View of the lenses, examples of photographs and the review itself specifically for Radozhiva, prepared Sergey Koveshnikov.
Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 135mm 1: 2D with full aperture
For a while, I simultaneously had two similar lenses in my hands: Nikon 105mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor Defocus Image Control and its longer focal length variant, Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 135mm 1: 2D Defocus Image Control, and, of course, it became possible to make a detailed comparison. Radozhiv already has a review of a wonderful lens Nikon 105mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor Defocus Image Control, so here I will only discuss the differences between it and the Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 135mm 1: 2D Defocus Image Control. Since the official names of the lenses are very long - hereinafter, for brevity, I will call them simply - 105/2 and 135 / 2.
Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 135mm 1: 2D Defocus Image Control
So, in addition to the obvious difference of 30 mm focal length, I found the following differences between these lenses:
- Overall rim length 135/2 compared to 105/2, increased by 9 mm, with exactly the same diameter. Most of this elongation was due to an increase in the width of the focus ring, which affects the convenience of manual focus in the most positive way.
- 135/2 is heavier by about 150 grams (and according to passport data, almost 200). It is noteworthy that the weight balance of the lens itself is significantly shifted forward, to the very edge of the focusing ring, while in the 105/2 it is located exactly in the center of this ring.
- The front lens 135/2 is located much closer to the front edge and, therefore, is potentially more vulnerable, while at 105/2 it is recessed several centimeters inward.
- For the same reason, using the built-in hood: 105/2 - from case to case, at 135/2 - mandatory, on an ongoing basis and often its length may not be enough.
- The 135/2 MDF is slightly larger - 1,1 versus 0,9 m.
- Despite the increased MDF, 135/2 has a slightly higher magnification ratio - 1: 7,1 versus 1: 7,7 for 105/2, although, of course, in any case, you can’t shoot the real macro with these lenses.
- The focusing ring of 135/2 has a slightly larger stroke, ~ 170 degrees versus ~ 130. The convenience of manual focusing and the speed of automatic focusing will increase / decrease accordingly.
Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 105mm 1: 2D and Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 135mm 1: 2D
- The 135/2 aperture is flipped backwards compared to 105/2 (the ends of the petals are visible when looking into the lens from the front). But the main - 105/2 forms a visually much rounder (almost perfect) aperture at f / 2.8-f / 5.6, in contrast to 135/2 in which you can notice some angularity of the aperture at these values. And this can influence the image accordingly. However, at lower values, the hole at 105/2 also ceases to be perfect and the difference between lenses in this respect disappears.
- On the IPIG scale for 135/2, much more values are marked than on 105/2, but at the same time, in 135/2, the only available depth-of-field labels for f / 16 are too wide and do not correspond to reality at all (and the instructions for the lens).
Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 105mm 1: 2D and Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 135mm 1: 2D
The rest of the lenses are identical. The same applies to the work of the Defocus Image Control function (if you are interested, I can prepare a separate material on the practical use of this unique function). The picture from both lenses, corrected for the focal length, is very similar (equally wonderful), it was not possible to reveal any noticeable differences in sharpness, color rendering, resistance to flare, aberrations, and the nature of bokeh.
135:
105:
Source code here.
135/2 substantially expensive than 105/2 both new and, especially, in the used version. So what exactly to choose, everyone should decide for himself. In any case, whatever you choose, each of them is a dream lens, especially for portrait photographers.
You will find more reviews from readers of Radozhiva here.
Thanks for the review! Informative.
Thank you very much, Sergey. Legendary lenses. I read a lot about each of them separately, but so that both at once in comparison - for the first time. Once in the online store, 135 already put it in the basket ... But I did not buy it, which I regret, tk. USD was then 33 rubles and there was money. I now dream of a 105 or 135mm lens. But I'm still leaning towards Sigma 135 1.8. Maybe I'm leaning wrong ..
There are 105 / 1.4E :)
Yes, but 150 TR I'm not ready to give for the lens
And you can buy a used Nikon 10mm f105 manual for 2.5 thousand (a 135mm analogue is two to three times more expensive): the difference in the picture is not so critical, but the price is incomparable ...
135 2.0 on the secondary is also significantly cheaper. On avito there are several offers for 40-50 in good condition
Probably possible, but the difference in price is the presence of autofocus. It seems to me that at such focal and apertures the depth of field will not be thinner than paper, it will be very difficult to aim manually, a bunch of frames will be with a barque in focus. Even autofocus will sometimes skew on such lenses, let alone the manual one.
Comrade !!! Don't even think about taking this pensioner! TRUST ME, play a little and sell) they have outlived theirs. Sigma 135 / 1.8art or 85 / 1.4art will be +100500 times more interesting. I have an 85art, and attention ... I SOLD THE NATIVE Nikon 85 / 1.4G after I took a picture with an ART 85. We plan to take also 135 / 1.8 art
Duc, Sigma ART indicated by you only new can be taken and this is not cheap glass.
Second-hand Nikkors can be bought for relatively reasonable money.
And also: “they have outlived theirs”
What is it like? What do you mean outdated?
Both Sigmas cost 75.000 rubles each. I think this is not an exorbitant price tag. Nikon 135/2 about 50.000 in good condition. The difference is 25t.r. not very big ... nooo ... If you compare the two photos, you will understand that 135/2 has outlived its size in terms of image quality on the open. I do not argue with them and now you can shoot great shots, but if you compare them head-on, everything will become clear! Regarding autofocus on Art Sigma ... everything is excellent. Yes, they had problems on 35, but now everything has been fixed. Misses about 3-4% of the total number of phot. Native Nikon missed more. But the most important thing is the QUALITY of the photo in the open! Everything is on top. Only non-autofocus Zeiss Otus can compete with it. Native Nikor smokes ((
Otus? In terms of quality, yes, close. But certainly not at the cost. :)))
Here I am about the same)) paying 100500 money for a manual is a perversion! Sigma has reached a new level. And if ever this company releases an FF SLR camera, I will doubt it for 1 second. Then I will sell EVERYTHING I have from Nikon and take the Sigma system, where everything will be perfectly compatible and efficient !!
Efksht 85.1,8 MS - one of the best lenses ever released, and with a possible stabilizer, and with a reasonable price.
Nikon 105 / 135D are outdated, but Art Sigms are not an option either! Sharp, but no bokeh! The best autofocus options are the native 105 / 1.4E and the hypothetical 135 /*.* E. The foot is sharp and with interesting bokeh. But the old 85 / 1.4G is more soapy. And that makes it less interesting now. But the whole problem is only in finances for new optics ...
A few words about Otus - it is worth taking for the soul, but for this you have to sell it!
I won't argue 105 / 1.4E without options is the best glass for a portrait as well as 200 / 2.0G ... but the price tag is just a disaster ((Sigma ART draws bokeh no worse than 85 / 1.4G, I personally compared it on the forehead !!!
Great review
Detailed and detailed review! Thanks…
Wow! It would be very interesting to read about blur control.
PS I'll never be able to shoot like that, it seems :)
Excellent review, thank you, Sergey, for your efforts. I would be extremely happy if you post material about working with Defocus Control :)
It is very interesting about the work of Defocus Control as well as about the resolution of glass - will they fit on fine pixel matrices? For example, I have a D810 with 36 megapixels on board.
Is this small pixel? Small-pixel ones are 24MP crops.
The resolution can be judged by the photograph of the lens in the article (first two). They were made at 105 / 2DC, connected to the D5100, which, as you know, has 16MP, which is equivalent in pixel density to 36MP per FF.
And the very first photo is a strong frame, almost 1 to 1.
Sergei!
Very beautiful and full photos!
Really cool!
Very necessary and long-awaited information. Thank you. Of course, details on working with Defocus Control will be interesting.
Sergei, in a bad light did not try to shoot with them?
How with tenacity and speed of AF in difficult conditions?
It is clear that it depends on the camera, etc., but it would be interesting to know in comparison.
Of course I tried.
You're right, most of it depends on the camera. And yes, problems at dusk. Not with speed, but with tenacity and precision. It may stop aiming altogether or is aiming at the fifth time. It seemed to me that in this respect the level is average or below average.
But this is not a drawback if you take into account the field of application - portraits are not taken at night: either the ISO will be too high or the shutter speed is unacceptably long, and a tripod is not an option in this case.
Thanks for the interesting review :).
Duck about the work of the DS in a review of 105tk described
In the review of 105 matches, only the theoretical part, without a single photo-example.
In the near future I will prepare the material on the DC function.
Sergey, there can be no your fault. I am sure you understand this very well. Better advise where you can such a teapot like me, to read in detail about the work of the vaunted Defocus Control function. Thank you in advance.
The trick is that if you want to read to understand the DC functions, then you need to google - "spherical aberrations". Well, Arkady wrote a little more in the review about the 105DC.
Thank you
Dear Sergey! Thanks for the stuff. The only thing that caught my eye was a somewhat clumsy expression in the description of the differences (item 1): ... an increase in the width of the focusing ring .... in fact, any ring has a DIAMETER, not width. And, for the rest - again, THANKS!
If anything, then it's not about the diameter, but just about the width.
the ring can (actually cannot, but should) have both width and diameter :) also thickness.
inner diameter and outer diameter))
And the width too. The same elementary geometric dimensions, cf. school. 😊 And if you take the focus ring separately from the lens, then also the thickness. 😂
I had 105mm. I sold and crossed myself. AF is terrible, washed and smeared - just unappropriate. My deep opinion is that these lenses are not suitable for modern cameras. Their time ended with the film era. Buy a modern Sigma ART 135 and don't bother.
Here I am about the same ...
And I also heard about crooked hands and tremors, the next morning on Monday. Well, and, of course, the photographer himself, how can we do without him. By the way, yours is written like this: not childish. (Middle school program.😊
Tell me people who know please!
which is preferable nikon 105 2.5 ai or nikon 85 1.4 / 1.8 d?
and why!
105-ka is worth a penny on e-bee, but the 85-bit price is biting. I just can’t decide.
As the owner of 105 I would recommend 85. Because of autofocus. On the open DOF it is small, it's hard to focus. And if they can do static portraits, then in dynamics - most photographs of marriage have to be taken in large series in the hope that at least a few frames will work out.
understandably. will have to wait until better times.
The Germans have a good saying: “Wer hat die Wahl, der hat die Qual!” “Choice brings torment.” There is no equivalent in Russian, but the situation is present among all peoples, even among the Mumba-Yumba tribe. Well, in big cities it is always possible to rent a car to make the right choice. Good luck .😋🖐️
Are you seriously thinking about taking a non-autofocus lens for your portrait?
I just can’t understand in any way since I have not tried it in the portrait yet.
even b / ear on e-be 85 1.4 ai 500 bucks worth
Take Jupiter 9 and try the manual in the portrait. It is inexpensive and sold easily.
In, in! Our old classic. On it and practice skills. True, flair, taste and other related qualities are desirable for a portrait painter.
But how did we manage the film FEDs, Zeniths and Kievs before? 😲
Do not do nonsense - only AF, otherwise in a week you will think - where to attach it
This is not me))) but I completely agree.
We are waiting for Yaga to release under Nikon 85 / 1.8 this fall for 160 bucks :)
And I was disappointed in 35 mm Yaga when I compared it with Nikon 35. And most of all in lazy autofocus. You press focusing again, and he doesn't even want to move the lenses. Although the sharpness on the open one also let us down. 24 Mp on crop does not allow. The only plus over Nikon is less chromaticity on the open. While a portrait lens doesn't need a lot of sharpness, maybe the 85 won't be a lump. 35 ads are already inundated - the people are getting rid of.
On the contrary, I am completely delighted with 35/2.
And where is the review?))
35tons? coming soon :) most likely in a few days.
Vitaliy, are you talking about Nikon 35, which is DX 1.8?
About 35 Yongnuo, the market is overwhelmed simply that they are cheap, I bought this - the focus is not a bullet, but the sharpness is at 35 / 1.8
The secondary market is overwhelmed. And they sell new ones at cost. Himself in thought - to sell or leave just in case. All the same FF.
What exactly? Compare yes, Yagu 35/2 with Nikon crop 35 / 1.8
135 1.8 for 300 bucks would be more interesting :). Yaga still has not made 100 f 2 under Nikon. It’s a pity that you have nowhere to take 100 ft 2 under Canon, it would also be interesting to see
At the end of summer there should be a review of Yagi 100/2
Nikkor 135/2 DC - itself a lousy lens like I am Volodya, up to / 4 - the wildest chromaticity, the sharpness is at 3.2-3.5, the accuracy of auto focus is zhakhliv, with great, or with low contrast, it is unwise to pick up auto focus in a zagaly, catch a hare, why It’s disgusting to finish - it’s 100% for the internal number (24mm) and if it’s great, the blend is short. I bought a new line that only lost the cost (((boke bokeh - won’t є that maє reach an acceptable viglyad, DC at 5.6 in the background, let me get the garnishing result ale most vipuskati taku light linz yaku so I want to close up to 4-5.6? EF 135 2L by orders of magnitude shrinking the lens for everything.Yakshcho at kenon 135/2 servants upgraded to 70-200 / 2.8, then at nikon fixing the motor 80-200 135 / 2dc - not varied, respect the trash, do not mess with dc 2.8 zoom to the last minute I will give a picture by all parameters.
Right! Arsenal is doing better at the factory.
In my opinion, the photo examples in the article clearly show that this is not so.
There are many photos in the open, I do not see any chromaticism or hares, with sharpness and contrast - complete order. Well, with sharpness, the question is still open, because the camera there is very large-pixel.
In the examples, there are simply no photos in which the HA would have shown themselves (the seagull was shot at f4), and the “source” is the zerg that has been processed. Of these two glasses, 135 outperforms 105 in all respects, including a stronger construct (my assumption based on the study of a broken 105), only loses at the cost :). And the prices for the secondary housing are higher than 135 2.0L from Canon, which is undoubtedly upsetting. “Can you buy a Sigma? Do you want a sensible alternative to that? from bl ... ka Dania, n ... ts to all thanks .... " (quote from the classic :))
What do you mean by “there are no photos on which HA showed themselves”? Full of photos at f / 2?
And yet - is it possible to remove HA (in particular, freing) during processing? At least I don't know how. And if you can clean - then is this really such a problem?
HA is not always present in images with an open aperture; the above photos do not have conditions for their occurrence. If a direct ray of sunlight hit the contours of a girl’s white jacket, near a flowering tree, HA would be visible, but the girl is in the shade. I'm not saying that this is a strong problem, especially if you shoot in RAW.
Yuri is partly right - in conditions of a high contrast of light and shade, it is easier to get CA with this lens. However, in the above example with a jacket, even if a ray of light had hit it, HA would not have arisen. The fact is that HA, at least for this lens, occurs only in areas out of focus, coloring areas behind the focusing plane in green, and in front of them in purple tones. But, since the jacket was in the DOF - HA would not have arisen.
Sergey, there can be no your fault. I am sure you understand this very well. Better advise, if you know where you can such a teapot like me, read in detail about the work of the vaunted Defocus Control function. Thanks in advance.
Buy this "masterpiece" - you will understand everything.
I fully support. Series 105 and 135 DC - soap trash
Wee have mercy! Tsya linza tse is not an extravagant Nikkor 50 / 1,8, but a creative tool. You didn’t want to go back to know it thoroughly, you don’t need to know it! You may need to change the camera setup and turn on the head, before the tim yak squeeze on the descent ???
As soon as you can, take the sawdust, the hammer and smash more beautifully than Nikon, Pan Andriy ....
Flame comments have been deleted. World, Labor, Internet.
It is a pity, the lynx with its paw on the face was very pretty.
yes lynx in all articles in kamenti crap
On photozone.de, both got the highest points in both optics and mechanics, one of the best results among all lenses. This also says something ...
Nipon (nikkor) q 135mm 2.8
in defense of Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 135mm 1: 2D is a wonderful lens. I am the one who currently use his great-great-grandfather - nikkor Q auto 135 mm F 2.8 and am just delighted with him! for lovers the most that is necessary! very cheap, sharp, beautiful bokeh, juicy and bright! I use it on d700
The next lens I want to take is the Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 135mm 1: 2D to use with the AF version. Native lenses are much better than their Chinese competitors! if the sigma 135 art will last the same years as the Nikkorovs, then you can still look towards sigma ..
the model is incredibly beautiful!
more photo with lens - nikkor Q auto 135 mm F 2.8
And not soap at all, 135 is a very sharp lens, it just does not like bright light and white color, the counter-lens generally kills it. But, if you understand its nuances at 2.0, you can get a very good, dense picture. But problematic ... The picture in most cases is violet-green, with the focus either undershoot or overshoot. In short - cocoa. I can sell)