Why nobody mentioned the new 105f1.4ED?????

Where exactly are you seeing it exhibit swirly bokeh?

I'm not seeing on the Flickr album I posted before. Who mentions: these were all shot @ 1.4 and im very happy with how sharp it is out of the box and the DOF fall off is very smooth. the back ground in each of these pictures wasnt that far since my back yard is very small. with a large open space that back ground will probably just melt away even more.

I'm not seeing it here.

or in shots by Vincent Versace. Who quotes: This has to be the sharpest lens I have ever used. It is also has the most beautiful Bokeh of any lens I have ever shot with as well.

or in Matt Granger's first outing with it. Who owns the 105mm DC and said he will purchase the 105 1.4 after this test.

The MTF chart [and all real-world reviews] suggests it will be a very sharp higher resolution lens, unlike the DC.
You can shoot it directly towards the sun without flare, unlike the DC.
It's modern so it will AF fast (SWM), unlike the DC.
It should have image characteristics much like the other Nano-1.4 lenses.

I have a funny suspicion this is going to be the portrait/wedding lens of choice, unlike the DC. That's one BADass lens.
 
Bokeh !!

what does that guy with the frizzy Fro say about it ?
or Rockwell ?
 
I mentioned it ages ago. I hope to get one in the next few months.
 
Here's a link to Ken Rockwell's review. Just from looking at his images, it seems like an amazing lens.

Nikon 105mm f/1.4 Review

Bokeh !!

what does that guy with the frizzy Fro say about it ?
or Rockwell ?


despite Ken's over-saturation, these still look really good. looks crazy sharp within the focus plane.

still not seeing swirly bokeh from this bad lens.


Fro describes the backgrounds as getting "OBLITERATED"



Nikon 105mm F1.4 Sample Images
 
again, no swirl here:



raw shots: Dropbox - 105 Raws.zip


seem to be getting what you pay for:

upload_2016-10-6_13-40-20.png



Still searching for swirl...
 
Oh great thats now exactly the kind of thread I wanted to avoid.

Well if you're happy with that lens be happy with that lens.

I really dont want to waste time on that.
 
This is the problem with discussions in the digital world. everything boils down to sharpness. Like that and bokeh are the only important things in a lens. That's only true if you spend all your time in front of a monitor looking at your images at 100 - 300%.

Gearheads care more about sharpness and MTF and all that other crap, while others take photos and use everything else that the lenses have to offer. It aint all about theoretical qualities and sharpness or whatever i the willy waving contest of choice this week.
 
It's pretty important If you want sharp images that have good bokeh rendering...

using tapatalk.
 
some lenses are magical and beyond the science such as the 135L and 135DC (if you find a good copy) but for the most part I choose a lens for it's focal length and maximum aperture, good science marks too.
 
some lenses are magical and beyond the science such as the 135L and 135DC (if you find a good copy) but for the most part I choose a lens for it's focal length and maximum aperture, good science marks too.

Which seems rather silly to me. You should be choosing lenses based on the most important factor, what color are they?

Can you use them on a bronze or red camera body and not have them clash horribly? See, that's how lenses should be chosen. Not all that focal length MTF bokeh sciency mumbo jumbo.

Lol
 
Why? Because it's not that great of lens for me to purchase it and a Nikon to Canon EF adapter. :biggrin-new:
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top