The 85mm f/1.8G is a very good lens for the price. The main thing it has going for it is its sharpness but it just can't keep up with most of the other lenses, particularly the Milvus, Sigma and Nikkor 105mm but they are a lot more money. It is also worth mentioning the older Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ex dg hsm is a great lens, which can be bought second hand for around the same price as the Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G and when that lens was tested again the 85mm Milvus the reviewer found the 2 lenses to be very similar: www.thephoblographer.com/2015/09/19/lens-comparison-sigma-85mm-f1-4-ex-dg-hsm-vs-zeiss-85mm-f1-4-milvus/
Always depends on your needs of course... Some people prefer it over the Nikon 85 1.4 for sharpness and focus speed not even just price. I guess the downside is the obvious it's not f 1.4. Definitely not as dreamy bokeh. It doesn't focus very close but that might be true of 85mm's in general. I as well have heard good things about the old Sigma 85 1.4 but it won't focus as quickly as the Nikon and a main priority for me.
Personally, I have never a big fan of the Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G, which is why I got the Milvus originally. It just feels a little bit 'mah'. It is sharp enough for most things but I hate the contrast which feels a bit anaemic.
Kresimir Delac I have a 85mm 1.8g , its the third copy . Very unreliable AF under f2. All three copies did this . I have a Nikon d810.All so cromatic abbreviation is in some cases not fixable it's that bad I now have the Sigma Art 85mm , it's amazing but only after you af fine tune it with usb dock and Focal collaboration tool. It renders beautiful , I would have kept the Nikon 1.8g was it not for that awefull af
Nice video, it would have been great to see either the Nikkor 105 f2 DC or the135 F2 DC as well. Those are considered some of Nikon's top portrait lenses, they are a little old but the pros swear by them, seeing how they stack up against more modern glass would have been great. Keep up the good work.
I picked up the Nikon 105. It's insane. Instant incredible, meaningful artistic photos. 105 is the perfect focal length for portraits on a full frame camera. It's really sharp and bokeh is almost perfect. Using it on my Z6II with ftzii adapter. It's a dream!
I'm planing to get 105mm 1.4 for my Z6 ii some day. But I already have 85mm 1.8s, and it's great. How is the focusing 105mm 1.4 with ftz adapter on z6 ii?
The rokinon 85 1.4 is a quality lens for the money... it’s miles cheaper than these ridiculously priced lenses and does a great job. I use it with a d800 and love the results. Any issues with a little chromatic abboration are easily fixed in post. Though the flaring is apparent when shooting to light, but please don’t me mean about it
I totally agree with you. All these other lenses are 4 to 6 times more expensive than the Rokinon and they better be damn sharper at that price. 4 to 6 times better quality, that will be hard to quantify. The Rokinon performs very well for a budget lens and are a great value for the money. I use a 16mm f/3.5 in my D7100 and 7.5mm f/3.5 and 12mm f/2 in my E-M5 Mk II. All perform very well and any small flaws are easily fixable. $1800 will buy me some excellent used glass for both of my cameras.That said, if had the money to throw away I guess I will get them.
I agree! The rokinon 85 1.4 is one of the best deals for the money of any lens I’ve used to be honest. For portraits it’s really great. I’ve even used it for my RUclips videos a few times for product shots. It’s just so much lens for how little it costs. Love it
Nice comparison! Based on that, and if money was no object, I'd get the Nikon 105 also. However, given that money is an object, I'd get the Rokinon... 😀
I’ve been studying for months what makes a Zeiss lens have that “pop”. I have asked on every forum, everywhere, even Zeiss themselves. The way each glass is made, the purity in its crystal like state, being formed so pure in its clarity. Then it hit me......... Whenever you import each image you take with the Zeiss, it actually imports a picture style that tells the software to bump up that amazing clarity slider. So now you know the secret, use the clarity slider on all your lenses!
Rokinon didn't get enough credit here. It may perform a little weaker than the others here but it's *miles* apart from them in price and with that in mind I find it impressive how well it keeps up with the others. Also, their 135mm f2 is jawdroppingly good
I bought the Zeiss Milvus 85 about 6 months back and couldn't be more happy. You are quite right about it's focus being almost like a razor-blade sharp but I guess that's what the aperture adjustment is for and once you get use to that it's one of my favourite lenses. I'm now looking towards the Milvus 135mm f/2 lens to complete the range I need. Keep up the great work, really enjoy your channel. Cheers from Paul in Salisbury East, South Australia.
I am a hobbyist. There is no way I am going to pay into the thousands. I always look into the older generation lenses and the nikon 85mm 1.4d is mind blowing on its on. I also tried the budget rokinon and samyang and are outstanding. They give a warm tone to the pictures. The only downfall is they are manual lenses. Too much time wasted trying to focus.
Apalapse, thanks for pointing this out. This review covered lens flare much better than most on RUclips, but I think there are calibrated test patterns that show it up better than just blasting a model with backlight. I will agree with you on Zeiss lenses having the kind of pop that I associate with low flare, at least on Sony.
+Apalapse Can you show me a picture with low sharpness and good micro-contrast? I have asked many people, and nobody has ever shown me an example (because, I suspect, the illusion of micro-contrast is just lens sharpness).
Zeiss has a good article on why their lenses "pop," but I found this article comparing an old Nikon lens to a new Sigma lens after a quick Google search: yannickkhong.com/blog/2016/3/7/sigma-art-vs-nikkor-afd-part-1
Indeed you pointed out one of the best articles regarding this phenomena. For the longest I wondered what it was about certain images that though sharp as hell were kind of flat then I started to look around at other lens manufacturers and Black n white Imagery and the many tonalities that occur and often wondered why the images truly had that 'POP'. I now look at images through a new set of eyes. Its not always about bokeh. The new king in town is that Micro Contrast!
Thanks for the video. For decades, I used the Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 lens in a 35/85/180mm kit. In 2016, I replaced the f/1.8 with the Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 D AF for less than $800. One 85mm f/1.4 feature that I really like is the 77mm filter size because it is the same filter size as my other two favorite portrait lenses -- the 150mm f/4 soft focus and the 180mm f/4.5 that I use on my Mamiya RB67 medium format SLR.
My favourite portrait lens is the Tamron 85 1.8 VC. I Know, 1.8, but ultra sharp, fast / reliable focusing, weather sealed, light weight, 9 rounded blades, and affordable. That 105 is pretty cool though.
I own both the Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Milvus and the Nikkor 105mm f/1.4E and there are a few things which might be worth adding. The Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Milvus is my favourite lens but I have found it does vignette quite badly, more so than most 85mm lenses I have tried. Also,the manual range finder system on the D5/D500/D850 is much more reliable on older Nikon cameras such as the D800/D810. At f/1.4 it is exceptionally hard to get focus, as there is too much leeway, even when the range finder system is saying the camera is correctly focused. I have the 1.2x eyepiece on my D800 but it just doesn't give enough accuracy, so generally I will try to use the rear screen to focus the Milvus. It is also worth mentioning the weight of the Milvus, which is the heaviest 85mm for Nikon on the market being heavier then the 85mm Sigma and Otus. I bought the 105mm f/1.4E because I needed something with autofocus and I was surprised just how good the 105 worked. Optically I would give a very slight edge generally to the Milvus but it is much closer than I thought it would be. The only thing problems I have with the 105mm, is the plastic feels a little cheap (like most modern Nikons), it also doesn't have a silent wave motor (though the motor is quiet) and at 105mm, it isn't always practical for smaller locations. Over all, I love both lenses and wouldn't trade either one. The Sigma is good but just feels huge, even though it is lighter than the Milvus. Also the Sigma isn't weather sealed which is a big thing for me but I know a few people who have bought the lens, who are very happy with it.
@@razbiton173 Sorry for the late reply. Yes, there should definitely be an advantage using focus peaking with the 85mm f1/.4 Milvus, though the manual focus on the D850 system, is superior to the D800, which I own.
I love your reviews and tutorials! Enjoyed the review even though I am shooting Canon (with a 85f1.2 and 50f1.8 for portrait). I love the new setup that is less techy oriented and lively. Just the music is a little loud at the beginning. Keep up the good work!
Hey guys, quick but fun to watch review. Lots of people care about bokeh, (among photographers at least!). You forgot to mention the Zeiss Otus 85 f/1.4 - if you try one it's like going to Venice Italy. Hard to forget...
I'm not a 'Nikon Guy', but enjoyed this comparison. Have you noticed how sharp you two are in the clip!!!! Woa!!! looks great what ever you recorded this with.
I have the 85mm 1.4 D lens and except for not having modern coatings is a great portrait glass. It used to be called the “Cream Machine” due to its bokeh. And if you can find one, grab it.
I know that this is not directly related to this video, but a Harvard professor just developed a new single element lens. It handles problems with chromatic aberrations. If you're interested in reading the article, just google "Harvard-Produced Metalens is 'Next Big Step' in Optics, Virtual Reality."
Not in this case. Single element lenses in a camera can suffer from chromatic aberrations. The brain compensates for chromatic aberrations in eye glasses and magnifying glasses, but cameras can't compensate for that. This type of lens prevents chromatic aberrations in cameras, which is why this is new technology. You might want to google the article mentioned above.
Yeah, I see that "particle" would be a more apt description for it right now! The only pictures I could find of one were shot through a microscope. :-) Amazing tech nonetheless - what they have achieved is no mean feat. It would be great to have one that was large enough to suit camera optics, whilst remaining economically feasible. Rokinon feasible rather than Zeiss feasible would be even better... ;-)
Amazing how this has changed in three years. Focusing accuracies have become a body issue instead of a lens issue and Samyang's new AF 85 mm lens is nipping at the heels of the higher priced options.
I'm sorry but my Nikon 85mm broke on me at an out of town wedding so in a Pinch I purchased the Rokonon 85mm f1.4 it is a manual lens but hey what could I do? I will tell you what I haven't done since!! I haven't replaced the lens!!!! I absolutely love my 85 Rokonon sure its I have to manually focus, But it's tack sharp and I've used it on probably 100 people from portraits to Brides and Grooms getting ready! I have not had ONE complaint about quality. For I think $275 I use mostley prime glass I only have 24-70f2.8 and my 70-200f2.8 the only 3 lenses I need for a wedding or portrait shoot. Just saying.
It is a very good lens and the only lens in the test that equals it in build quality is the Zeiss 85mm Milvus. The Nikkor 105mm f/1.4E is optically exceptionally good (nearly as good as the Milvus), When I bought the 105mm f/1.4E, I compared it to the 105mm f2 DC and it is more practical and in many ways optically better. The only real negatives I have about the Nikkor 105 f/1.4E, is its build quality, which like most modern Nikons just feels a little bit cheap compared to older Nikkor lenses and the fact that it doesn't have a silent wave motor.
I can vouch for that Milvus. The pictures it produces are alien. Perhaps the CA is a bit more pronounced but then if you really hate that, you can always go crazy with the Otus equivalent. The manual focus is definitely something to get used to but it was worth every dollar imo.
I've struggled with my Sigma 50m Art on the d810 to the point I don't hardly use it anymore. Especially on portrait shoots. Just can't trust it. Focus accuracy issues big time. Sounds as though this may be common after hearing what you've said about the 85 art and focusing reliability. Helpful video as usual. Thanks.
Since my life revolves around these reviews....I opted for the Nikon 1.4G for the speed and warmth it has. For portraits, any real photographer knows that you want sharp but NOT SHARP.
I have been using the Zeiss 85mm F1.4 planar and the Nikkor 85m F1.8G! put it this way, the nikkor is useful with moving subjects and ease! the Zeiss might be better for indoor etc. I have used it on locations and got wonderful results but you have to work harder with it :) as its manual
I never bought into the super expensive lens hype, but I got myself a Zeiss and wow they really are beautiful. Very rich colors and contrast. The bad thing about having a Zeiss (and any Leica lens) is that you'll have to hear their fans babble on incessantly about "micro contrast and 3D rendering!!!"
Thank you for sharing this video. It is the best camera lens review that I have seen on RUclips. You had everything organized and there was structure to the information. You guys go good together!!!!
John Dawson Tamron primes are not as fast, but the stabilization makes them sharper "in the real world". I also own several Tamron lenses and focusing is as good as my Nikkors.
I have read and heard a lot of *older* comments on the AF of the Sigma 85mm 1,4 Art, and I suspect that Sigma has since dealt with those problems without telling anyone :) , because my copy does nail the AF every time without any problem.
Nice video. The black screen at the end is a great oportunity to think if we really need that bokeh so dont worry. I missed the new tamron 85mm. I´m starting to put aside some cash (750USD) for it and your opinion on that lens is always welcome.
You chose the 105mm lens in a comparison of 85mm lenses???????????? What's next? Choosing 100-400mm in a 50mm lens comparison? I'm baffled. Usually you guys are sober when you make these types of tests. Not this time. LOL
In reality 99% of Nikon photographers in the market for a dedicated portrait lens will compute the 105mm f/1.4 in their purchasing decision, as the focal length difference is small and the range of applications is very similar. This is not the same as adding a 50/58mm or a 135mm to the mix. I am therefore glad the Northups added this one to the mix as I am in this buying process right now, and kind of see the 105 as potentially replacing both the 85 and 135 options. Not sure yet, but this review helps my thinking.
I really like the comparison and all these are F1.4 lenses. I just went through the same comparison minus the Zeiss, but plus the Tamron 85 1.8 and Sigma 135mm. I ended up with the Tamron. It basically tied the Sigma for sharpness (better in the corners at F1.8) but the image stabilization was killer. I didn't feel I needed F1.4 given the stabilization. The irony is my budget was higher but I ended purchasing the least expensive of these lenses. The best of them I felt was the Nikon 105 and Sigma 135. I will likely pick up one of these two (probably the 135, love the extra length and I felt it was slightly sharper than the 85's)
Thank you for that awesome review. I'm so disappointed in the quality of the lens, except for Ziess. I think the ghosting on the 85mm choices make them unacceptable for portraits, but OK for weddings. I would like to know if you stop them down does the ghosting get any better ? Also how does Sony fare in their 85 mm line up? Thanks again guys. BTW, how does a 105 win the 85mm round up , sad.
When I first purchased the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art a couple years ago, I was disappointed how often it would miss focus with my D850. But since two firmware updates, one for the lens and one for the camera, and after calibrating the lens with the dock, I nail focus every time. No one talks about this. All anyone knows about the AF on this lens is from old reviews. Someone should do an updated review.
I'd rather buy than rent, you still come out top in terms of per day rental to yourself. Especially if you use the lens between a 7 and 30 days a year. I'm not sure if the Sigma 105 was out when you did this video, but a comparison between the Nikkor, Sigma 105 s and the Sigma 135 would be more helpful to many viewers
Why didn't you do it for Canon at the same time? So often I see reviews of third party lenses against Nikon or Canon, but those comparisons aren't valid for those using the other brand. Personally, I'm not sure that third party lenses would rank in the same order on a different brand camera. No Tamron 1.8? For many non snob viewers it would be an alternative, VC is a huge plus, particularly with high resolution cameras.
Hello to you both, you are doing a good job and that's why I would appreciate having your honest opinion on the AF-S 24-120mm f / 4G ED VR. I know you are not fans of the "lens kit", but because it comes with the purchase of my new D750 and the price of the kit is very interesting, I am tempted. My goal is to do short-term portrait and wedding and while waiting to go to 105 1.4, I just want to make sure that I'm not mistaken. Thank you!
Just got the zeiss. Couple things i find strange: 1. Focus ring is rather stiff as compared to nikon AI-s lenses. My 50mm f/1.4 and 400mm f/3.5 is like 10x less stiff than zeiss. 2. There is a rubber band on the zeiss around the aperture ring, which i assume is supposed to stay there since it has cutouts for aperture scale and aperture ring lock button, but that rubber thing is very flimsy and is not even glued to that ring.
I bought the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and found it impossible to get a sharp photo while hand held, even at 1/5000, must be defective? I sent it back. Now, if you think the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 is sharp... Check out the Sigma 135mm f/1.8. So sharp I can hardly believe it. Eye slicingly sharp. Can't understand how Sigma was able to accomplish this. I own both and they're heavy, but well worth it. But as to sharpness, the 105 is a 9 out of 10, the 135 is a 10. Astonishing!
How often is the hit rate for focusing when hand-holding on a fast lens wide open? Do photographers shoot on a tripod and use live-view or focus peeking to ensure that the eyes are tack sharp? Given that auto-focus may not be reliable wide open, perhaps the Zeiss is not such a bad choice.
If you include the nikon 105mm 1.4E than you could have also included the sigma 135mm 1.8, the difference to the sigma 85mm 1.4 and the nikons would be really interesting! I own the sigma 135mm and the nikon 85mm and 105mm, but only had the time to do a comparison to the nikon 85mm and found the same as you did!
Explain how a 105 just won a video titled "85"???
$1000 more expensive 2! Compared to the Sigma.
A very unfair test. Beside the Sigma is better in all departments except bokeh where the Zeiss is smother.
they used only extra expensive lenses!
we need to stop watching these jokers
Because these two clowns are clearly innumerate, Vincent.
Very helpful comparisson. I use the Nikon 85mm 1.8G It was so much cheaper than the 1.4 and i'm really pleased with the result.
The F 1.8 is also a better lens, Marina....
Awe no Nikon 85mm 1.8g mentioned. I get that it was outclassed for your purposes but that glass is amazing bang for your buck. My favorite Nikon lens
Charles Li i am currently looking into buying the 85 1.8g...you would definitely recommend it then? any downsides?
The 85mm f/1.8G is a very good lens for the price. The main thing it has going for it is its sharpness but it just can't keep up with most of the other lenses, particularly the Milvus, Sigma and Nikkor 105mm but they are a lot more money.
It is also worth mentioning the older Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ex dg hsm is a great lens, which can be bought second hand for around the same price as the Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G and when that lens was tested again the 85mm Milvus the reviewer found the 2 lenses to be very similar: www.thephoblographer.com/2015/09/19/lens-comparison-sigma-85mm-f1-4-ex-dg-hsm-vs-zeiss-85mm-f1-4-milvus/
Always depends on your needs of course... Some people prefer it over the Nikon 85 1.4 for sharpness and focus speed not even just price. I guess the downside is the obvious it's not f 1.4. Definitely not as dreamy bokeh. It doesn't focus very close but that might be true of 85mm's in general. I as well have heard good things about the old Sigma 85 1.4 but it won't focus as quickly as the Nikon and a main priority for me.
Personally, I have never a big fan of the Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G, which is why I got the Milvus originally. It just feels a little bit 'mah'. It is sharp enough for most things but I hate the contrast which feels a bit anaemic.
Kresimir Delac I have a 85mm 1.8g , its the third copy . Very unreliable AF under f2. All three copies did this . I have a Nikon d810.All so cromatic abbreviation is in some cases not fixable it's that bad I now have the Sigma Art 85mm , it's amazing but only after you af fine tune it with usb dock and Focal collaboration tool. It renders beautiful , I would have kept the Nikon 1.8g was it not for that awefull af
Nice video, it would have been great to see either the Nikkor 105 f2 DC or the135 F2 DC as well. Those are considered some of Nikon's top portrait lenses, they are a little old but the pros swear by them, seeing how they stack up against more modern glass would have been great. Keep up the good work.
I picked up the Nikon 105. It's insane. Instant incredible, meaningful artistic photos. 105 is the perfect focal length for portraits on a full frame camera. It's really sharp and bokeh is almost perfect. Using it on my Z6II with ftzii adapter. It's a dream!
I'm planing to get 105mm 1.4 for my Z6 ii some day. But I already have 85mm 1.8s, and it's great. How is the focusing 105mm 1.4 with ftz adapter on z6 ii?
The rokinon 85 1.4 is a quality lens for the money... it’s miles cheaper than these ridiculously priced lenses and does a great job. I use it with a d800 and love the results. Any issues with a little chromatic abboration are easily fixed in post. Though the flaring is apparent when shooting to light, but please don’t me mean about it
I totally agree with you. All these other lenses are 4 to 6 times more expensive than the Rokinon and they better be damn sharper at that price. 4 to 6 times better quality, that will be hard to quantify. The Rokinon performs very well for a budget lens and are a great value for the money.
I use a 16mm f/3.5 in my D7100 and 7.5mm f/3.5 and 12mm f/2 in my E-M5 Mk II. All perform very well and any small flaws are easily fixable. $1800 will buy me some excellent used glass for both of my cameras.That said, if had the money to throw away I guess I will get them.
Indeed!
I got an 85mm Nikkor f1.8 and have regretted selling my Samyang/Rokinon ever since as it produced much better pictures
They don’t even consider it as a worthy lens on this but for the money you can’t beat the Samyang 👍
I agree! The rokinon 85 1.4 is one of the best deals for the money of any lens I’ve used to be honest. For portraits it’s really great. I’ve even used it for my RUclips videos a few times for product shots. It’s just so much lens for how little it costs. Love it
Nice comparison! Based on that, and if money was no object, I'd get the Nikon 105 also. However, given that money is an object, I'd get the Rokinon... 😀
Simon Patterson story of my life as a photographer. 😂
Bob Barnett ha, I bet you and I aren't the only ones! 😉
For that price, jokes aside the Nikon 85mm f1.8G.
I’ve been studying for months what makes a Zeiss lens have that “pop”.
I have asked on every forum, everywhere, even Zeiss themselves.
The way each glass is made, the purity in its crystal like state, being formed so pure in its clarity. Then it hit me.........
Whenever you import each image you take with the Zeiss, it actually imports a picture style that tells the software to bump up that amazing clarity slider. So now you know the secret, use the clarity slider on all your lenses!
Honestly T & C, music is NOT required, your voices are smooth enough !!
Rokinon didn't get enough credit here. It may perform a little weaker than the others here but it's *miles* apart from them in price and with that in mind I find it impressive how well it keeps up with the others. Also, their 135mm f2 is jawdroppingly good
I bought the Zeiss Milvus 85 about 6 months back and couldn't be more happy. You are quite right about it's focus being almost like a razor-blade sharp but I guess that's what the aperture adjustment is for and once you get use to that it's one of my favourite lenses. I'm now looking towards the Milvus 135mm f/2 lens to complete the range I need. Keep up the great work, really enjoy your channel. Cheers from Paul in Salisbury East, South Australia.
The 135/2 is a brilliant lens I love it, I don't own the 85 yet
Chelsea you have me sold on 105 1.4, I have enjoyed your demonstrations on it
I am a hobbyist. There is no way I am going to pay into the thousands. I always look into the older generation lenses and the nikon 85mm 1.4d is mind blowing on its on. I also tried the budget rokinon and samyang and are outstanding. They give a warm tone to the pictures. The only downfall is they are manual lenses. Too much time wasted trying to focus.
The zeiss "pop" is called microcontrast (lens fidelity). It's what gives photos realism and 3d character.
Apalapse, thanks for pointing this out. This review covered lens flare much better than most on RUclips, but I think there are calibrated test patterns that show it up better than just blasting a model with backlight. I will agree with you on Zeiss lenses having the kind of pop that I associate with low flare, at least on Sony.
+Apalapse
Can you show me a picture with low sharpness and good micro-contrast? I have asked many people, and nobody has ever shown me an example (because, I suspect, the illusion of micro-contrast is just lens sharpness).
Zeiss has a good article on why their lenses "pop," but I found this article comparing an old Nikon lens to a new Sigma lens after a quick Google search: yannickkhong.com/blog/2016/3/7/sigma-art-vs-nikkor-afd-part-1
Indeed you pointed out one of the best articles regarding this phenomena. For the longest I wondered what it was about certain images that though sharp as hell were kind of flat then I started to look around at other lens manufacturers and Black n white Imagery and the many tonalities that occur and often wondered why the images truly had that 'POP'. I now look at images through a new set of eyes. Its not always about bokeh. The new king in town is that Micro Contrast!
Apalapse does the 105 have good microcontrast?
Thanks for the video.
For decades, I used the Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 lens in a 35/85/180mm kit.
In 2016, I replaced the f/1.8 with the Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 D AF for less than $800.
One 85mm f/1.4 feature that I really like is the 77mm filter size because it is the same filter size as my other two favorite portrait lenses -- the 150mm f/4 soft focus and the 180mm f/4.5 that I use on my Mamiya RB67 medium format SLR.
Liked this shorter kind of more simple test but still direct and not over anyones head. Keep em coming, for example macro lenses!
Why no test of the Tamron SP 85mm F/1.8 Di VC USD?
My favourite portrait lens is the Tamron 85 1.8 VC. I Know, 1.8, but ultra sharp, fast / reliable focusing, weather sealed, light weight, 9 rounded blades, and affordable. That 105 is pretty cool though.
I have a hard time going much under f2 since the so little detail is in focus for close ups. I'll keep my f1.8 Nikon D at around $300 these days.
Great review 👍
Did you try the Sigma 105mm 1.4??
Great job guy's!! Just got my 105 three weeks ago and LOVE IT!!! Mated with my new d850...
Lensrentals is great, I used them a couple times to tryout lenses in focal lengths I don’t usually use and can’t justify buying for once a year need.
i must say i really like this new kind of video you put lately
I own both the Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Milvus and the Nikkor 105mm f/1.4E and there are a few things which might be worth adding.
The Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Milvus is my favourite lens but I have found it does vignette quite badly, more so than most 85mm lenses I have tried. Also,the manual range finder system on the D5/D500/D850 is much more reliable on older Nikon cameras such as the D800/D810. At f/1.4 it is exceptionally hard to get focus, as there is too much leeway, even when the range finder system is saying the camera is correctly focused. I have the 1.2x eyepiece on my D800 but it just doesn't give enough accuracy, so generally I will try to use the rear screen to focus the Milvus. It is also worth mentioning the weight of the Milvus, which is the heaviest 85mm for Nikon on the market being heavier then the 85mm Sigma and Otus.
I bought the 105mm f/1.4E because I needed something with autofocus and I was surprised just how good the 105 worked. Optically I would give a very slight edge generally to the Milvus but it is much closer than I thought it would be. The only thing problems I have with the 105mm, is the plastic feels a little cheap (like most modern Nikons), it also doesn't have a silent wave motor (though the motor is quiet) and at 105mm, it isn't always practical for smaller locations.
Over all, I love both lenses and wouldn't trade either one. The Sigma is good but just feels huge, even though it is lighter than the Milvus. Also the Sigma isn't weather sealed which is a big thing for me but I know a few people who have bought the lens, who are very happy with it.
will the zeiss be better on a mirrorless camra such as z6?
@@razbiton173 Sorry for the late reply. Yes, there should definitely be an advantage using focus peaking with the 85mm f1/.4 Milvus, though the manual focus on the D850 system, is superior to the D800, which I own.
I used lenrentals to try out the Nikon 200-500 on my D500. Great service they offer.
lol
I love your reviews and tutorials! Enjoyed the review even though I am shooting Canon (with a 85f1.2 and 50f1.8 for portrait). I love the new setup that is less techy oriented and lively. Just the music is a little loud at the beginning. Keep up the good work!
Hey guys, quick but fun to watch review. Lots of people care about bokeh, (among photographers at least!). You forgot to mention the Zeiss Otus 85 f/1.4 - if you try one it's like going to Venice Italy. Hard to forget...
Fun Review! I really enjoy the comfortable approach of this video, keep it up!!
I'm not a 'Nikon Guy', but enjoyed this comparison. Have you noticed how sharp you two are in the clip!!!! Woa!!! looks great what ever you recorded this with.
Great review guys! Sigma is really killing it with the prime glass. Nice crib!
Foto4Max My 50 and 85 art work superb needing no af adjustments on my 1dx2. I guess I got lucky with my copies 🤷🏾♂️
I have the 85mm 1.4 D lens and except for not having modern coatings is a great portrait glass.
It used to be called the “Cream Machine” due to its bokeh. And if you can find one, grab it.
This is my top lens but the AF doesn't work on the Z with FTZ adapter :-(.
I know that this is not directly related to this video, but a Harvard professor just developed a new single element lens. It handles problems with chromatic aberrations. If you're interested in reading the article, just google "Harvard-Produced Metalens is 'Next Big Step' in Optics, Virtual Reality."
Jacob Roberts isn't "magnifying glass" the common term for "single element lens"?!
Not in this case. Single element lenses in a camera can suffer from chromatic aberrations. The brain compensates for chromatic aberrations in eye glasses and magnifying glasses, but cameras can't compensate for that. This type of lens prevents chromatic aberrations in cameras, which is why this is new technology. You might want to google the article mentioned above.
Yeah, I see that "particle" would be a more apt description for it right now! The only pictures I could find of one were shot through a microscope. :-) Amazing tech nonetheless - what they have achieved is no mean feat.
It would be great to have one that was large enough to suit camera optics, whilst remaining economically feasible. Rokinon feasible rather than Zeiss feasible would be even better... ;-)
Thanks for the great content! 🌷☀️What lens did you use to record this video btw?
Amazing how this has changed in three years. Focusing accuracies have become a body issue instead of a lens issue and Samyang's new AF 85 mm lens is nipping at the heels of the higher priced options.
Why no field test of the Zeiss Planar 85mm 1.4?
Thank you for your comparison! Got that Sigma Art, reasoned by focal length, autofocus and sharpness! Don't regret anything at all
Everyone is saying the AF is not the best. Can you confirm that? I'm looking for a prime lens for portraits
Perfect sponsor for you guys. Thumbs up
TechJunkie i think blockbuster should have just changed their business model to renting camera gear.
More to see such lens comparision
Great job tony and chelsea
I'm sorry but my Nikon 85mm broke on me at an out of town wedding so in a Pinch I purchased the Rokonon 85mm f1.4 it is a manual lens but hey what could I do? I will tell you what I haven't done since!! I haven't replaced the lens!!!! I absolutely love my 85 Rokonon sure its I have to manually focus, But it's tack sharp and I've used it on probably 100 people from portraits to Brides and Grooms getting ready! I have not had ONE complaint about quality. For I think $275 I use mostley prime glass I only have 24-70f2.8 and my 70-200f2.8 the only 3 lenses I need for a wedding or portrait shoot. Just saying.
Thanks for awesome review....new 85mm F1.8 ultimate battles video , keep shooting
No 105mm f2 DC? I'll take that over any of the ones in the video. It's incredible for portraits.
It is a very good lens and the only lens in the test that equals it in build quality is the Zeiss 85mm Milvus. The Nikkor 105mm f/1.4E is optically exceptionally good (nearly as good as the Milvus), When I bought the 105mm f/1.4E, I compared it to the 105mm f2 DC and it is more practical and in many ways optically better. The only real negatives I have about the Nikkor 105 f/1.4E, is its build quality, which like most modern Nikons just feels a little bit cheap compared to older Nikkor lenses and the fact that it doesn't have a silent wave motor.
105mm f2 DC is awesome
nicodimus2222 horrible chromatic aberration
I can vouch for that Milvus. The pictures it produces are alien. Perhaps the CA is a bit more pronounced but then if you really hate that, you can always go crazy with the Otus equivalent. The manual focus is definitely something to get used to but it was worth every dollar imo.
Should I get one for casual use and travel etc? Im not proffecional and never used mf lens before, idl i just love that lens from what i see
I recently shot some portraits with old micro 55mm Nikkors from the 60's - amazing clarity for under 200 bucks
Good to see you're reviewing stuff we can all afford to buy - Cheers.
what was this video shot with..?gorgeous quality.. Thank you. Also, how do you think the fuji 56 1.2 compares to the nikon85?
Nice video as always. Would love to see a video with strict budget-lenses (perhaps a comparison). Is this anything you plan to do?
Love my Sigma 85mm 1.4 art
I've struggled with my Sigma 50m Art on the d810 to the point I don't hardly use it anymore. Especially on portrait shoots. Just can't trust it. Focus accuracy issues big time. Sounds as though this may be common after hearing what you've said about the 85 art and focusing reliability. Helpful video as usual. Thanks.
The bottom line = cost. Nothing else matters as much.
Since my life revolves around these reviews....I opted for the Nikon 1.4G for the speed and warmth it has. For portraits, any real photographer knows that you want sharp but NOT SHARP.
Why not include the 85mm f1.8 from nikon to be another budget friendly option like the rokinon, I'm curious how they match up against each other
I have been using the Zeiss 85mm F1.4 planar and the Nikkor 85m F1.8G! put it this way, the nikkor is useful with moving subjects and ease! the Zeiss might be better for indoor etc. I have used it on locations and got wonderful results but you have to work harder with it :) as its manual
I have the tamron 85 1.8 vc on the d750 and its very sharp I love it
me too, I have this lens too
No bad
Thank you for this awesome video. I'm looking to rent an 85mm soon for my D3300 and this video was very informative. Keep up the awesome work
Very in depth analysis. Thanks a lot for that. But what are your views on Tamron - 85mm f1.8 and 90 mm f2. 8?
Loved the review. Thank you for pointing out the “flare blobs.” I thought it was my fault or a really bad copy.
Great video! Sincerely thanks for this! Can you make more such comparisons of lenses for different types of photography - landscape, astro, etc?
Yup, I have the Nikon 105 and its awesome!
Nikon 105e 1.4 is the only reason am still shooting Nikon. It's a stunning lens.
The Nikon 85mm f/1.8 would have done the job. The f/1.4 is only marginally better (if at all) but costs 4 times as much as the f/1.8.
Nice review, well done, for the very few astrophotographers the Sigma will deliver the best shot concerning coma and astigmatism control.
I never bought into the super expensive lens hype, but I got myself a Zeiss and wow they really are beautiful. Very rich colors and contrast. The bad thing about having a Zeiss (and any Leica lens) is that you'll have to hear their fans babble on incessantly about "micro contrast and 3D rendering!!!"
Thank you for sharing this video. It is the best camera lens review that I have seen on RUclips. You had everything organized and there was structure to the information. You guys go good together!!!!
Helpful comparison - concise and to the point. Thanks!!!
Why no Tamron? I'm a Nikon guy, but the Tamron's are giving Nikkor lenses a good run for their money lately.
John Dawson Tamron primes are not as fast, but the stabilization makes them sharper "in the real world". I also own several Tamron lenses and focusing is as good as my Nikkors.
I have read and heard a lot of *older* comments on the AF of the Sigma 85mm 1,4 Art, and I suspect that Sigma has since dealt with those problems without telling anyone :) , because my copy does nail the AF every time without any problem.
Definately should've included the 85mm 1.8G as the budget lens. They go for $500 new and 400 used
Nice video. The black screen at the end is a great oportunity to think if we really need that bokeh so dont worry. I missed the new tamron 85mm. I´m starting to put aside some cash (750USD) for it and your opinion on that lens is always welcome.
I'm getting right now the Canon 85mm 1.4 IS.. looks like a great lens for portraits
This Milvus 85mm f/.1.4 (NIKON - MOUNT) with Sony A99II and Sony mirrorless is amazing... So easy to focus with Sony!
i have Z6, and never manual focused before- do you recommend it?
Nice kitchen. When will we see som food pictures and videos? General cooking skills?
You chose the 105mm lens in a comparison of 85mm lenses???????????? What's next? Choosing 100-400mm in a 50mm lens comparison? I'm baffled. Usually you guys are sober when you make these types of tests. Not this time. LOL
Haha.. u are right .
Hahaha 🤣
Isn't the 105mm 1.4 a portrait lense?
In reality 99% of Nikon photographers in the market for a dedicated portrait lens will compute the 105mm f/1.4 in their purchasing decision, as the focal length difference is small and the range of applications is very similar. This is not the same as adding a 50/58mm or a 135mm to the mix. I am therefore glad the Northups added this one to the mix as I am in this buying process right now, and kind of see the 105 as potentially replacing both the 85 and 135 options. Not sure yet, but this review helps my thinking.
@@Zivereer, amen.
I really like the comparison and all these are F1.4 lenses. I just went through the same comparison minus the Zeiss, but plus the Tamron 85 1.8 and Sigma 135mm. I ended up with the Tamron. It basically tied the Sigma for sharpness (better in the corners at F1.8) but the image stabilization was killer. I didn't feel I needed F1.4 given the stabilization. The irony is my budget was higher but I ended purchasing the least expensive of these lenses.
The best of them I felt was the Nikon 105 and Sigma 135. I will likely pick up one of these two (probably the 135, love the extra length and I felt it was slightly sharper than the 85's)
What about the Nikon 85 1.8? How do it compare?
Thank you! Great Job. I wonder what lights did you use on you? It looks great too. Best
Nice dots shirt, must be helpful for perfect focusing !
Thank you for that awesome review. I'm so disappointed in the quality of the lens, except for Ziess. I think the ghosting on the 85mm choices make them unacceptable for portraits, but OK for weddings. I would like to know if you stop them down does the ghosting get any better ? Also how does Sony fare in their 85 mm line up? Thanks again guys. BTW, how does a 105 win the 85mm round up , sad.
When I first purchased the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art a couple years ago, I was disappointed how often it would miss focus with my D850. But since two firmware updates, one for the lens and one for the camera, and after calibrating the lens with the dock, I nail focus every time. No one talks about this. All anyone knows about the AF on this lens is from old reviews. Someone should do an updated review.
Skip to 8:00 mark for the best part. Your welcome
They switched to Pentax to shoot that last bit.
I'd rather buy than rent, you still come out top in terms of per day rental to yourself. Especially if you use the lens between a 7 and 30 days a year.
I'm not sure if the Sigma 105 was out when you did this video, but a comparison between the Nikkor, Sigma 105 s and the Sigma 135 would be more helpful to many viewers
Why didn't you do it for Canon at the same time? So often I see reviews of third party lenses against Nikon or Canon, but those comparisons aren't valid for those using the other brand. Personally, I'm not sure that third party lenses would rank in the same order on a different brand camera.
No Tamron 1.8? For many non snob viewers it would be an alternative, VC is a huge plus, particularly with high resolution cameras.
What about the other apertures? I love the reviews you guys make but your always shoot wide open. I love my portraits mostly at F4
Dennis Lampe - Exactly! My Nikkor 85mm 1.4D never goes wider than f/4.
Nikon 85 1.4 G lens vs Nikon 105 1.4 ED lens body to use Nikon D780 which is better than buying wedding photography and fashion photography
Hello to you both, you are doing a good job and that's why I would appreciate having your honest opinion on the AF-S 24-120mm f / 4G ED VR. I know you are not fans of the "lens kit", but because it comes with the purchase of my new D750 and the price of the kit is very interesting, I am tempted. My goal is to do short-term portrait and wedding and while waiting to go to 105 1.4, I just want to make sure that I'm not mistaken. Thank you!
I would have liked to see the Tamron tested as well.
The Tamron test score on DXOmark.com is higher than the Nikon 85mm and the 105mm
Thanks for the work and effort you put into this video. Really helpful
Just got the zeiss. Couple things i find strange:
1. Focus ring is rather stiff as compared to nikon AI-s lenses. My 50mm f/1.4 and 400mm f/3.5 is like 10x less stiff than zeiss.
2. There is a rubber band on the zeiss around the aperture ring, which i assume is supposed to stay there since it has cutouts for aperture scale and aperture ring lock button, but that rubber thing is very flimsy and is not even glued to that ring.
Definitely, the most comprehensive and practical review I've seen on RUclips. Great Job :D
Would have liked to see the Zeiss 135 in this test, although it is a lot longer than the others of course. Best portrait lens I’ve used though
This video was super polished! Sheesh!
I also own the Sigma 85 f1.4 and found the AF off unless corrected by the AF Dock. Did you try improve the Sigma's AF by using the Dock?
Dxomark says that sigma 85 art is one of the sharpest , best transmitting 85s on the market. That’s the one I want for my canon 6d
informative. thanks for the effort and the sharing. thumbs up.
Om the Sigma did you dock and update the firmware for that lens? That tends to fix the focusing on them.
I bought the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and found it impossible to get a sharp photo while hand held, even at 1/5000, must be defective? I sent it back. Now, if you think the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 is sharp... Check out the Sigma 135mm f/1.8. So sharp I can hardly believe it. Eye slicingly sharp. Can't understand how Sigma was able to accomplish this. I own both and they're heavy, but well worth it. But as to sharpness, the 105 is a 9 out of 10, the 135 is a 10. Astonishing!
Sigma has the ability to be fine tuned with the docking system. I've found the focus quality can be greatly improved.
Out of curiosity, how do you think the A7RIII + 85GM lens will stack up against that bunch?
How often is the hit rate for focusing when hand-holding on a fast lens wide open? Do photographers shoot on a tripod and use live-view or focus peeking to ensure that the eyes are tack sharp? Given that auto-focus may not be reliable wide open, perhaps the Zeiss is not such a bad choice.
I have a Zeiss lens, it’s so sharp it makes my eyes bleed.
You lucky old thing...😷
If you include the nikon 105mm 1.4E than you could have also included the sigma 135mm 1.8, the difference to the sigma 85mm 1.4 and the nikons would be really interesting! I own the sigma 135mm and the nikon 85mm and 105mm, but only had the time to do a comparison to the nikon 85mm and found the same as you did!