Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR Micro Nikkor AF-S

I love this lens. It is sharp and captures fine detail. It also is excellence for portraits. I normally have attached the 18-200 nikkor lens, and it is SUCH a joy to have this lens attached because the detail it captures is fine and flattering. Its a higly flattering lens to all subjects it photographs and at whatever distance you are at.

Fantastic lens. A better all-around lens than the previous model, which is a great macro lens! Yes, the VR is only good outside of about 10', but most macro shooters go manual anyway. On most Nikon cameras, this VR lens turns into a about a 160mm lens, so the VR is extremely useful. If you are looking for a 105 strictly for extreme close-up macro work, either Nikon macro will do, some folks even like the older one a little better. All-around shooting, go with the VR. This guy Rockwell says to avoid this lens based upon his extremely brief encounter with it at a camera show??!! An absolute foolish, unfounded statement to make. Not unusual with this guy.

Build quality.
Sharpness.
VR

Some think a weakness is the fact that the VR does not work inside of 10' or so. No problem for most macro shooters.

Here we have what appears to be a made-in-heaven lens from Nikon combining thier excellent 105 2.8 with 9 blades for better bokeh (out of focus rendering) and (gulp!) VR!!!

Well, let's cut to the chase. Is this lens worth the money? It depends. If you absolutely had your heart set on a Nikon 105 2.8 Micro, then this lens makes sense. The bokeh IS better than the older 7 bladed version. And it also has the VR which will be of aid when doing normal non-macro work. There's no denying that VR works great and combined with the 2.8 speed you get a nice package here for available light work.

My problem with this lens, as with the original, is that the Tamron 90 Macro 2.8 DI is still a better lens. It is sharper and continues to hold the lead in bokeh for protrait work. With the Tamron being under 450 new, people in the know can save and score.

On the other hand, the Nikon is HARDLY a bad lens by any stretch. We're talking about minute differences most of the time. The Nikon's VR is of very little aid doing macro work, but it's great when shooting anything else. On top of that you get VERY fast AFS focusing.

Once again I'd like to point out that a macro 105 or 90 requires close distances to subject for 1:1 work. If you want to shoot bug faces a longer focal range, such as a 150 or 180 may be better suited, though less useful for protrait work on a DSLR with a 1.5 crop ratio.

So depending on your applications, the Nikon 105 VR may still be worth the money. You have to consider how and where you'll be shooting. Optically I still feel the Tamron 90 is the lens to beat for this range in macros. But the gadget factor on this new Nikon makes for a very interesting product that will please a lot of shooters and gadget photogs alike. Enjoy!
Capt. RB

VR, build is excellent. very good optiics

Still optically behind the lengendary Tamron 90, which is itself update for digital now. Bokeh is still less than great.

Sigma 150, Tamron 90, Tamron 180, nikon 60 Micro, 18-200VR (listed this one because it's capable of near macro.

Unknown

I do a lot of macro photo's of flowers in low light conditions. I prefer to not use tripods when shooting. This lens has been a major blessing to my style of photography. I am able to hand hold the camera at shutter speeds of 60-80 with excellent results. The lens is just as sharp (if not sharper) than my 60mm micro Nikkor. I have been able to capture very fine detail with great clarity. This lens has been a joy to use. I cannot coment on the autofocus capabilities though, because I only use the manual focus mode. Autofocus is more of a hinderence than a help in macro work.

Sharp with great contrast and clarity. Very smooth focus with a very bright image.

Big for a 105mm lens

Nikkor 60mm micro, Nikon 70-180 Micro-Nikkor, Tamron 90mm macro, Sigma 24 and 50mm macro lenses, Sigma 180mm macro

Not used