85mm Decision Time - 1.8g or 1.4d

Vipmediastar_JZ

@msmoto one of my fav shot of yors. that candid is great in many ways. The 85mm is a blessing.

Golf007sd

@Msmoto: Such an images just goes to show how shallow the DOF is whenever such lenses are used wide-open. One can clearly see the "focal plane." The right eye is as sharp as it can be, while the left is already starting to blur out due to the aperture used.

Here is one of mine taken on the D7000 as well for comparison, but at much closer distance to the subject.



D7000 1/3200 ISO 100 85 1.8G @ f/1.8
Larger image size.

DavidJaan

Fantastic examples you guys. I was just about to pull the trigger on the 105mm, but now I'm back at the 85 1.8....lol

TaoTeJared

TTJ, just buy the 85mm 1.4G. You won't be sorry. Hell, even the 135.........

But then there is the 58mm 1.4 I have to get too (

I have two lenses to update, 85mm and my 60 macro. And I also want to get the 58mm & a 45 TC. Just south of $6k for the 4. And did you see that Fuji X-T1 camera? Ooooh - I want with the 35 & 52 (50 & 85) that too! That is only $3,000.

I need to get off here and go book some jobs.

WestEndBoy

And the DF and a 24 and 35 and a 58 for me......

TaoTeJared

I booked a couple of new jobs today - I'm only 1/1000th of the way there for both of us!

WestEndBoy

You need to raise your rates buddy!

SquamishPhoto

Here is one that I forgot that I took with the 85mm 1.4D @ f1.4 Should give you a good sense of the bokeh quality.


D3 • ISO 1000

ThomasHorton

I ended up buying the 1.8. The reviews were good and the MTFs looked good too. Now is the 1.4 "Better"?

Probably. But is it up to 5 times better. No. But that's what the cost difference can be.

For me there is a cost/benefit equation that needs to be justified. Sure, I would love to have a kit where cost is no option. But the I wake up in the real world.

An extra 2/3 stop for an extra grand was just is not worth it to me.

I will pay the extra money for the 1.4 when it is the performance of the 1.8 that limits my photography and not my skill.... and that will be a very long time.

WestEndBoy

Very rational thinking indeed.

HarleyFrank

I use the 85mm 1.8 almost daily. I don't understand why anyone would pay double for the 1.4 version. You can bump a good DSLR camera's ISO up by 1/2 stop easily with no image compromise. Who can tell me it's obvious whether a properly-lit indoor shot was shot at 400, 600 or 800 ISO with a newer FX Nikon camera and the 1.8G? Under a 30" by 40" print, it's nearly impossible to tell with an 8X Agfa lupe! If you have a client that can tell, he's a photog too!

For me, clients decide what lenses I shoot with by their image size orders. If they're asking for 5x7 or 8x10" final prints like small weddings or family occasions, it's the less expensive glass. Gallery show large prints? Architectural assignments? Just the opposite, high end everything. (A rare occasion for me since I'm retired.)

Actually thinking about this, Nikon is going in opposite ways in product development. They're marketing camera sensors and processors that make ultra-fast lenses unnecessary with such high camera ISO capability. At the same time they're releasing new prime lenses at fast 1.4 speeds that are very expensive and made unnecessary by the above technology. In the days of maximum ASA film speeds of 64, 80, 125 etc... those fast lenses were necessary. Not any more. I'll save the money and get that Pelican case!

Just MHO.

HarleyFrank

PB_PM

I don't understand why anyone would pay double for the 1.4 version.

You buy a 1.4 to shoot at 1.4, not for extra shutter speed (most of the time).

proudgeek

I also bought it, and this is a stupid reason for anyone but a pro... pros get judged by their kit.



Amateurs too. While in Costa Rica last month I was shooting hummingbirds with a D800, a 300mm f/2.8 (with camo skin protection), mounted on a carbon fiber tripod. A woman came over, took a look at my gear, and said, "Ooh, are you a professional photographer?"

My wife, who takes a mildly cynical but patient view of my hobby replied from just about 10 feet away, "No but he plays one on TV."

"Oh my God, you're on TV?"

cue the face palm

DavidJaan

Well I finally made the decision and pulled the trigger on the 85mm f1.8g. My finger was teetering between it and the 1.4D, but I'm going to take the money difference and use it towards a new transport bag for wedding days. I'm excited to get it! Thanks again everyone for the awesome suggestions and samples.

WestEndBoy

Good for you. I am sure that you will be happy with that lens.

Golf007sd

@greybagel: I know you will be very happy with this lens. One thing I might suggest: if you are close to a Nikon Service Center, that your body and all your lenses, including your new toy and have them all calibrated. This will insure that all your gear is fine tuned to perfection.

Cheers....

Msmoto

@greybagel

Very good decision. I think you will find it is a better lens than the 1.4….but I am quite biased in this regard

WestEndBoy

@greybagel

Very good decision. I think you will find it is a better lens than the 1.4….but I am quite biased in this regard

Pitchblack and I will arm wrestle you on that one. However, the 1.8 is a fabulous lenses. No question.

Photobug

@greybagel: I know you will be very happy with this lens. One thing I might suggest: if you are close to a Nikon Service Center, that your body and all your lenses, including your new toy and have them all calibrated. This will insure that all your gear is fine tuned to perfection.

Golf, I have read how to do the measurements to optimize the lens to the body. Any idea what Nikon charges to perform the test to calibrate the lens to the body? Thanks.

Golf007sd

@Photobug: Their was no charge for my lens to be calibrated, they were all within the 5 year warranty. The only charge was for my 1.7 teleconverter, they only come with a 1 year warranty like most of the bodies. With that said, I also had the AF system on my D4 & D7000 checked as well to insure they were working properly. The D4 was covered under warranty, but not the D7000. The charge of it was a bit over $150 or so something within that range for all the work I had done.

Photobug

Thanks Golf. Appreciate the response.

nukuEX2

I got Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 last week and it is a very good lens.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/28425344@N02/22358202274/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/28425344@N02/22792950250/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/28425344@N02/22370677423/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/28425344@N02/22370676743/in/dateposted-public/

heartyfisher

:-) maccas ..

birdman

Agh...the timeless question. I favor the 1.4d since it was released in my senior yr of high school (and yr I turned 18 -1995). 20 yrs wow...technology has sure advanced. So has coatings and lens design. But the 1.4 wasnt even new tech in '95 - which means nothing other than cheaper glass has caught up...and *sometimes* passes old guards in areas. The older Nikkors are a little hairy in high contrast scenes shot wide open. Nobody denies this. Call it character, artistic design, but never say it was meant to always be this way. Nothing a hood, certain filter, and skill couldnt manipulate, right? I had 1.8d, upgraded less than 100 bucks for 1.8g, and rarely even shoot portraits. The 1.4G is pretty much a big, bad, Chuck Norris type prime. I tried it out and was floored. Get the 1.4d if it's killing you...market is there to resell and pick up cheaper .8g if uniform sharpness and plain donuts/vanilla ice cream are your type. Just kidding! Sigma would be 2nd option for me if price in mint shape was sub $600. All Nikon 85mm kick ass, even the older ai-s manual focus lenses.

Never, however, confuse it with the 200/2.0. No contest on isolation and pure heaven. Incredible lens for those situations that demand the best....no matter if a blind man is shooting

nukuEX2

I'd love to get f/1.4G but it cost $1600!!! ( nuff said!!! )