| Author |
 Replies: 8 / Views: 4,910 |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
Today, I did a side-by-side comparison of two Nikkor macro lenses I own: the 105mm f2.8G VR versus the 60mm f2.8 (the first AF 60mm micro-Nikkor model, built early 1990). Both were used on the Nikon D810, shot as raw files and at full resolution. The subject I used is something we all have access to: a crisp US dollar bill. With the center of the frame focused on the center of Washington's right eye, I set both lenses set to around 1:1 and shot mirror up, EFCS enabled w/remote. Zero sharpening has been done, in camera or in software; you see what each lens focused on the sensor @ 100% crop. The results below are the sharpest for each lens taken at f5.6-f11. All I did in post-processing was to optimize the tonal range. To my surprise the early AF 60mm lens is noticeably sharper, with less chromatic aberration as well. The 60mm is an excellent lens I got for a fraction of the 105mm price. The only downside of course is less working distance, which might interfere with some lighting techniques.  First, a small detail of the sharpest shots from both lenses--easiest to pixel-peep.  The larger picture--click to view @ 100% crop.  *Note: the smudge you see in the 105mm pic directly above the eye is due to a speck of dust on the rear lens.Edited by DVCollector
11/30/2014 12:54 am
|
|
|
|
CCF Sponsor
United States
702 Posts |
Fascinating! That 60 is substantially better than the 105!
Too many lens groups in the 105? Or is a 60 so close to the old standby and perfected 50 that they just had something easier to work with?
Great comparison, thanks!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
10045 Posts |
Quote:
Too many lens groups in the 105? Or is a 60 so close to the old standby I wondered if lens complexity is a factor too. My non-AF-S 60mm has 8 lens elements, the 105 VR has 14, which is up from 9 in the prior model. I think I lucked out getting the older 60mm. It's a great lens, but not one I'd recommend using in the field. It's not sealed up very well; my previous one got dust/grit in the internals from shooting a lot outdoors. Edited by DVCollector
11/30/2014 01:50 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
It is interesting....I suspect that since the advent of digital photography Lens manufacturers have got a little lazy. I suspect that is going to get worse. Some cameras now have inbuilt customisable lens compensation programmes. I have a phenomenal Minolta 135F2 Lens( extremely rare) No distortion but typical CA of the late analogue era, I have simply programmed my camera to adjust for the CA!!
Why build a lens to cope with CA, distortion of vignetting when you can programme the camera to make the necessary adjustments?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4038 Posts |
The 60mm is in the same lineage as the original 55mm. When they went to AF, they changed from 55mm to 60mm and did some optical updates, including adding elements to allow AF to work at 1:1.
Plus generally, shorter lenses can be sharper and better corrected than longer ones...
Contact me for photographic equipment or visit my home page at: http://macrocoins.com |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5825 Posts |
From what I know (I have the 60mm Nikkor macro lens) the major difference is that the 105mm gives you more room to place your lights.
And at major shows I've seen a person with a 150mm Nikkor macro.
The lens is about 2 feet from the coin being imaged.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Well, lens-to-lens production differences are known. Perhaps the 105 is a suboptimal example; I wouldn't expect the 60 to outperform it by such a clear margin. Where are you relative to DLA at f/9, and were you manually focusing?
Edit to add a note for Kanga: the farther you are from the coin, the greater the chance of extraneous outside light hitting the lens. At 150mm, I'm definitely using a hood. Of course, then you can start leveraging the natural diffusion of a lamp's illumination pattern which simplifies things.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
I know that this 60mm model is rated (slightly) higher for sharpness by labs like Dxo, but I didn't expect by this much. Not sure this matters, but the 60mm is built in Japan; the 105 was made in China. Quote:
Where are you relative to DLA at f/9, and were you manually focusing? The images shown above were at the aperture which produces the sharpest image. I also did this test to know the best possible f-stop before diffraction degrades the image. I should note--I did in-camera AF fine-tuning for each lens. I could have focused manually, but I seldom see better results. Quote:
the major difference is that the 105mm gives you more room to place your lights. Something I also see with the shorter macro lenses like the 55/60mm is that it gives you more of a sense of depth over a longer lens which tends to flatten subjects. You might notice the difference if you're shooting high relief coins like ancient Greeks. Edited by DVCollector
11/30/2014 2:30 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5825 Posts |
From Dave: Quote:
... the farther you are from the coin, the greater the chance of extraneous outside light hitting the lens. At 150mm, I'm definitely using a hood. Definitely with respect to the hood. The user in this case has about an 8"x8" curtain surrounding the whole setup, camera stand, camera, coin. And if I recall correctly the curtain extends well above the camera location. |
| |
Replies: 8 / Views: 4,910 |
|
Posted 11/30/2014 01:49 am
