Rumor: new Nikkor AF-S 105mm f/2 VRII Nano lens in 2011?

Since it is slow, I will allow myself to quote a rumor from dpreview about a new Nikon AF-S 105mm f/2 VRII Nano lens:

"2011 fall no more DC but VR and 77mm filter size min. focusing to 3.6 feet and max magnification of 1:3.4 priced at $2199 no more 135DC"

I find the amount of details provided interesting, but rumors about new products 10 months in advance are usually not reliable, especially when they mention a specific retail price.

The old Nikon AF DC 135mm f/2.0D lens was reported as discontinued numerous times in the past.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Just out of curiosity, what is the magnification meaning in lenses?

    • aetas

      A lens with a 1:1 magnification factor produces a image on the sensor which is the same as what you are taking a photo of. So it seems as though what you see is the same as what you get. So if im not mistaken then 1:3.4 would mean that the image would be 3.4 times as large as the subject. I hope someone can clear this up a little better then im able to for ELPH.

      • onodera

        1:3.4 means the image will be 3.4 times smaller. Nikon doesn’t have a lens that can take larger than life images out of the box.

        • Aaron

          Technically they used to until they discontinued their large format line. With a view camera the only limit to close focus distance is bellows extension and the length of your front element.

          Actually, now that I think of it, any (non G) Nikon lens paired with an f-mount bellows can get crazy magnification, but they don’t make an f-mount bellows anymore, either.

          • GlobalGuy

            What about a Macro with a teleconverter as extender? That gets very good macro. 105VR + 2xIII is an excellent pairing by the way with full functions. You could add a 1.4x on top of that and do even better.

            • SGN

              And, If you are adventurous, you can reverse a good quality MF wide-standard zoom, and get a MP-65E equivalent at a TINY FRACTION of the price ๐Ÿ™‚

      • aetas

        ah ya. that makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

    • sirin

      to further simplify:
      50mm lens on a DX gives you the same magnification as a human eye.

      • JamesC

        I do believe you’ve just complicated things quite considerably ๐Ÿ™‚

      • Aaron

        You’re thinking angle of view, not magnification, and then only on a full-frame sensor. Plus, the whole “normal” lens thing is a little bit of a fallacy, but that’s a whole different discussion.

      • Dxxx0

        No, 50mm on FX “gives you the same magnification as a human eye”
        but not the width, so you’re looking thru a little square in front of you.

        • Heh

          “Perspective” is a better word than magnification.

          • GlobalGuy

            This is why i’ve always liked 35mm on Full Frame more than 50mm — the 50 does not mimic the human eye. Peripheral vision is so important to how we see our environment, that I strongly strongly believe that a 28/35mm is much more natural feeling that the trapped-in-a-hallway tunnel vision of 50mm. Even if the perspective is slightly off, the human brain can bring the subject forward while looking at a 35mm photograph. But it cannot ever add periphery to a 50mmm shot.

  • mshi

    I will pass because 105 f/2.8 VR serves me well with min focus distance of just 1 ft.

    • aetas


    • The invisible man

      The Nikkor 105mm AF-S VR f/2.8 is the SHARPEST (and NO distortion) lens ever made by Nikon, and at only $800 that’s a steal !

      • mshi

        don’t let the secret out.

        • asdasd

          but bookeh is not bookehlicious and it is one stop slower

    • itznfb

      The 105 f/2.8 Micro and 105 f/2 DC (new 105 f/2 Nano) have two completely different purposes. A serious portrait photographer will not pass on the 105 f/2 because they already own a 105 f/2.8 Micro.

      • Exactly; If you’re shooting portraits (or really, anything) closer than 3m (3ft?) from your subject, you won’t have f/2.8.

        • Miguel

          More like 10 ft. I’m sure google would have converted that easily for you. In any case, 3m seems pretty far away to start losing aperture to me, although I have no experience with the lens.

  • aetas

    How much was the 105 2.8 vr1 when it first came out. The price was 950 when I got to buy it. Is 2199 high compared to the original when it came out.. This might be a great piece of glass.

    • mshi

      its NOT VR1 because its VRII

      • aetas

        I was asking about the old 105 2.8. that was just VR correct.

        • re

          105 2.8 G is already VRII.
          VRII is basically not in lens model. II means version 2 of the same focal length and the same aperture. This is upgrade of
          Nikon 105mm f/2D AF-DC Nikkor.

          • aetas

            ah i never had heard that. The 105 I have just says VR which I assumed ment that it was vr1.

            • mshi

              NikonUSA’s website says its VRII

            • aetas

              I was not arguing. Its just weird they sell as vrII yet label VR

  • Anonymous

    I guess we will not see this 1 pro or FX camera from Nikon. Thank you Nikon, you did not disappoint us.

    • Anonymous

      Sorry, I meant this year in 2010.

  • The invisible man

    **** SCAM OF THE YEAR ! ****
    A brand new Nikon 12-24mm AF-S f/4 for $73.99 !
    I guess there is still pleople who believe in santa !

    • The invisible man

      I also love the fine prints

      We are not responsible for typographical errors. The photographs of some accessories may not reflect the actual item shipped. We reserve the right to substitute accessories for similar ones of equal or greater value. We do not offer price protection if the price of an item that you purchased. Prices do change frequently.

      • The invisible man

        LOL !
        They are now selling it for $975 !
        Anyone want to by a “logitech” Nikon for $975 ?

  • Anthony D’Atri

    Still no alternative to the 135L? Nikon’s doing their damnedest to foil my urge to jump camps.

  • SZRimaging


    I always wanted a 105DC or 135DC. Guess I’ll just have to buy used…..

    • mshi
      • Isn’t it interesting that no other store has this lens in stock? I think Nikon dealers are rightfully upset about this Nikon online store.

        • Nir.E

          In stock at Adorama for a few months now every time I checked
          Nikon 135
          I recently bought one ๐Ÿ™‚

          • GlobalGuy

            I bought and received a -new- U.S. version about a month ago from Adorama. The serial number was higher than online records for recent years showed, so it clearly was manufactured very recently.

            Simply Nikon is not pumping these out. They are making mere handfuls. It makes no sense. But whatever.

            • dualsighter

              I bought a USA version of 135 dc from B&H on Thurs (phone order, they didn’t have it in the store), UPS delivery tomorrow. They only had 2 in stock, I jammed in my order right on time to get the last 1 available.

              Seems they are getting 135 dc every now and then in quantity of 2. But don’t hold your breath, few times I saw them in stock online, turned out to be system glitch.

            • dualsighter

              Took delivery of the 135 DC, severe focusing issues, no amount of AF tuning on D700 is correctable. I haven’t even gotten to test out the DC feature, very disappointing. Going to RMA back to B&H and place another order when it gets restocked.

        • mshi

          it was available a few weeks ago at Roberts.

          • Every now and then it comes available on B&H as a new import item. Iv’e got mine and I don’t plan on selling it any time soon! The DC function is great for reducing the harsh shadows of poor facial features like wrinkles and acne.

      • Until you add it to your cart, then it says that it’s out of stock.

      • SZRimaging

        Tried buying one back in January, no one had it. Since then I spent all my money on vacations ๐Ÿ™

      • c.d.embrey

        Not Now! I just checked an it is shown as out of stock – aarrg.

  • Banned

    I’m afraid this guy you quote from DPR has a history of deceit and a general pest at that. Not reliable.

  • This would be great for the underwater imaging world. The current 105VR is one of the workhorses we use for uw macro photography. I just hope it’s true!

  • Matt

    The 135 DC is NOT discontinued. They just don’t make a lot of them and they are very hard to find.

  • *yawn*

    105 is too close to 85, and for that price, no thanks… now 135… I would do naughty things for a new 135 f/2… or even f/1.8. I’d love for them to keep the DC (but they won’t).

    • Where’s my…

      85 1.4 af-d and 105 f2.0 dc may be close in focal length but they are very different type of lenses. It’s always easy to choose either one based on type of photography and light. The DC feature makes the 105 infinitely fun to learn.

  • broxibear

    Well since we’re quoting rumours from dpreview here’s one about the Nikon D800, Nikon D400 and Nikon D4 / D4X…

    • aetas

      Are they saying the d4x will have same mp little faster and prob slightly better low light shooting. I thought the d4x was going to be the high mp nikon coming out. Am i missing something. I dont follow the d3x d4x to much to be honest its out of my pay grade but it seems as though nikon would release something with more mp. Granted this might just be speculation on dpreviews part.

      • aetas

        ok, this is getting off base sorry admin.

  • I think this rumour is bullshit…

    • PHB

      Me too.

      It is pretty obvious that Nikon are completing their AFS upgrade across the line. Once they have the 80-400 done there is really nothing in desperate need of a refresh. So it is not exactly going out on a limb to guess tgat the DC lenses will be refreshed.

      The DC lenses are not fast sellers. But neither was the old 28f/1.4. The 24 f/1.4 has already outsold it. One reason is likely this site, dpreview and the rest. Another is that it is much easier to get to grips with very technical lenses such as the dc series.

      I can see arguments for and against dropping the DC feature. But as with all these rumours, the ones that claim to know the exac price are fake. Nikon does not even know what the USD price of their existing lenses will be tn months out.

      Nikon probably expect anyone buying a professional prime to have the f/2.8 zoom. So an f/2 prime for more than the zoom? For more than the 85mm? That is nuts.

      I would tend to think that any replacement is likely to have some feature to distinguish it from the zoom, so keeping the DC feature is not unlikely.

      That said, the 85mm can probably do everything a 105 can do. It is easy to crop digital and at 12mp there are plenty of spare pixels. I would suspect that there would only be one lens to replace the old pair.

  • Mock Kenwell

    While the delivery is a bit suspicious, the updating of the 135 and 105 makes sense right now, especially now that so many other crucial primes have been updated. I agree that with an 85 prime in your bag, the next leap to 135 would make more sense than 105. The 105 seems to be one of the last holdovers from the old “ideal portrait” focal length myth. A 135 f/1.8 would be amazing, though I likely couldn’t justify the cost. That would be some honking glass. I don’t love the DC feature although the pros I know who do tell me I just don’t know how to use it.

    Oh yeah, and at some point in the next few months, Nikon needs to deliver an affordable full-frame for me to put these lenses on…

  • Anonymous

    I think that the reality part is the “105” but my gutt feeling tells me that this maybe the revised Macro 105 to VRII with nano coat and not what the rumor exactly said.

    • Michael

      105mm f2.8 G AF-S VR IF ED Micro Nikkor Lens already has VRII system and Nano Crystal Coat…

  • TaoTeJared

    I’m calling BS on this one as well. Anyone can guess those numbers/upgrades.

    The 105 VR I is one of the most perfect lenses I have ever owned. There is very little room for much if any improvement. Just to upgrade something for the Nano coat and Filter – BS. I easily get 3 stops of VR on everything but close macro which you use a tripod anyway.

    Dpreview always gets people who have gripes with any Nikon without 77mm filter and remarks accordantly. 50mm, 16-85, The DC lenses, etc.

    The DC lens “no longer available” has been out there for a good 3 years. No one sells them since they are specialized lenses. I have never found a shop who keeps that amount of money tied up in a couple of lenses when they don’t sell. There is no reason to keep them in stock if they can order them and get them within a few days.

    • WoutK89

      And we have another winner, the 105 macro has VRII and nano coat.

  • mshi

    Just got delivery of Nikon TC-20E III from Nikon Store and its my first new lens purchase at the store. To my surprise, the lens looks like an import version because there’s no NikonUSA Five-Year-Warranty Registration card inside the box, and there’s a list of international addresses that you can get your lens serviced. Anyone else has the same experience?

    • mshi

      Forgot to say that the IQ out of TC-20E III is so fabulous.

      • I can vouch for this. It’s actually quite impressive.

        Enough to make me think that a TC-17E III would be near flawless.

  • Realandre

    I think most people have the wrong lens in mind….
    We are not talking about the Macro 105 VR but it is the portraitlens of 105 mm/f2 DC ( defocus control ). I would prefer it over the 85/1.4 AFs, cause 105 is a way nicer portait lens. I still have the old manual Ai version , the 105 mm/2.5.
    Was my fav lens on the FM3 in the early days…

  • R R

    oh well this could mean that that lens would be available for the public (in real time terms) by the summer 2012 , mmm thats is close to the end of the world according to the mayans!

    Just watch the 85mm f1.4G that Nikon announced like 4 months ago, still NOT available!! jesus!! … yes, I think Jesus will come again to earth before they make this lens available to us humans! so.. a new Nikon 105mm VRII or what ever.. who gives a crap!! make the 85mm f1.4G available FOR REAL !!!

    • Can you really not find the 85 anywhere? I got mine September 1st, so I haven’t been up to date with stock status, but I heard it wasn’t near as hard to find as, say, the 35 is going to be.

      • Robert Stoffer

        Still waiting on my copy, its been 3 months

        • ArthurH

          Same here. In the Netherlands the 85G is still not available anywhere. And there must be a very long waiting list, so I wonder when this lens will ever be available in the stores. I’m afraid the 35G and the SB700 will be the same story.
          Sigma 85 1.4 is available everywhere though, tried it, sharpness is excellent but bokeh and autofocus are horrible.

      • R R

        I just got word from the store in my country, I may be getting it by the end of January! ๐Ÿ™‚

  • I think it will be AF-S 135mm F/2 N. No VR and no 105 (we allready have 105mm macro version, so why Nikon bother?

  • That price sounds totally out of line. A 135mm f/1.8G VRII Nano maybe…

  • Gareth

    a 135mm f/2 for a fraction of the cost of the 200 f/2 would be very interesting.

  • MF

    I’d would love to see a 105 2.5 AFS Nano, no VR. My old AI-s version was a longtime favorite versatile lens. Sold when 80-200 was purchased…

    • santela

      “I’d would”?
      Sorry, just had to.

      • MF

        Seriously santela?

        You one of those trolls just itching to find any kind of typo so you can reply with some snide comment just to make yourself feel better about your pathetic life? What a twit…

        • Hurr

          trolled hard

  • Ubiquitous

    I believe that the source of the rumor is mistaken about the focal length. It is not the 105mm, but rather the AF-S 135mm f/2G ED N VR-II. The present 105mm DC has a minimum focusing distance of 3โ€™ and this one 3.6′ โ€“ it does not make sense. On the other hand the present 135mm DC has a minimum focusing distance of 4โ€™. The price does not make sense, if we are talking about the 105mm VR-II. Why gets that lens instead of the 105 Micro f/2.8 VR-II with a minimum focusing distance of 1โ€™. However, everything makes sense if we are talking about a probable AF-S 135mm f/2G ED N VR-II, including the $2,199 price. I might be very interested in the rumored 135mm

    • mshi

      I will say thank you very much but I will pass because my 70-200mm VR2 serves me really well already.

  • zzzzzzzzzzzz

    Since Nikon no longer lacks wide primes and the 85 1.4 was updated I think it makes sense to introduce a 135 f2 as well as the 105. I personally have very little need for the 105 but a new 135 would cause blood to rush to a certain part of my body…lol

  • Drew

    You heard it here first… Dec 22 2012 new Nikon is releasing the new 13-800 f/1.4 G VRIII N ED AF-S Micro!!!!!!

    Too bad we’ll never see it because we all know the world is ending on Dec 21.

    On a more serious note why post this as even a rumor when the source is a random post from a random guy. Might as well put the 13-800 I just leaked on the list of possibilities as well.

    PS it’s for MX sensors… Nikon’s new medium format sensor that’s being released on the same date. Shhhh!

    • broxibear

      “because we all know the world is ending on Dec 21.” ?
      I thought it was the 12th, as in 12/12/12 ?…but I’m not Mayan so I don’t believe in that prophesy lol !

      • Ubiquitous

        I did not know that the world was going to an end on 12/12/12 or 12/21/12. What is this world coming to? What am I to do? I know, I will go on a $100,000 photography spending spree, starting next year, since I won’t have to pay for it after the world ends.

  • where the H is D800?

    Even if a 105mm f/2N VR does exist and shows up in 2011, there’s no way it would cost $2199 even from Nikon. Believe it or not optically it might just be a improvement over the existing DC version, add AF-S/VR/Nano to it (much like the AF-S primes), and increase the price tag by 1/3 or so. Why would anyone want to pay for a 105/2 for as much as they pay for a 70-200VR2 nowadays?

    AF-S 24/1.4 is a complete redesign (nothing preceeeds it) so it sells for $2199. that’s not really the case for all the other primes.

  • Roger

    Price sounds absurd, cant imagine what sane person would pay 2199$ for it.

    Calling BS on this one.

  • zzddrr

    This is really boring, I mean Nikon no longer can produce but 2 cameras a year. 1 that is almost a coolpix (d3100) and the other that will never be sold without a kit lens (d7k). This is one of the crappiest years for Nikon when it comes to new camera products lately. So for all of you, what is the big surprise those a-hole Nikon execs were talking about? I think the surprise is that Nikon will no longer sell new cameras unless you buy a lens with it. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • pete

      you must be kidding. this is the best year nikon has had in a decade. if it werent for the absolutely stunning optics they released this year i would have switched to canon, along with many other nikon shooters.

      thank GOD nikon stop listening to you fanboys who think that bodies need rotation every other year. what needed work was the GLASS. my d3s and d700 are perfectly fine thank you. and i might pick up a d7k just for a crop body with video aswell. those of us who actually take photos rather than focus on tech specs of bodies are smiling ear to ear right now.

      i bet you were one of the whiners that complained nikon didnt update the 85, 35, 24 and duidnt have f4 pro glass werent you ? and i bet since they released all this stuff you have bought a total of ZERO of these. you are irrelevant to nikon execs cos all you do is talk.

    • Mock Kenwell

      Yeah, you’re barking up the wrong tree zzddrr. This was an awesome year for Nikon, they just didn’t address the 5D Mk II issue. You really need to get a new rant.

      But I’m right there with you on wanting to stuff a sock full of nickels into Kimura’s big, fairy-tale-spouting mouth.

  • werner k.

    2199 $ are really expensive!
    Do you think there is chance, that nikon will realese an updated version of the 85mm 1.8 soon, because I have to decide wheter to buy the old 85mm 1.8 D AF-D or waiting for an update.

    thank you

  • Gavin

    Ok all this aside. Can anyone tell me what the difference in picture quality and style will be between the 105 macro and the 105 DC (or the new rumored one) IF…they are both set at say 2.8. This would be for a portrait picture and not a macro shot.

  • John

    An AF-S 105mm f/2 VRII Nano sounds like it would be the perfect glass for concert photography (i.e. low light, no flash).

    I had hoped the AF-S 85mm f/1.4G would get VR but that obviously didn’t happen.

    This might just be the next best thing…

  • i’m sorry, what’s all this about the 105 micro ? the post is about a replacement for the 105 f/2 DC, wich is NOT a micro lens, nor is a f/2.8 lens, so any comparrison between two is irrelevant.

    i find the 105 f/2 DC a tempting offer, since i sold my 105 micro due to weight, but i don’t consider buying one because there are numerous rumors about it not beeing able to focus correctly on the D700. this being said, i was waiting for a replacement that CAN focus correctly, only to find out that i will be charged with 2200, while in my country the SONY 135 1.8 sells for 1600 !!! and the 85 1.4 sony is 300 cheaper than the new 85 1.4G.

    what a rip-off nikon, keep at it.

    • **i sold the 105 micro because it was too heavy for a portrait lens. i did not use it for macro and it was only 2.8, pointelss for a fix focal, so i wanted to go for the 105 f2.

    • Gavin

      Well actually it is relevant. Firstly yes this is about the 105dc replacement but as you can see by the replies it has been discussed to death, and at this stage it is just that….a rumor and probably not a very good one. What more is there to say.

      As for the comparison between them, yes it is relevant. You have two lens of differing price, the only real advantage of the 105 DC is F2 as compared to F 2.8….0.8 of a stop. Is this enough justification to purchase it over the macro 105 especially if the rumored version is more than double the price?

      That to me is a useful discussion point that I am sure many people would be interested in.

      I would love to buy the 135DC but wonder whether again the 0.8 of an F stop is worth the justification over the 70-200 which I own.

      As you said though, it is a shame it is so expensive compared to the Sony, but how does the quality compare?

  • 105 DC and 105 2.8 are two totally different lenses. Goodluck getting good bokeh on the 2.8 thats not macro (remember that a lens has to be optimized for macro distances or far).

    What most people dont know is that if you set the DC setting to its opposite it should make the lens sharper (but have worse bokeh). Its not like were comparing an 80-200 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8….. these are very, very different lenses.

  • Renato Pope

    No more 135 f/2, and two 105 primes? Good job Nikon, if I want a 135 f/2 should I go Canon or Sony?

  • Back to top