Nikkor Micro AF D czy AF-S VR

[ecml]

W czym jest lepszy Nikkor 105 Micro AF-S od AF D? Nie potrzebuję VR, śrubokręt mam.

[2pompony]

Oto co uznawany za znawcę w niektórych kręgach Ron Reznick ma do powiedzenia a propos tych dwóch. Pozwolę sobie wytłuścić clou. Żródło. (http://www.digital-images.net/Lenses/body_lenses.html#105VR)

105mm f/2.8D Micro (click for photo): The 105 AF Micro is a compromise lens... while not quite as good as the 60 Micro or 200 AF Micro, it offers more working distance than the 60 and is significantly easier to hand-hold than the 200 at near-maximum magnifications. The lens is quite sharp in the sweet spot -- optimum sharpness is achieved between f/5.6 and f/11, although the difference at f/16 is barely perceptible. The lens works best at distances under 15 feet (it’s softer beyond that range) and between f/2.8-f/4 it loses edge definition a bit and contrast in the outer frame. The focal length reduces significantly as you focus between 1:2 and 1:1, making the lens roughly 80mm at minimum focusing distance. It is a good portrait lens at wider apertures for work in the 7-15 foot range as well, as long as the subject is kept near the center of the frame. For best contrast, using either an HN-23, HN-24 or preferably an HN-30 hood on the 62mm barrel thread is desirable. Overall, I preferred the results from the 60 and 200 for field work and the 85/1.4D for portrait, so I finally sold this lens, eventually replacing it with the AFS/VR version described below.

105mm f/2.8D AFS/VR Micro: An exceptional upgrade to the original, this lens has the newer coatings, the AFS high-speed focusing motor and instant manual-focusing option, and VR (vibration reduction) lens stabilization. It outperforms the original in every way possible. It is better at distance, and can be used as a high-speed focusing short telephoto (as long as you use the focus-range limiter so it doesn’t scan all the way to 1:1). It is better than the original at portrait ranges too, and also yields better results at wider apertures, so you can use it as a portrait lens (although it does’t beat the 85mm f/1.4D, it is certainly not at all bad). Where it really excels, of course, is at close range and extreme close range. The 105mm has always been easier than the 200mm to hand-hold. With VR, it is even better. The yield from this lens is nearly 100% in my experience, meaning that as long as the shot is possible and you hit your focus plane, you are very likely to yield a usable image every time. I still use manual focus most of the time when up close, because it is easier to place the focus plane where I want it, but the AFS makes it possible to track moving bugs or flowers moving in the breeze, and using it increases the yield. This very special lens is now my default macro lens.

[ecml]

Uprzejmie dziękuję, idę czytać :)

[boeing]

Af-s jest dużo szybszy i na pewno duuuużo cichszy.

Af-d to taka wiertarka, choć zdjęcia produkuje świetne. Pięknie szkli oczy :)