The Nikon lens line up includes two specialized portrait lenses. These are the 135mm f/2 and 105mm f/2. They both include what Nikon refers to as “defocus control.” I discuss this in greater detail here but in simple terms the defocus control allows the photographer to give preference to either the foreground or background out-of-focus areas. The effect is extremely subtle but from my experience certainly gives these lenses the edge when it comes to pleasing bokeh. In technical speak, backgrounds just melt into a marshmallow dream wrapped in pillows and bunnies. These lenses are two of my favorites. This post includes a brief overview, a discussion of some of the complaints, some comparison images, and finally a list of other sites that include content related to these lenses.
More… →

The Nikon 135mm f/2 and 105mm f/2 lenses include what Nikon refers to as “defocus control.” This “control” is a separate ring on the lens with settings that look like aperture numbers (F5.6, F2, R2.8, etc.). I’m not qualified to discuss the technical aspects of what this changes optically but it involves controlling the amount of spherical aberration in portions of the image. In simple terms it allows the photographer to change the character of the out-of-focus areas (foreground or background). More… →

I recently made a few comparisons (see here and here) of the Nikkor 135mm f/2 DC lens and the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II at the request of another 135 owner who was considering switching to the 70-200. There probably aren’t many people who are having a problem choosing between a 105mm lens and the 70-200mm monster but since I also own the 105 f/2 I decided to do a quick comparison with it for interest sake. As is the case with the 135mm f/2, I’ve read comments by several users who claim that the 105mm f/2 is soft below f/4. Granted, there are many confirmed reports of front/back focus issues with the DC lenses but I think this test alone shows that the lens is anything but soft. These images were again taken on a tripod at the apertures indicated and at ISO 200. The 70-200mm was zoomed to 105mm. The shutter speed varied to achieve correct exposure. More… →

This is part two of my comparison of the Nikkor 135mm f/2 DC lens and the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II. See part one here for some background.

All the photos were taken with a D700 on a tripod at the apertures indicated and ISO 200. The 70-200mm was zoomed to 135mm (confirmed in Lightroom). The shutter speed varied to get correct exposure. The first shot in the series was taken with the 135mm at f/16 to show the background detail as much as possible. The next two shots were taken at f/2.8 on each lens and the final shot is taken at f/2 on the 135 (what you would miss by owning only the 70-200). Take a look and I’ll give you my opinion below. Captions are below each image. More… →

I recently acquired the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II “super lens.”  After shooting mostly with prime lenses over the past couple years I feel a sense of power holding it in my hand.  It almost screams, “I can shoot anything!”  I also own the Nikon 135mm f/2 DC lens which is a very specialized portrait lens with some unique capabilities (see below).  I love it for different reasons mostly related to its unique rendering of subjects and it’s dreamy qualities.  Because it overlaps the focal length range of the 70-200 many people make the decision to own one or the other.  With the advent of these powerful zooms the primes in that range have been neglected and forgotten by many.  I was recently asked by another 135 owner whether I felt he should sell his 135mm f/2 and 180mm f/2.8 and replace them with the 70-200. The size, weight, and cost differences are obvious.  The 70-200 is relatively heavy, very expensive, awkward to carry, and draws stares but otherwise is highly regarded as a piece of glass that does everything well.  Autofocus is very fast, the vibration reduction is fantastic and can give you sharp shots at very slow shutter speeds, and the overall consensus is that it is very sharp wide open.  The 135 on the other hand is light and convenient to carry by comparison and costs about $1000 less.  The opinions on this lens however vary greatly. It is one of the oldest lenses in the Nikon line up and was designed during the film days. Due to its unique design (which includes the defocus control ability) it can have issues on modern DSLR’s. Many reviewers claim that it is one of Nikon’s sharpest lenses while others are extremely frustrated by it (mostly due to focus issues) and claim that it is soft below f/4. I have certainly experienced frustration with mine in the past (which may be the subject of a future post) but I am currently very happy with it and love the results I get from it. It can produce beautiful, dreamy images that few other lenses can match. However, to help fully answer the original question I decided to setup a couple tests to show the optical differences between the two and to see what one might be losing by having only one or the other. My main goal was to compare sharpness (to see whether the “soft” label applied to the 135 was justified) and also the character of out-of-focus backgrounds. This post is part one. See part two here which is a bit more interesting in my opinion. More… →