[Текст на српском] Today we have a clash of old and new. You might think this might be an unequal duel, but wait until you see the conclusion…
If you have ever had a chance to listen to Nikon photographers from pre-digital era, they always had a full consensus about one portrait lens — they all loved Nikkor 105mm f/2.5… No, it was not the best ever portrait Nikkor option, but it was compact, extremely well made, reliable, optically excellent, and always highly recommended lens. Of course, it is a full manual lens, which is not a problem with the modern focus assist options on the mirrorless cameras. How does it stacks today against a modern digital era optics? We had a chance to compare it to the Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro USM, a versatile lens that is excellent as both, macro and a portrait “specialist”. Canon’s first EOS USM Macro lens (later upgraded with IS and marked L) was dubbed “speed demon”, because of unusual fast autofocus for a macro lens. At the time it was the sharpest, fastest AF macro lens with a quite moderate price. Still can be found today, and it has my warmest recommendation. And now, let’s see the…
Contenders
Today we have, in the black and yellow corner:
Nikon Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIs, made in pre-AI F mount and AI variants from 1959, and as the AI-s from 1981 until 2005.
Summary
Nikon Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AI-s
Mount
F mount, metal
Filter
52mm, built-in telescoping hood
Optics
5 elements in 4 groups
FOV
23°20' deg FF / 15°30' APS-C (160 mm equiv.)
Min. focus
1 m / 3.5 ft
Diafragm
7 blades (stops to f22 at full stops)
Weight
435 g
Length
78 mm
And in the white and red corner:
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM (non IS) EOS, EF mount, in production since 1990.
Summary
Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Mount
EF, metal
Filter
58mm
Optics
12 elements in 8 groups
FOV
24 deg FF / 15°40' Canon APS-C (160mm equiv.)
Min. focus
31 cm / 1.02 in (Macro Reproduction Ratio 1:1)
Diafragm
8 blades, rounded (stops to f32 at thirds of stop)
Weight
600 g
Length
119 mm
Construction
The first obvious difference that you can’t escape is — size. Canon’s “multipractic” is much larger, and it is not surprising at all…
Inside the Canon lens tube you have much more glass in a far more complicated optic formula and also very fast ultrasonic ring motor. Furthermore, Canon’s lens is big because it has internal focusing mechanism that prevents dust sucking inside the tube. This lens probably has metal base, but has obvious plastic elements also. Despite this, construction quality is very high with only one slight fault — a tripod collar (not included) could be designed far better. Canon corrected that at the new, IS L-version.
Nikon does not have any electronics inside, it is full metal construction, and it looks like one of those lenses that you buy only once in a lifetime. It also has very useful retractable lens hood. An exemplary design. Both lenses are a joy to use with excellent manual focus rings, which is particularly significant on a macro lens.
Pixel Peeping
This is a test of the lens sharpness. Both lenses cover FF sensor, but unfortunately, I’ve never had an FF camera, so all the results are from my trusty Fujifilm X-T20, 24Mpix APS-C sensor.
DISCLAIMER Still haven’t constructed a perfect test setup. Computer screen and equal conditions should give a proper relation between optics. The final results has a certain subjective component, so please do not expect an absolute quality estimation. Thank you.
As with a previous lens test, you can blame possible inconsistencies to a human error — I am not so reliable like I was in the previous millennium 😉
As you may imagine, all Nikon’s lenses from that era goes up or down only for a full stop on a mechanical ring. Canon has an elecronic controled f-stop to a 1/3 steps. For this occasion we will adapt a test to an older Nikkor, and give you the results for a full stop only.
All test photos were made at ISO200. We are going to start with Nikon at f2.5…
Nikkor f2.5, 1/105, Center
Canon N/A
Nikkor f2.5, 1/105, Lower Left
Canon N/A
Wide open, Nikkor is not perfect, but it is not bad at all. Slight center softness is still plenty sharp for portaits with a nice blurred background. Corners are soft with the hints of chromatic aberrations, yet not so much as you would expect from over 40 years old optic formula.
Nikkor f2.8, 1/100, Center
Canon f2.8, 1/105, Center
Nikkor f2.8, 1/100, Lower Left
Canon f2.8, 1/105, Lower Left
At 2.8 Nikkor gets marginally better both in center and in corners. Canon starts from its wide open aperture stunningly sharp in center and in corners. This high-performance macro has been one of dpreview.com’s standard studio lenses — and here we can see why.
Nikkor f4, 1/52, Center
Canon f4, 1/50, Center
Nikkor f4, 1/52, Lower Left
Canon f4, 1/52, Lower Left
At f4, center sharpness of a Nikkor is very good, and corners are visibly better. With Canon everything looks so good that it is hard to find any fault!
Nikkor f5.6, 1/26, Center
Canon f5.6, 1/25, Center
Nikkor f5.6, 1/26, Lower Left
Canon f5.6, 1/25, Lower Left
At f/5.6, Nikkor is almost as good in center as Canon, and it is coming very close in the corners.
Nikkor f8, 1/13, Center
Canon f8, 1/10, Center
Nikkor f8, 1/13, Lower Left
Canon f8, 1/10, Lower Left
Nikkor f11, 1/6, Center
Canon f11, 1/6, Center
Nikkor f11, 1/6, Lower Left
Canon f11, 1/6, Lower Left
At f/8 and f/11 both lenses show fantastic sharpness across the frame.
Nikkor f16, 1/3, Center
Canon f16, 1/2, Center
Nikkor f16, 1/3, Lower Left
Canon f16, 1/2, Lower Left
At f/16 first signs of diffraction are visible on the Nikkor, but Canon still holds surprisingly well — this is extremely important with macro lenses which must be stopped down for a deeper DOF in the macro region photos.
Nikkor f22, 1s, Center
Canon f22, 1s, Center
Nikkor f22, 1s, Lower Left
Canon f22, 1s, Lower Left
At f/22 diffraction are showing in Canon’s frame and Nikkor is now visibly softer. Which is not unexpected, the physics must do its own at these apertures.
Overall, Canon is a fantastic lens, but the old Nikkor is not a slouch either! You can’t feel anything but respect for a design that old, and so good even today. Let’s see them in the field.
Real world example
Our youngest favorite model, Paul, wanted a portrait in front of his Christmas tree. Which is a perfect opportunity to check a bokeh quality in the blurred highlights. Here is Nikkor at f/2.5 first:
Fujifilm X-T20, Nikon, f2.5, 1/60, ISO1600
And here is a Canon’s version of ‘Home alone’, also wide open:
Fujifilm X-T20, Canon, f2.8, 1/60, ISO640
As already seen with Nikon’s Nikkor 35mm f/2 test, and consistent with the Nikkors of the time, Nikkor 105mm has a slight warm note, pushing the skin tones towards yellowish. Canon has very nice neutral rendition with more pleasing skin tone, which is a trademark of Canon lenses and cameras alike. Much older Nikkor also is showing bit of chromatic aberration (visible at “Rock Star” sign). Don’t panic. There are many new lenses with this problem pronounced much worse. If you find it distracting, have in mind that modern photo editing software can remove it with ease.
Both lenses can be proud with its bokeh quality. While bokeh bulbs are somewhat larger with Nikkor, it still has some slight onion rings inside them, Not visible in Canon photo. On the bright side, it is hard to believe that it could be a dealbreaker even with the most demanding photographers. Another nice feat for the 7-bladed aperture of an old lens:
Conclusion
In the showdown of these two lenses, Canon is a clear winner, no doubt. And it is a steal with the current price at around $600. Yet, if you are portrait photographer on a budget, and you find affordable (I really cannot say ‘cheap’) and highly respectable second hand Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AI-s, do not hesitate. You won’t regret. You will have a reliable optics that has withstood the test of time, and you won’t feel it heavy in your bag. On a mirrorless camera manual focus will not be much of a problem, and the joy of use is guaranteed…
