Nikon AF DC-NIKKOR 105mm f/2D lens listed as discontinued

Nikon-105mm-f2-AF-DC-lens
The Nikon AF DC-NIKKOR 105mm f/2D lens is listed as "Discontinued by manufacturer" at Amazon.com:

Nikon-AF-DC-NIKKOR-105mm-f2D-lens-listed-as-discontinued
The lens is still not listed as discontinued on the official Nikon website and is still available in stock in all major US retailers (B&H, Adorama). Nikon USA is "Temporarily out of inventory".

Update: Nikon UK confirmed that the AF DC-NIKKOR 105mm f/2D lens is no longer in production (thanks Harv):

Nikon AF DC-NIKKOR 105mm f:2D lens listed as discontinued

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Nyarlathotep

    Interesting. Definitely it would be sad if true. The 105DC is a special lens. But it wouldn’t surprise me if Nikon sees the 105 f/1.4 as its direct replacement. It certainly was never a big volume lens, so they may just sell until existing stock is depleted.

  • I did not say that it’s out of stock at Amazon, they listed the lens as “Discontinued by manufacturer”.

    • SGG

      Sorry, I opened it from my phone and there is no such message. May be they didn’t update the mobile version, ldk…

    • PhotoJoe55

      It doesn’t say Discontinued on Amazon US, where are you looking? Anyhow, Amazon doesn’t make them, Nikon does!

      • See the screenshot or scroll down on the page I provided.

      • Michael Hatzel

        It does say discontinued by mfgr clearly on the Amazon page. Did you read the post or just skim and start shouting?

        • PhotoJoe55

          The AF DC NIKKOR 105mm f2D is still not listed as discontinued at Nikon’s web site, and it’s still current at B&H as well. Also, there was no Press release by Nikon. … Btw, I have one of each DC lens to sell, if anyone is looking.

  • doge

    Nikon USA website still shows it in their normal list. But it is listed as “temporarily out of inventory.”

  • Mr McLaughlan

    Now that the 105DC has been discontinued surely the 135DC will be next.

    • An American in Canada

      “But I just bought the 105!” he said, whiningly.

    • zorwick

      I damn hope so. I bought mine not to long ago, but I will be happy to replace once. Its still decent and sexy lens 🙂

  • a.almeida

    The 105 f/1.4 is the new beast!

    • TwoStrayCats

      This could herald a new measure of exclusiveness: “How much does YOUR lens weigh per mm of focal length?”

    • For around twice the price as the DC.

    • An American in Canada

      Is it officially bigger and heavier than the 28-70 2.8D? If so, that makes my lens feel sad and emasculated…

    • m1hoff

      Made in China, out of plastic, at twice the cost.
      Oh yes, and find one decent image from the new lens.

      • NicP

        Is the new lens (105 1.4) made in China?

        • DG

          yep. 2k for made in China. Sad. Canon dropped a wonderful 35 1.4 mk2 for less made in Japan. Old Nikon glass was awesome. Nikon rumored to also be discontinuing the 135, the Nikon 60 2.8 D macro another great lens as well.

          • TylerChappell

            It literally makes no difference that it’s made in China or Japan. Get over your pathetic little inferiority complex.
            The micro 105 VR was made in both Japan and China, and yet all the Japan ones were in no way magically better.

            • DG

              It’s not a inferiority complex it’s I want high quality build and money going towards people under better conditions. Made In Japan Fender guitars are also quite amazing even at times compared to the Made In USA guitars unless it’s hand made from highest quality of wood just like a high quality Violin from Germany or Italy compared to cheap plastic knock offs from China with lower quality wood. I don’t want my hard working money going to things that will fail faster and come from cheaper customer service. My Made In USA tools have lasted ages while my friends Home Depot Made In China have continued to break down. Don’t ever come at me with an inferiority complex attack again. Read about how China has lower standards when it comes to the foods as well and even the natural foods they label organic that aren’t always.

            • TylerChappell

              Oh you’re right, I guess I neglected to realize that your complex is probably just disturbing unmerited patriotism instead. Go vote for Trump.

            • DG

              Sorry I won’t be voting for Trump at all. I appreciate you again knowing me oh so well with your internet knowledge of me and how much I work for the money I make so at least I feel good about putting it to quality. My feelings of putting my hard earned money towards things that are built to last has nothing to do with where I come from or voting. Don;t be another internet smart a$$ who pulls this whole trump card crap. I could care less about him or his agenda and bullying ways. You know what most of my electronics are Made in China but I prefer my musical equipment all from Japan and all analog from the 1970’s due to build quality and how much care they took into making it. When it comes to cameras as well yes Made In Japan does matter to me. My favorite digital camera is a Ricoh GR and guess what it’s from China and guess what It already has most of the paint chipped off and dust inside whereas my Japanese Fuji or Canon doesn’t but it’s still my favorite camera. If I’m going to drop over a few grand (which I can’t afford or will) on something that crazy I’d like it to come from there. Nothing to do with my Trump side. I did enough and was around enough for my service and time to see how politics and politicians truly are to get suckered into that BS.

        • m1hoff

          Yep. $2k for Chinese made lens that has many molded plastic elements not glass.

  • Pk Bullock

    I thought it was discontinued a year or more ago.

  • Art

    This is one of my favorite lenses. I don’t use it as often as I might but when I do, I am always super happy with the results. It creates truly beautiful results when it is used. It is sad to see it go though I’ll always take comfort that I’ve already got mine. 😉 It would be sad if Nikon doesn’t roll out a new specialty lens to replace it with.

    • a.almeida

      Isn´t the new 105 f1.4 a specialty lens up to the task of subtituting the 105 DC? probably with high merits in resoluton, bokeh and so on. The only drawback being the cost diference.

      • Art

        Not really. The new 105 f1.4 doesn’t have a defocus control like the 105 DC. If you aren’t familiar, the 105 DC has an additional ring like your aperture ring that is used to control bokeh which creates some really beautiful results when used properly.

        • TwoStrayCats

          Although that defocus ring does the same thing as you moving the focus from front to back without the ring. Don’t get me wrong – I love that lens!

          • Art

            I’m not sure that’s correct. As I understand it, the defocus control ring adjusts the lens elements that are responsible for chromatic aberration. I’m not sure this can be duplicated by simply moving back and forth.

            • TwoStrayCats

              Well, I learned something new! I thought that ring just moved the focus point within the acceptable field!!

            • br0xibear
            • silmasan

              *spherical aberration.

        • MyrddinWilt

          There is a choice in lens design between soft Bokeh in front of or behind the focus area. You can’t have both though. Most lenses are designed to put the soft bokeh behind the focus point. But there are really rare occasions where people like it in front. Once the DC lenses are gone it may be really difficult to find a lens that does.

          Note that there isn’t a DC f/1.4, it was an f/2. So you are gaining a stop. Which means the front element is huge and that gives you shallower focus and smother bokeh in the soft area.

          So all in all the new lens is probably better. If not, buy one second hand.

          • El Aura

            Here is another illustration of what the DC feature does: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58097026
            (It is for the 135 mm f/2 DC, but the principle is the same and the two lenses have a very similar behaviour.)

          • silmasan

            Soft bokeh both in front and behind focus plane? Double apodization would certainly help with that!
            This is my favorite (visual) reference regarding this subject:
            jtra [dot] cz/stuff/essays/bokeh/

  • brian valente

    this is a super underrated lens. very sharp and great for portraits. It’s too bad it’s overshadowed by the 135mm

    • TwoStrayCats

      Agreed. I chose the 105 at the time because I thought the focal length was more applicable in way more situations.

      • Art

        That’s why I selected it too. I could see way too many cases where a 135 would be too long such as taking portraits inside (say in a factory setting) and there isn’t the space to move around.

  • Aldo
    • TwoStrayCats

      How did the Russians get those trees to whip around that model in a circle?

      • Aldo

        It’s hypnotizing

    • Not the same thing. This is petzwal effect. 105 DC’s is normal but creamy bokeh.

      • Aldo

        I was mocking it a little… dont you think it looks a little like that? To me the DC has a sandy bokeh not smooth at all… like when you add too much sharpness to a photo and the bokeh starts to look grainy… thats how I think the DC looks. Maybe just me idk.

        • silmasan

          Err… not really. You have to use the DC correctly for your intended purpose. If you intend for the image to be “creamy” in the background, the foreground would be less smooth. And vice versa.

          • Aldo

            To me the samples I’ve seen look less ‘creamy’ on the background than even the 50mm 1.8g…. but I don’t own the lens so I guess I should defer to your expertise. It may also be a matter of taste? idk.

            • silmasan

              “Expertise” lol I wish 🙂 Which/what kind of samples though? The 50 1.8G doesn’t even come close unless it’s severe blur (because of close object + distant background).

            • Aldo

              The samples I’ve googled and seen floating around. I saw Matt Granger’s review of either the 135mm or the 105… and his samples also display that grainy sandy look to me.

            • silmasan

              Go image search “Benjamin Kanarek 135 DC” instead. These ones show it better IMO. The rendering is virtually similar to the 105, just the angle/DoF is slightly different.

              …And actually I still don’t get what you mean by “grainy sandy”. You sure that’s not high ISO-related? 😀

        • Oh. I thought you meant it. But really the few times I have used the 135 DC, I just loved its rendering. And everybody says that 105 renders exactly the same. But like you said, that may be just me.

  • a.almeida

    Will a 135 f2 have shallower depth of field than a 105 f1.4?

    • TwoStrayCats

      They’re almost identical at the same given distance. The 135 takes it simply because of focal length. I plugged data into the Cambridge DOF Calculator for 10′. The slice for the 105 1.4 was .24′ – the same for the 135 f/2.0 was .2 even.

      • Eric Calabros

        For having same diagonal field of view of 105 at 4m distance, you have to stand at 5.14m with 135 lens. at 5.14 the dof is 17cm, while its 12cm at 4m for 105. so with keeping identical field of view, 105 f/1.4 would have shallower dof.

        • TwoStrayCats

          I just plugged the data into the calculator, Eric. Same camera, same sensor, the two different lenses. Distance of 10′. Yes, the field of view is going to be different.

        • a.almeida

          Got it!

          • NicP

            You get very little difference in final image with the 135mm having more compression of the elements in your frame

    • Eric Calabros

      At 4m distance to subject, Dof of 105 is 12cm, and for 135 its 10cm. of course at same distance, angle of view will be slightly different.

  • TwoStrayCats

    I suddenly feel… old. I love that lens.

  • bobd111

    it’ll be interesting to see if the price of this specialty lens (DC) goes up (because of scarcity) or down (seen as obsolete).

    • NursultanTulyakbay

      It won’t be obsolete until there are no longer bodies that it can mount to. The price will be determined by the demand. If nobody wants it – same or down. If people want it – up.

      • bobd111

        I was thinking more along the lines of the Nikon 28 1.4. When it was in production thru 2006, it retailed at around 1700. Today, used, it’s 3500. Sure, it’s supply and demand — with demand driven up beyond rationality by its mythical reputation. I can only hope DC becomes the same thing.

  • Photographer100

    ALSO the 60mm 2.8 D AF nikkor
    also the 180mm 2.8 D AF nikkor

    same “boat” (disaster)

    • An American in Canada

      The 60mm 2.8D is such a stellar lens for so many purposes. I feel like I should buy an extra new one just to have on reserve, I use mine a lot.

      I have longed to try that 180 as I hear it is really nice. I have always wanted to pick one up, but I can’t justify it with the 80-200 2.8D on hand. I hope that is a lens that can be found extra cheap in the coming years vs. that 200 f4 micro…

  • saywhatuwill

    You hear that? It’s the sound of Nikon removing the competition (it’s own) so it could sell you a more expensive lens.

  • Scott

    I have its grandad from the 70’s, the 105 f4. Tank-like quality.

  • Sadly, a lot of photographers have no idea what this lens is all about. I hope that this is a case of Nikon updating this gem rather than just getting rid of it.

    • Nikos Skartsilas

      Fully agree. Legendary optics.

      • TheInconvenientRuth

        IIRC the 105DC has always been a tad sharper than the 135DC ?

        • taildraggin

          other way round

          • silmasan

            Not really, I guess it depends on who you ask and how their particular sample performs. I also remember reading about the 135 DC having more QC/sample variation than the 105 on photo_net or somewhere else. Again, YMMV.

            • taildraggin

              I get 3-4 of each and keep the best (thanks, Nikon). Web reviews like #s or mtfs, but that isn’t the full reality.

        • Nikos Skartsilas
          • Andy Aungthwin

            There is no way that that test is definitive.

            For example, one lens maybe better at the distance being tested (which is practically useless for real world photography). At “portrait” length is what counts.

            Also, you have no idea how the lenses are being AF fine tuned. The 105mm maybe set at +5 but the optimal setting could be -1. Who knows?

            It’s crazy that some people will make conclusions based on ONE basic test.

            I could show you the link to Bjorn Rorslett, who is very well respected, who says that the 105mm DC is sharper but it certainly doesn’t make it so, right?

            • Nikos Skartsilas

              We just have one document which shows that in same distances and a particular f range the one lens seems sharper than the other. It happens to I own the first one (105) and only tried the 135. And believe me, who cares about sharpness when has to deal with these lenses. For me the major characteristic is this unique detail rendering when the image seems (without being) soft the same time. In that case sharpness is out of my desires when I hold this lens mostly capturing portraits with emphasis to the out of focus appearance. Conclusions are never definite when you love trying and trying and optimizing lens’ behaviors. I will see the tests you mentioned (thanks btw) and search for comments other than sharpness.

  • Out with the 1.41 lb lens, in with the 2.17 lb lens. I do not like this “Otus” trend of massiveness and expensiveness.

    Nikon, don’t neglect your lineup of amazing, decently affordable and delightfully lightweight f/1.8 and f/2 primes!

    (Who knows, maybe there is still a 135mm f/2 yet to come.) …Oh, and I could go for a 14mm f/2 as well. 😀

  • Appears to have been a typo by one of numerous vendors. You should correct the misleading headline. Clickbait is one thing, inaccurate clickbait is another.

    • What do you mean by a vendor? Amazon controls the description of their listing, vendors cannot just change it unless it is information from Nikon directly.

      • Amazon is a vendor. They made a typo.

        If Nikon had it listed at discontinued then your headline might be appropriate. In this instance a better headline would be “Is … discontinued?” or “Amazon lists … as discontinued.”

        Clickbait headlines hurt your credibility.

        • silmasan

          Referring to the development above, I guess I would expect an apology coming from you, if you’re being fair. 🙂

          • Nope. Based on the information then available the headline was inaccurate.

            It would have been appropriate to say that ‘Amazon lists … as discontinued” and note that the writer is checking with Nikon to verify this. Then once verified the headline can be changed to “105 discontinued” or some such.

            • silmasan

              I would assume that it was enough evidence for him to make the inference, since this is hardly the first of such case. I guess you might have had a case, but it could be delivered more gracefully, or am I just being too sensitive. ^_^

      • Hi admin, is this being flagged as too rude?

    • The fact that Amazon has listed this lens as “discontinued” has been reported all over the web. Are they all at fault for reporting this?

      • It depends on how it’s reported and how quickly they correct it once Amazon updated their site. It’s not the reporting of it but that it was done in a way (sin of omission) to imply that it was Nikon who did it.

        • Yes, usually Nikon provides this info to Amazon and I do not understand what is so suspicious about it – Nikon announces a new 105mm lens and discontinues the old model.

          • I just asked Nikon UK, it is out of production

            • Yes, thank you – like I said, the info on Amazon is/was correct.

          • Nothing suspicious about it. My only issue is your inaccurate clickbait headline. I expect more from you.

            • You still don’t get it. Amazon did not change anything. My title is 100% accurate of what I am trying to say. Nikon UK confirmed that this lens is no longer in production. Any questions?

            • FountainHead

              Don’t feed the troll…

            • silmasan

              I wonder whether you can give a proof to back up your line “since Amazon changed it”.

              In any case, at this moment I’m seeing the same thing in the referenced page’s Product Information table: “Discontinued by manufacturer | Yes”.

            • Yes, Amazon did not change anything, at that point I think he is just trolling and I need to ban him and delete all his comments.

            • That was inaccurate on my part. When I logged in to Amazon (UK) it did not show it as discontinued.

            • Who told you to login to Amazon UK? The link I provided was for Amazon US and the title describes exactly what I am trying to say in the post. So at that point I assume that your confusion came from logging into the wrong site.

            • There was no confusion. Based on the information you had at the time you wrote and posted the headline all you knew was that it was noted as discontinued on Amazon’s website. You correctly noted in your post that it was not listed as discontinued on other websites including Nikon’s own.

              As I mentioned above a more accurate headline would have been ‘Amazon lists… as discontinued”. Within the news industry we call this the sin of omission — technically correct based on current known information but written in a way to imply something different to the average reader… EG, that Nikon are listing it as discontinued or that numerous vendors are doing so.

              Anyway, not that big of a deal in the scheme of things. You overall have a good website. This one headline was a bit below standard.

            • I usually try to keep the headlines as short as possible – that’s the only reason I did not add Amazon. Thanks for being a reader!

            • Oh my God you have a lot of patience! I would have lost mine about 3 replies ago.

            • I think he really misunderstood my post

            • silmasan

              There’s a bit of a problem with Nikon’s own official “discontinued” definition though. Check AF 85 1.4D for example, which is exactly in the same situation as 105 DC now. It’s still not on Nikon’s own discontinued/archive list (the AF 85 f/1.8D however already is listed there). Even the 58 f/1.2 NOCT is still not in the list!

              I suppose there are 3 things that must be fulfilled before Nikon gave the ‘final stamp’:
              1) The item is not in production anymore
              2) The item has been replaced by a newer product
              3) The item is no longer in stock (zero inventory left at Nikon’s warehouse)

            • ZoetMB

              Don’t take Nikon’s USA website so literally. They don’t update it very often and they keep discontinued items on the site as “active” for a very long time, probably so as not to depress sales at dealers who still might have the product in inventory or maybe due to confusion or laziness.

              Last time I checked, there were six lenses still on the website that are actually discontinued: 80-400 AF D ED VR (1966), 500 AF-S G VR II N (2171), 55-200 AF-S G VR (2166), 18-55DX 3.5-5.6 AF-S II (2170), 55-200 4-5.6 DX AF-S G (2156) and 18-55 G VR (2176).

              In addition, the old AF 70-300 G has been discontinued internationally for a long time, but is still sold in the U.S.

              The 80-200D hasn’t been sold in the UK since late 2008, but is still available in the U.S.

              The 500 4.0G and 600 4.0G are discontinued in Japan.

              The 200 macro was discontinued in the UK earlier this year.

              And I don’t know if this is still the case, but you could still buy the “white” version of the AF-S 300 f4 D relatively recently. It was discontinued in the U.S. (#2124) years ago.

            • silmasan

              Yes, I originally had included “point #3 might potentially cause discrepancies between various Nikon subsidiaries worldwide” in my post above but deleted it to make it shorter. 😀

              Btw, I was referring to Nikon Global site’s discontinue list. In the Japan site (nikon-imaging), the 85/1.4D is already listed as discontinued.

              However when I checked the 105 DC page, it turns out that the DC pair are still featured on the latest PDF brochure (right across the new 105/1.4E).

            • ZoetMB

              The 85 AF 1.4D was removed from Nikon’s lens catalog (back when they were still doing print brochures) as early as October, 2010, although it didn’t seem to be discontinued (removed from the U.S. website and unavailable at retail) until around April 2015.

              On rare occasions, the U.S. has discontinued before the rest of the world. The 85 AF 1.8D came off the U.S. website around 7/2013, was marked “discontinued” by B&H around 9/2013, but was still on the International site as late as 10/29/14.

              But trying to figure out Nikon’s logic in all this is impossible.

            • Ric of The LBC

              All headlines are “clickbait” That is their sole purpose. I guess on a newspaper they are “readbait”

            • Somewhat. A headline should accurately inform the reader what is included in the article, it should not mislead the reader and it should entice the reader to read the article. Accomplishing all of these is not always very easy.

              The test of accuracy and misleading is how will the average reader interpret the headline. From a journalistic standpoint the headline above should have specified Amazon. If more than one single vendor or reseller had listed it as discontinued or had Nikon done so then the headline would have been accurate.

            • Ric of The LBC

              Then I suggest you stay off the internet.

            • Seriously! “Opafiets” is an jerk and needs to get a life.

    • There should also have been a correction by now. At a minimum a note at the beginning of the article that it appears to have been a typo that has not been corrected and better a correct headline.

    • Michiel953

      Looks more like an Omafiets to me.

      • Good eye. 🙂 I have an Omafiets at our cabin. The more I ride it the more I’m thinking about replacing the Opafiets at home.

  • Aldo

    Is anyone gonna talk about the white elephant in the room? Canon just released what could be the best DSLR yet… Or we don’t talk about canon here? I hope Tim’s 30×30 is just as refined.

    • silmasan

      But but that’s off-topic here!

      • Aldo

        I think canon is finally back.. idk. I’m scared… hold me

        • silmasan

          I was going to calm you down, but then I’m selling my D-bodies : P
          I’m going to come back at some point though! It’s just an anticipation for what’s to come. Trust me… Nikon is alive and well.

    • I saw the announcement. It looks nice, but in most ways the D810 is still better – native ISO 64, 36 MP, etc. Remember the D810 is two years old. No doubt the successor will be released soon and I am confident it will be a strong competitor to the new Canon.

      • Aldo

        I was particularly impressed by its AF

        • The D810 successor will likely have the same AF as the D5, so I am sure it will hold it own. I would like to see the on sensor AF, but it may not happen.

          • Aldo

            I wonder how the d810 iso performance will hold against the canon. They claimed to have solved nikons DN dominance.

            • VanHoff

              From the sample photos provided with the launch of the 5D mark IV, I clearly can tell that 30.4 mpx sensor is noisier and still has less DR that our beloved D810/D750, for many people it will be difficult to justify get rid of 3500 to buy that 5D over Nikon D750/D810 replacements (even over the actual models), remember this on the near future when D820/D760 come to light.

            • Aldo

              Oh wow… well that sux… for them =]

            • Neopulse

              Also the card and buffer selection are atrocious.

  • TheInconvenientRuth

    Aww..

  • Tom

    Rather amazing, I just got my copy from Hong Kong today. I wanted to learn how to use DC properly. Glad I did. I paid ~35% of the cost of the new f/1.4. There’s something mildly pleasing of hearing the motor focus, sorta like how the notion of a gas engine will be weird in about 20 years compared to electric.

  • Nikon1isAwesome!

    Love the 105mm DC. I should probably pick up the 135mm DC before it is replaced…

  • Back to top