105mm dc f2 and 135mm dc f2 images wanted

Hi Wayne. Sorry, but I do not have any photos to post. However, I recently purchased the 105mm DC and I thought I would let you know you would not be going wrong with this lens! I have owned the 105mm f2.5 and the 105mm f1.8 in the past and this lens is sharper and works great for low light, hand held shots.

thanks

Here are two pictures taken with the 105 mm dc lens, scanned from the copies (in case the quality is too lousy, I can scan the negatives again with a HP flatbed scanner)

second sample

I haven't used the 135/2 DC but the 105/2 I do have and it's a fabulously well made lens both mechanically and optically.

I found this slide taken a week or so back. The shot photo is not anything special, but it was taken with the 105DC hand held at 1/30th second.

A more interesting question would be - does anyone have pictures showing the DC feature in use at one extreme setting vs the other?

Both lenses have very good glass. The Defocus control (sometimes) works better with the lens on manual focus, but you may experiment with autofocus on and shoot away.

Here is one 'sample.'

Here is another

But how can I minimize my picture

Here are three shots taken with an F4 and 105 DC on Kodak Portra 400B&W, scanned with a Microtek 6700 flatbed.

Joe

Joe

Joe

Sorry Joe, but I don't see any effect from the DC feature in you pics. In fact they all look like there were shot stopped down with DC not used.

Carl,

>>Sorry Joe, but I don't see any effect from the DC feature in you pics. In fact they all look like there were shot stopped down with DC not used.<<

Good eye. I didn't use any DC and I did stop down a few clicks, to f/4 or maybe f/5.6.

But Wayne didn't ask for pictures shot wide open or with DC, just pictures taken with the 105, which is what I posted.

Joe

I use a 135/2 DC for a low light lens, and I'm pretty impressed with the image quality wide open. I virtually never use the DC feature.

I note that you're using a Fuji S2. When I have tried the 135/2 on a D100, I found the D100 could not adequately AF the lens in low light for basketball. Given time, it comes up with a solution, but it's half a beat behind for tracking action (misses a lot of shots). The 135 is sort of a 'massive pig' to AF. My F100 handles this lens fine for basketball. In fairness to the D100, I learned later (borrowed camera) that only the center AF point is any good. I was using one of the end points. This same point on an F100 is quite good, as is the torque of the AF motor.

If you're looking for a fast AF'ing tele for low light, I have better luck with the 85/1.8 AFD.