive, that I understand why Nikon, and Canon, have kept this as an optional extra. I'm even sure if the lens did come with the collar, I would have removed it as I do not use a tripod very often and the lens sits nicely in my hand.This lens will most certainly be a travel companion, across the UK and abroad and to be honest, that sums up my decision to buy - it will get lots of use and that justifies the spend.Highly, HIGHLY recommended!
Read more..

21.12.2014

This Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR is superb! I've been using 70-200mm f/2.8G VR as my "bench mark" of best quality lens. After being advised about the superior quality of the f/4G VR and reading numerous positive reviews, I've decided to get the f/4G. It's a hard decision since I've already got the expensive f/2.8G. My main reason is the f/4G's superior optical quality and very importantly its light weight and smaller size compared with the f/2.8G for overseas travel. Having got used to the weight and size of the f/2.8G, when I hold the f/4G I was very impressed and pleased by the slimmer size and lighter weight of the f/4G. After field tested for a day's shooting, I was really impressed by the sharpness and fast AF.The f/4 is not inconvenient in any sense as I can carefully operate the best combination of ISO and speed. No need to say more about the superior optical quality as there are plenty of confirmation and positive reviews about it. I'd highlight the tricky reasons for my choice of f/4G as compared with f/2.8G. Since I've got both, the f/2.8G will serve well for my need for faster speed in low light or some actions, or particular need for shallow depth of field (but the f/4G does give reasonably good depth of field). For normal street and landscape, I'd definitely take the f/4G since it feels really light as compared with the f/2.8G and I can hand hold (the f/4G's VR iii helps to make it work very well) it for the whole day without feeling tiredness. Another important reason/usage is for flight travel. This f/4G's slim and light weight with exactly the same level of hight optical quality of the f/2.8G (and slightly superior over f/2.8G in some respects as noted by some reviewers) is just perfect for holiday trips or special photography tours by flight travel. However, bear in mind the f/2.8G has dust and moisture sealing but the f/4G doesn't. So I'd not take my f/4G if I'd expect to encounter rain showers or some extreme weather conditions (unless taking a proper rain cover).
Read more..

13.10.2013

I was looking to buy a 70-200mm F2.8 lens and looked at the test reviews for the Sigma version, Tamron version (V2) and the Nikon version (VR2). Going by the test reviews the Nikon version had the best and most consistent performance throughout the aperture and zoom range. I had a chance to try a friends Nikon 70-200 F2.8 VR2 lens on his D600 and found the lens far too heavy to be lugging around all day. It was just too front heavy and the camera felt unbalanced. Then Nikon announced the 70-200 F4 and the test reviews were showing it to be optically on par with the F2.8 version. It is approximately half the weight and under 2/3rds the price of the F2.8 version. I decided to take the plunge and purchase it.I'm so happy with my purchase. It sits nicely balanced on my D700 with battery grip and the quality of the lens is outstanding and I've been shooting mostly at F4 right throughout the zoom range. The images are very sharp and have plenty of pop. The bokeh is nice and smooth especially at the 200mm end. The focus is fast and accurate and the zoom ring is nice and smooth. The VR3 is very effective and easily tackles 4 stops lower shutter speeds. It is very well built and a pleasure to carry around and use. I know I will get more use out of this lens than the F2.8 version as I know I would have more likely left that at home much of the time.Some of you might be thinking of purchasing the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 as it's cheaper and faster but optically it has too many weak points ( corners and borders are very poor at the 200mm setting and it also suffers from heavy vignetting at F2.8 throughout the zoom range ) and can't touch the Nikon version plus you'll be lugging a hefty weight round your neck.NIKON 70-200 F4 VERDICT: EXCELLENT LENS AND HIGHLY RECOMMENDED !!!!PS: Don't worry about the lack of tripod collar as you won't need it. And it doesn't suffer from focus breathing either unlike it's big brother and the rest of the F2.8 lenses mentioned here.
Read more..

20.8.2012

This is hardly a cheap zoom lens or particularly light but the image quality is first rate & has a constant f2.8 maximum aperture throughout its zoom range. You get a removable tripod bracket which rotates. I keep mine off unless using a tripod - doing so improves handholding. The lens comes with a decent soft case & bayonet lens-hood.This lens is designed for FX cameras but will work perfectly well with DX models with the consequent increase in magnification (105 - 300mm equivalent). One important factor when considering purchase is that the closest focussing distance increases dramatically at the 70mm end. This is a trade-off Nikon have made to keep the size down and is the weakest aspect of this lens.Although this lens will fit Nikon's smaller DX cameras, it will feel a little unbalanced. Used with my D700, it doesn't tip forward too much.This lens sports Nikon's VRII image stabilisation technology that can be turned off (slide switch on the lens) with another switch marked Normal/Active where the Normal position allows for panning. Another two switches are to turn off autofocus & slect between A/M or M/A that change the priority between the degree of manual override during autofocussing. The forth switch controls the autofocus range between infinity & 5m or full range. Flare is well controlled with the inclusion of Nikon's Nano Crystal Coating on some surfaces.Image quality is best described as truly excellent in the centre at all settings with some softening at the edges at larger apertures as one would expect. Chromatic Aberrations are also low as are distortions. This lens is of metal construction & is well-sealed. It feels like a professional lens & the zoom & focussing controls rotate smoothly as do the switches. The lens length remains constant & the front element takes 77mm filters that don't rotate. Autofocussing is fast. An exceptional lens that works extremely well with Nikon's teleconverters.
Read more..

14.8.2014

It is a never ending search to find a lens that will do exactly what it says on the tin. There are countless reviews on various lenses that actually do more to confuse rather than give the details. Strictly speaking there are four groups of lenses. Prime, Telephoto, Tilt Shift, Short Throw Zoom and Long Throw Zoom. You can see I have left out something here, Macro. You see Macro is an effect rather than a type of lens that can be incorporated into any of the types of lens I've just mentioned. The Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 IF-ED lens falls into the telephoto category, the perfect length for portraiture is 85mm, but this lens also works beautifully as a portrait lens also. The Bokeh on this lens has to be seen to be believed.Bokeh fans will not be disappointed. The sharpness of this lens should carry a safety case, it is razor sharp. The focus is quick although on very close up it can hunt a little. It also offers a great macro facility. Most macro photographers will use manual focussing and that really is the way to go on this lens too. A good tripod is also a must for complete stability. You can hand hold again as this lens uses the Nikon vibration reduction system (VRII) this works really well as it does on other telephoto and zoom lenses. The build quality is what you would expect and for your money you get essentially 14 elements in 12 groups, nano coating and ED glass as well. That is some serious glass. This makes it a heavy lens for it size. It handles really well though, so shouldn't put you off purchasing it. I couldn't sees rubber seal on the lens so cannot say if it is weather sealed. I didn't give a 5 star for one reason. The VR works really well however it is a little noisy, this is a feature of this lens with all that glass aligning up you can hear it all clicking into place. It's not a big deal, but Nikon should of addressed this. It's a fabulous lens though overall.
Read more..

5.9.2012

This lens is simply gorgeous in every respect. By far the sharpest zoom ive ever used and its build quality is truely worthy of its price tag. I mean it really does feel like its been forged out a solid bar of metal..and then they put some extraordinary glass inside. Even the foot and mount is rock solid.Nothing moves on the outside during zooming or focussing. The zoom ring has wonderful damping and it feels very smooth.The VR is actually very useful in most situations, especially low light and longer focal lengths.The fast 2.8 aperture gives amazing DOF and beautiful backgrounds.The autofocus is blistering. Try putting the lens cap on and focussing and see how quick it racks.It makes a huge amount of sense as your only tele zoom for DX or FX,its even pretty handy for wildlife on DX. On my D800 I have really enjoyed using it for those longer, closer in landscape shots as well as general people and nature photos.Downsides?It's expensive. Of course it is, its optically exquisite and tough as nails designed for years of pro use.It's heavy. If your upgrading from a plastic DX zoom beware of this. An extra 1.5kg could be a burden to you if your not used to carrying similar gear.At close distances the effective focal lengths actually shorten and at the long end it becomes more like a 135mm, but the fact that it actually focusses so close is a great advantage particularly if your doing journalism/pap photos. This shouldnt bother the majority of people.With that said its a no nonsense, pro built tele that is so much better than I was expecting, and I expected a lot.If your a pro: chances are you already have one.If your an enthusiast: dont delay if you have use for a tele and you dont already own some good primes in the zoom range (ie 85mm 1.4, 135mm 2 etc...)
Read more..

15.4.2010

If you're thinking of buying this lens, you're probably already a fairly keen amateur or you're a pro. If you're shooting on FX, then in my opinion, the decision to buy or upgrade to the new model of this lens is a no-brainer. The VR is noticeably better than on the old model, and the vignetting and corner softness which plagued the old model is almost absent at all focal lengths and apertures. Yes, at close range, you're not getting a full 200mm equivalent focal length at maximum reach, but in practice, that isn't really an issue, at least in my case. Because it lacks real close focus abilities (around 5 feet minimum focus) this isn't a lens for zooming right in on nearby objects anyway.You're far more likely to be shooting from 150mm down at close range. What you want is good reach at distance and great bokeh, and this baby delivers it in spades. The bokeh is every bit as good as on the old model. I upgraded from the old model to the new model after much debate and soul-searching, and I'm so glad I did. On an FX body, it's a real step up from the old model. However, if you're shooting on DX, then my advice would be to consider buying the old model secondhand instead. The extra stop of VR (which is effectively all you'll be getting in the new model) is just not worth the increment in cost to go to the new model, and because DX shoots using the centre portion of the lens, you have none of the softness and vignetting issues that FX bodies suffer from in the old model. FX shooters - if you like vignetting and corner softness - add it in photoshop - at least you have the option not to have it in automatically applied to every shot at f2.8 now!
Read more..

List All Products

Terms and ConditionsPrivacy Policy