How does the Nikon 200mm f.2 perform at minimum focusing distance?

[henrikfoto]

I am using the Micro Nikkor 200 f4 for stacking together with a Camranger.
It works great, but I have started to wonder if the Nikon 200 f.2 could be even sharper.
I can not find any information about how this lens performs close up.
Have anyone here tried it close?

Also, how is the optical difference between the generations of this lens if I will not use the VR?

(Normally I would just buy the lens and test for myself, but this is a very expensive lens..)

[BernardLanguillier]

I believe that btwn the latest (II) and the VR I, the difference is nanocoating and a newer VR.

Was there a non VR version of the AF lens?

Cheers,
Bernard

[bcooter]

I don't know which version I have of this lens, (it's not in front of me), but I think the latest version.

I can't really answer your question, but it's the prettiest nikon lens I've ever used.





IMO

BC

[henrikfoto]

Thanks to both of you. Maybe it's correct that the pre-vr versions of this lens was only mf.

Does the Nano-coating have any importance for studio-work?

Henrik

[Rory]

The nano-coating improves micro contrast.  For macro photography, with the lens opened up a couple of stops, I doubt you will see much difference from the micro 200.  Something else you should be aware of is the 200VR is a bear to carry.  With the lens hood reversed the lens is fat and heavy and difficult to fit into most camera bags/packs.  The 300VR is actually easier to carry and pack IMO.

Having said that the 200VR is one sweet lens.

[henrikfoto]

The nano-coating improves micro contrast.  For macro photography, with the lens opened up a couple of stops, I doubt you will see much difference from the micro 200.  Something else you should be aware of is the 200VR is a bear to carry.  With the lens hood reversed the lens is fat and heavy and difficult to fit into most camera bags/packs.  The 300VR is actually easier to carry and pack IMO.

Having said that the 200VR is one sweet lens.

Ok, maybe there is another lens that is better for this use.
Most of the best macro-lenses are manual and I like to use the automated steps with the camranger.

Is there any really really good macrolenses for Nikon that is af?
(or even af and Apo?)
The Micro-Nikkor 200 f.4 is good, but I allways wonder what the best is..😉

[Rory]

Well, the 105VR is pretty darn good... here is a stack using it:



I have used all the lenses we have discussed and the 105 is really good.

[NashvilleMike]

I have the 200/2G AFS and love it, but an important disclaimer is that I do not shoot macro. My uses for the lens include portraiture, head shots, stage/theater, and landscape. It is without question one of the best lenses I own, perhaps the finest of the 50+ Nikkor lenses I've used, and would belong to the group of the finest lenses available for a DSLR. To me, it represents a marriage between the art of lens design and the science of lens design.

From what I've read, the Nikon 200/2G AFS (either VR version) was seemingly designed with two slightly different optimizations, dependent on distance. In the closer ranges, it's extremely sharp in the central zone with a touch of deliberately undercorrected SA to enhance bokeh and possibly contribute to the 3D subject isolation the lens is justifiably known for, at the very slight expense of a touch of corner sharpness drop off at F/2, while at the longer distance ranges, it's SA correction is spot on, and is sharp corner to corner. So while the lens is quite excellent, I'm not sure it's imaging characteristics would be the best suited towards macro use if corner performance is an important goal. Given it's cost, I think one might consider renting if possible - my gut feeling is that this lens was not designed to be a macro lens and thus your intended usage would fall outside of its design parameters, but again, I don't shoot macro so I am just postulating based upon what I know about its design.

-m

Reference: Marco Cavina's analysis of the optical design of the lens, which can be found here (translation required) http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Nikkor_200mm_f2_AFS-VR/00_pag.htm

[RobSaecker]

Is there any really really good macrolenses for Nikon that is af?
(or even af and Apo?)

Sigma makes a 150 and a 180, both AF APO Macro. Michael Reichmann bought a 150 to go with his D800, and with that as a recommendation, I bought one as well, though mine is the older non-OS version. I haven’t been disappointed. Lensrentals has the 180, though not the 150, if you want to try before buying.

You might also want to read what Michael Erlewine has to say about the lenses he uses for stacking in this thread, especially his comment about the Nikkor 200 here.

[henrikfoto]

Thank you all a lot!

I will look closer at the Sigma 180 apo. Looks like a good lens.
I have been looking for some MTF-curves. Do Sigma show them somewhere?

[Larry Heath]

If you are really all that enamored of the idea of using the 200mm f2 in the way you indicate, I am told renting lenses of this type are relatively easy and inexpensive now days. So rent it and try it. I don’t know all the particulars but these guys apparently rent it for $177 for four days. Seems you should be able to figure things out in four days.

https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/nikon/lenses/telephoto

Frankly given the little looking I did at specs available from Nikon on these two lenses, I don’t think it would be worth it to me, to do even this much, unless there was some really significant payoff monetary or otherwise to be had for the effort.


Later Larry

[RobSaecker]

I have been looking for some MTF-curves. Do Sigma show them somewhere?

Yes, here, click on the tech specs tab underneath the picture of the lens.

[henrikfoto]

Yes, here, click on the tech specs tab underneath the picture of the lens.

Thank you!

[RobSaecker]

Thank you!

You’re welcome. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on that lens, if you do end up with one.