answers: 140

  1. Victor
    21.11.2014

    And a spiritual review, and a lens. And special thanks to Arkady for the Snow Maiden. Already, the soul has warmed up, although I do not like the New Year’s orgy. Thanks!

    Reply

  2. Vladimir Pochtarev
    21.11.2014

    Good review.
    Thank you.

    Reply

  3. anonym
    27.11.2014

    You can shoot another girl. This is all pokotsanaya and acne.

    Reply

    • d.martyn
      28.11.2014

      Ah yes comment! The top of idiocy.

      Reply

      • R'RёS,R ° F "RёR№
        28.11.2014

        for criticizing the models (unfair and not smart) BAN

        Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      28.11.2014

      ban_set

      Reply

      • R'RёS,R ° F "RёR№
        29.11.2014

        the girl, by the way, is very interesting, and is dressed in resonance with the topic (I don’t know whose merit), respect :)

        Reply

      • Owned
        27.06.2021

        Stop blaming, cuckolds. No need to make a cult out of the cap. Not all women are beautiful.

        Reply

  4. Anton
    17.04.2015

    Hello. I bought this lens. I thought for a long time. Very satisfied. The lens was created only for the portrait and this is its strength. I use de focus, understood and dealt with it. I have a nikon d700 auto focus for a portrait works well because this is a portrait lens (not fast and not slow). There is no front and back focus. The new lens was brought from Japan. In general, knowledge of physics and education excludes the appearance of chromaticity and other aberrations, even on a bright day at diaphragm 2,8! Learning mate part guys! I really like the lens that flies, I even bought a protective filter for it without UF effect (I don't want the filter to decide which zone of the light spectrum to remove for me), because they do not shoot landscapes ... For this bokeh and blur had to be paid dearly. Guys, take your lens, be happy. You just need to understand him, his character and he will give you gorgeous photos. Well, patience from you! Here is a snapshot of ISO 200 parameters, exposure 1000, aperture 3,2, R2, deliberately increased by this value, there is no loss of sharpness, but a slight blur appeared. Nikon d700 camera. Good pictures to everyone!

    Reply

  5. Anton
    17.04.2015

    Hello. I bought this lens. I thought for a long time. Very satisfied. The lens was created only for the portrait and this is its strength. I use de focus, understood and dealt with it. I have a nikon d700 auto focus for a portrait works well because this is a portrait lens (not fast and not slow). There is no front and back focus. The new lens was brought from Japan. In general, knowledge of physics and education excludes the appearance of chromaticity and other aberrations, even on a bright day at diaphragm 2,8! Learning mate part guys! I really like the lens that flies, I even bought a protective filter for it without UF effect (I don’t want the filter to decide which zone of the light spectrum to remove for me), because they don’t shoot landscapes ... For this, bokeh and blur had to be paid dearly. Guys, take the lens and be happy. You just need to understand him, his character and he will give you gorgeous photos. Well, patience from you!

    Reply

    • Julia
      29.05.2016

      And can you give contacts that I could order from Japan?
      Thank you.

      Reply

  6. Julia
    28.05.2016

    Please tell me, how does this monster of portraits behave on Nikon 7000? Of course, shooting only on the street or in large rooms, such as theater halls, etc.
    Thank you.

    Reply

  7. serg
    29.05.2016

    It will lead perfectly, like an ordinary small glass, very sharp.

    Reply

    • Julia
      29.05.2016

      Thanks for the reply.
      There are many mixed reviews regarding this lens on the Nikon 7000.

      Reply

  8. serg
    29.05.2016

    This is in the backlight, plus defocus konrol.

    Reply

  9. Jury
    16.09.2016

    “The DC-Nikkor 105 / 2D is built to last, almost all of metal, including with a metal hood and metal thread for light filters. Only the aperture ring and focus mode ring are made of plastic, and that's a little upsetting. ” The part of the body with the lens name, in which the focusing distance window, is also made of plastic. This element plays very well. an important role in the mechanical strength of the lens and Nikon made it out of plastic, which greatly upset some owners, who also thought that they had a thing assembled for centuries, but were mistaken.

    Reply

  10. Nikita
    04.06.2017

    Incredibly cool lens !!

    Reply

  11. Nikita
    04.06.2017

    Very beautiful model in the photo.

    Reply

  12. Ivan
    07.08.2017

    Guys, these DIC lenses can't be bad by definition! Questions and discussions from the series - and what is better than 105 135 and maybe also with the 85th one is compatible with feelings as for me from the area of ​​delirium. The entire line is good by default - the rest is just taste. All in quality are comparable to the L-kami from the Boot. Searching for flaws in a model is generally nonsense. Another respect and respect to the author.

    Reply

    • anonym
      08.08.2017

      The new 105 is better. Both technically and by drawing. It is a pity that it will be 2 times more expensive and heavier. She hits the 85th fast aperture too. 135s greatly compress the perspective, so I think the best portrait range is 85-105. And necessarily f1.4.

      Reply

  13. Alexander
    22.08.2017

    I got this lens and I never regret it ... I took it used but it looked like it was from a store and got it relatively inexpensively.
    Very sharp, fast, beautiful bokeh .. sits perfectly on my d700 with a booster. Took for portraits and chose between 80-200 and this. Of course, 80-200 is good, but still, when comparing, I chose 105 ku. I don’t know how on other Nikon models, but on my camera the motor noise is not noisy and not annoying ,? my 50mm is louder.
    If someone is chasing new products then take 105 1.4 ... but in fact there is more marketing. In comparison, the price of 105 f2 dc versus 105 f1.4 is ridiculous. Today it can be found for $ 500-600 and in very decent condition.

    Reply

    • Sergei
      17.03.2018

      Here, too, I came across a choice of 105 2.0 vs 85 1.4d, somewhere else in the distance I have a Vaida 85 1.8g rented for 700.

      Reply

  14. Alexander
    30.12.2017

    And if you compare this lens with the Nikon 85 f1.4D
    Between them will be a big difference in the picture in the same conditions? How they will have work in the backlight and what a difference in bokeh.
    If you had a heading about comparing such monsters

    Reply

  15. anonym
    17.03.2018

    Did anyone download the archive with examples? No one had any questions? Is everything okay? Is the lens at a height?

    Reply

  16. anonym
    22.03.2018

    On my Nikon D700, sharpness at F / 2.8-F / 5.6 simply 'tears' the sensor - a shameful lie, look at the pictures - and sharpness by nine in the camera

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      22.03.2018

      9 - this is for previews, in the review there is a link to the raves, you can look at it raw. No one here is trying to deceive anyone)

      Reply

  17. Alexey de Paris
    15.04.2018

    Thanks for the review! Yes, an interesting lens, I wanted to try it on a portrait and not only. The photographs presented show good quality, this lens and its additional features you need to try yourself to understand.

    Reply

  18. Demyanov
    20.06.2018

    Author, the first photos on the background of a wall with flowers should not be invested in the archive! Profuse acne on the female cheeks does not look at all attractive. Still, the photographer must take care not only of technical tests, but also of the appearance of the model and not be allowed to present it in this form to the audience. There must be self-discipline.

    Reply

    • Vitaly N
      21.06.2018

      Here is an overview of the object, not the model. If you upload photoshopped pictures, this is no longer a review. And for the press, please - correct.

      Reply

  19. Vladislav
    08.09.2018

    I downloaded the archive with full-size photos from this glass. I’m thinking about acquiring it. D700 and F5 cameras. I looked carefully at the examples and it seems to me that somehow you gently reacted to the misses of autofocus. Obviously, they arose very often and it is not entirely clear for what reason. It seems like this glass is famous for razor sharpness, and even in the d700, the focus system is not the worst. I wonder what the problem was.

    Reply

    • Onotole
      08.09.2018

      The problem is the slightest displacement of the model or the photographer or both in relation to each other. DOF in the open, even from portrait distances - a few centimeters. If you get directly into focus (~ 50% chance), the sharpness will pleasantly surprise you.
      In principle, the same applies to other high-aperture telephoto lenses - 85 / 1,4, 135 / 2,0, 180 / 2,8 - one way or another it is difficult to get super accurate into focus.

      Reply

  20. Denis
    02.10.2018

    Thanks for the review, informative and interesting

    Reply

  21. Andrei
    25.12.2018

    Hello. Faced the question of choosing a portrait lens. 85 and 105 1.4 do not look new because of the price tag. 85 1.8 boring in drawing. The lens from the review is normal, but the mistakes are very embarrassing, the originals were rocked, the drawing is not bad, even very good, but the accuracy is not very good. For commerce, I really don't want this behavior. I looked towards 105 2.8 micro VR, so there are also some drawbacks, the main one is that full-height photos without bokeh in infinity, which greatly limits the creative potential. Once again I have to look at 70-200 2.8. you can still buy humanely. In general, I would be glad to hear the opinions of people about what is better to choose for a portrait, since I myself did not hold all of the above in my hands. Maybe someone will tell you a normal reliable glass at a humane price.

    Reply

    • Alexander
      03.04.2019

      By the way, I shot for about a year at 70-200 2.8. I didn't like it. Weight does not bother at all. But the picture is pretty uninteresting. In comparison, 85 / 1,8g draws much more beautifully. From the pros - fast and tenacious focusing, good stabilization. But we shoot for the sake of the image, and here it is boring.

      Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        03.04.2019

        I know a few who got down from the new 70-200 in favor of the old 80-200 mk3 because of the picture

        Reply

      • scif
        04.04.2019

        it wouldn’t have come down from 70-200 vr2 towards the ancient 80-200. 70-200 taxis !!!

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        04.04.2019

        Nikon attributes the 80-200 / 2,8D to current lenses that are manufactured and sold. At the same time, MK4, MK5 are removed from production and sales.

        Reply

      • PETER
        06.06.2019

        Based on what you need from glass, if the picture, then for my taste 80-200 mc3 is at least no worse, in general, as always, check or go. And if the sports reporting, then that's another story

        Reply

  22. Alexander
    03.04.2019

    Good day to all, Friends.
    Arkady (or someone else from a respectable public), please say about your feelings. I choose a portrait for nikon d600. Need longer than 100 mm. I chose either this 105/2 DC or 180 / 2.8 AF. I understand that they are very different, but the purpose is the same. Interested in a general impression of the lenses. The difference in price is not critical.

    Reply

    • anonym
      03.04.2019

      105 or 135 DC

      Reply

      • anonym
        09.04.2019

        Thanks. I will do so.

        Reply

  23. PETER
    06.06.2019

    Television portraits are my weakness, I like to play with them. I shot a lot at 135 2,0 dc. If briefly.
    !) Very specific, 2 by 135, you need to learn how to film and understand, then play with blur. You can do a lot of things. It makes you think about the end result.
    2) Before you take such a glass, decide why you need it. Maybe you and 85 1.8 will be enough for the eyes. Glass is not for everyone.
    3) It is interesting that on the d750th, that on the sprinkled water, only in its own way.
    And quite shortly, the best portrait I shot, And I was played by almost all the popular Nikon glasses

    Reply

  24. Ivan
    04.08.2020

    I have a Nikon d810, how does this lens perform on a 36 megapixel sensor?

    Reply

    • Anatoly
      24.09.2020

      Fine! Portraits are filmed only with this lens.

      Reply

    • Dezmond2
      16.01.2021

      Do you think a lot of things depend on the resolution? I somehow compared RAW files from the D850 (46Mp) with the D700 (12Mp) ... if you look at the scale "under the monitor", and it is not particularly important what ... there is no difference. If you look larger, for example at 100% ... then of course the difference is on the face ... but who looks like that? Everybody puts something about FullHD or a little more or a little less on the network. It is certainly better when the resolution is higher, but the lens will show itself absolutely the same. On this site there is a review of Sonya at 42 or 45MP ... and there the good old Helios coped quite well. So it's all a stereotype that for high resolution you need some kind of super-quality optics.

      Reply

  25. Dezmond2
    16.01.2021

    I still don't understand the logic of the one who invented the focusing motor to build into the carcass. After all, it doesn't take much to guess that each lens needs its own unique motor, with its own special characteristics, be it torque, rotation speed, power, etc.

    Reply

  26. Load more comments ...

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer