| Joined: | Wed Apr 18th, 2012 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4193 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
Optically , the 105 f2.0 DC is more than I could ask for,but it has no VR..well , neither has the 105 f1.4,so there..I think that VR is the Best invention since digital photography.
Sony vs. Nikon, you know, I have noticed a bunch of Z 2nd. handers for sale ...Zfc...Z7..for reasonable prices,and Z lenses, my gawd, even overhere there are about five 2nd. hand Z lenses up for grabs, ...incl. a 24-70 f4.0 and even a 400 f4.5 which would qualify as pro-glass, whats going on...is the Nikon Z perhaps somewhat disappointing then ?...why would a long time Nikon photog. go to Sony ?..look,f. ex. Fuji or Canon, would be somewhat understandable....I`m not getting this,....having said that,..I have noticed that the design team at Nikon seems to be on the " young" side,perhaps all technically astute, without the understanding of practical use of things, look at Nikon`s latest offering , the " Plena " , lots of fanfare there, but it is a 135mm f1.8 , coming in way after " like-offerings " from the competition,and ,that it is a tad narrower and a smidgen less weighty with a bit more even rendition is not really a dealbraker is it, as it is not exactly a major break-through,but is considered by some more of a " me too " optic, ...where are the innovations ?..I am Baffled to say the least.
I had the 105 f2.8 Micro AFS VR. Nice lens though a bit chunky.
However the VR for macro was a bit pointless because I was given to understand VR doesn’t work on subject distances closer than 2feet. At any rate the camera was often mounted on a tripod so VR had to be switched off.
Last edited on Fri Feb 2nd, 2024 08:45 by
____________________
Eric