7 out of 10 points and recommendedNice Price, Nice Bokehtough to focus at F1.4 manual focus on APS-C
I would not buy if shooting APS-C for stills, especially if subject is in motion.reviewed June 23rd, 2011
Would buy for film, or video, or perhaps FX.
See review and sample photos: http://glamourphotography.co/?p=2791
8 out of 10 points and recommendedInexpensive, Good Macro CapabilityNot really a portrait lens, not enough bokeh
This is a nice lens for shooting macro/micro up to 1:1 on a Nikon DX body. Can be used on FX, with central portion of sensor active.reviewed August 15th, 2011
VR is a bit of a waste, as in close up work, there is more in and out, as opposed to side to side motion, which VR does not help with.
The lens is a bit slow for good portrait bokeh.
So is pretty strictly reasonably priced macro lens.
To see some sample images taken by the 85mm 3.5 and more details, check out http://glamourphotography.co/?p=3003
10 out of 10 points and recommendedWow, the VR and image quality are amazing!Big, Pricey
Love the pictures it takes, see samples at: http://glamourphotography.co/?p=2466reviewed August 15th, 2011
I can take shots at 1/13 sec at 200mm on a D7000 hand held with the VR, wow.
Or can reach out to a surfer on a board.
The construction is well done, just can't believe all the dust inside... I mean really, can't they assemble it in a clean room? Even if it doesn't effect picture quality... It just looks wrong...
All in all, my favorite lens in the bag.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedVery Sharp, Great Close Focusing, Avail for a song usedFocuses Slowly, No VR
The 2.8D Micro 105 is an outrageously excellent lens.reviewed September 10th, 2011
To see what this lens does from F3-F32 (it is sharpest far focusing at F8) check here:
To see the sharpness of irises in a head shot, look here:
To see a macro shot of a sapphire ring, look here:
I favor the 2.8D micro for macro work and also love it for portraiture when extreme sharpness is desired.
My finding is, VR is not necessary or useful in macro or flash studio photography.
Speed of focusing is also not usually an issue, in these specific realms.
Not first choice for use in fast moving sports.
While AF focusing works pretty well for most relatively static applications, this baby goes through an extreme range of focus distances (close to far).
All micros generally take more time to focus than lenses limited to strictly long focusing.
So usually, you can expect non close focusing lenses to focus much faster than micros, due in fact to their more narrow overall focusing ranges.
Lens is often available used for stupid cheap money...
If you shoot close and love sharp, you too may love owning this lens.
8 out of 10 points and recommendedBest DX Lens Currently, Widest Pro Wide Angle Zoom Range, Pro Quality, FastHeavy, Big, NO VR
This is a great lens and the Best DX lens Made by Nikon today (10-5-11).reviewed October 6th, 2011
It is also the widest range zoom of any wide angle pro glass Nikon makes, 17-55mm. This covers from wide to medium telephoto in a fast f2.8 lens.
Missing VR is a definite miss... VR would be nice for night time and dark interior shots, especially for weddings and such at 55mm.
Still, the 17-35mm 2.8 has quite a bit less zoom range, and is about same price. And, the 18-55 VR DX is not really able to take shots in any lower light, as it is 5.6 at 55mm and the VR is less needed at the widest zoom ranges... But, the 17-55 2.8 DX is like 10x the price of the 18-55 VR DX...
I would buy a VR version of this lens for sure.
For sample glamour images taken with the lens and use comparison vs other Nikon choices see: http://glamourphotography.co/?p=4179
9 out of 10 points and recommendedPrice, Size, Sharpness62mm Filter Size, No Bayonet Shade
This lens takes an impressive image for not much $.reviewed November 23rd, 2011
Is only 1/2 stop slower than the 1.4D for less than 1/2 the bux.
For my glamour portraiture usage, I have some sample images by this lens and a comparison to several of its peers avail in a more detailed review @ http://glamourphotography.co/?p=4841
For the money, if you need a sharp 85mm AF, it's hard to beat.
6 out of 10 points and not recommendedGreat 11x Zoom Range, VR f3.5 at 18mm, one lens does it all... with a priceZoom Creep on some samples, soft wide open, f5.6 at 200mm
I like the results I have gotten with this lens in Pinup and Glamour, see samples here: http://glamourphotography.co/?p=6189reviewed February 8th, 2012
When used stopped down, is plenty sharp enough for many uses.
This can be one lens that will do 90% of the carrying for 90% of photographers...
In my case, with my copy, it had lens creep... the lens would creep out to its full extension under its own weight while strapped to my neck... banging into things while being carried.
I exchanged my VR1 for the VR2. If it wasn't for the lens creep, I would have kept it... The lenses are identical except for this feature, and I hear, not all copies creep.
Only reason not to have the 18-200 VR2? You are in the 10% who shoot at a pro level and spend more bux on very fast pro glass...
9 out of 10 points and recommendedSize, Price, Sharpness, SpeedFilter Size, Could focus faster...
Love the lens... Great sharpness and contrast...reviewed April 4th, 2012
See sample Hollywood style portrait here:
1/2 the price of the 1.4G, 25% more than the 1.8D.
Not the tank the 1.4D is, but half the price, sharper. Lighter. Focus is about same speed, but a touch more accurate, important at wide apertures. A keeper.
Takes 67mm filters... odd ball size... so not same as the pro 77mm standard size.
Still, hard not to love it.
7 out of 10 points and recommendedInexpensive Pro Quality Zoom, Strong Exterior BuildNo VR, Manual Focus may require small easy repair
The barrel of this lens is like a tank, overall. What I say below does not impact my overall confidence in the build quality of this lens.reviewed August 28th, 2012
The 80-200 is smaller and lighter and much less $ than the 70-200 VR2.
The images it takes are almost as good at the 70-200, if you shoot in ways that can't use VR... and the 80-200 lacks VR. Me, I like VR...
While built strong with lots of metal, my copy, like several copies out there, had a worn plastic pin under the focus band, which caused manual focusing issues. Easily repaired thanks to an internet tip, but a design defect non the less. My repair used tape, and a small piece of wood to keep the retaining clip down and engaged properly instead of epoxy - which I found more dodgy to apply and less reversible. It works good as new with my quick repair.
If you don't need VR, it's hard to make a case against buying this lens for this focal range.
If you need VR, buy something else.
To see more details check a side by side practical feature comparison: http://glamourphotography.co/?p=6798
8 out of 10 points and recommendedGreat Bokeh, Very Sharp, 77mm Pro FiltersLarge Green Ghost images from highlights wide open, sometimes
An beauty glamour headshot image taken with this lens @ f9.0 in studio with a Nikon D90 along with some brief details are avail for view here: http://glamourphotography.co/?p=6588reviewed April 16th, 2012
Some may say f9.0 is not a fair test of a fast portrait lens.... I say, on a D90 crop sensor camera, a 50mm is an excellent portrait lens, and in studio, using studio lights, most shots are taken at f5.6 to f9.0.
If you like to see the image larger, view here: http://www.yucelphoto.com/Glamour-Beauty-Boudoir/Beauty/13795570_wqDTM8#!i=1794846338&k=RxczQ4v&lb=1&s=X3
This is not a bokeh shot... It's a shot showing use in beauty portraiture stopped down to where the lens is sharpest.
4 out of 10 points and not recommended12mm is very wideNot sharp enought in corners
I've tried this lens and the Tokina 11-16 and the Sigma 8-12mm DX lens on Nikon. On a D800 FX body, I prefer the 8-12mm Sigma image quality to the 12-24.reviewed January 23rd, 2013
That is, if I need image sharpness in corners, I think I get better output shooting the D800 in DX mode w a 8-16 than with an FX 12-24.
See full images here: http://glamourphotography.co/?p=6879
8 out of 10 points and recommendedWide, so very wide. Price is so very reasonable, Sharp, pretty sharpNot FX ... But good enough in DX even on FX
I love the Tokina 11-16mm... Recently got a D800...reviewed January 23rd, 2013
So was investigating options. Tried the 12-24mm Sigma version II...
I prefer the corner sharpness and image usability in the 8-16 shoot DX on the D800 over shooting the 12-24 FX on the D800... The 12-24 is going back to Adorama... TY Adorama for the great service.
See images and pixel peeks of the corners at: