Hey Everyone ! What are you Thinking ? Do you think the F1.2 is worth the extra cost for you and what you shoot ? Does this also show how good that Nikon Z 50mm F1.8S is? Let me know in the comments below ! as always Thank you so much for watching !
I think for wedding 1.2 is really worth it in term of sharpness and bokeh, because we can do almost all purpose shot like candid and documentation if the space is available (dont need a wider lens)
dang. I haven't used the 1.8S yet but wow, this really shows how well it performs next to the 1.2S. I guess it just comes down to personal preference and budget. That 1.8S is amazing but at the same time, I would LOVE the 1.2S too. Personally, I would jump on the 1.2S. I've been waiting for it ever since there were images of it nearly 2 years ago(i think) :D
Thanks, this confirms that everything is as one would expect from a Nikon f/1.2. I think I may still need to see it used in its right element before coming to a final conclusion. Hoping to see some portrait and wedding photographers take it for a spin in the near future.
50mm is not my favorite focal length, so f1.8 is good enough for me. Save money for 85mm f1.2 for 2021. I think it will beat all 85mm lens on the market. Obviously, it must be big and heavy too
At the end of the day, Nikon has made both 50mm Z lenses for any type of shooter. You can focus incredibly fast with the 1.2 for stills and video but also have the 1.8 with image quality close to the 1.2 that doesn’t break the bank. Nikon has done well. Well, at least for people who are actually using these lenses and not just sitting back and complaining about the fact that they “only released 1.8 lenses.” Instead of saying that their image quality is impeccable, they complain and that’s all sticks with the public.
For me it just reconfirms how great the 50mm f/1.8 S lens is. This is the one I want, best price-performance lens Nikon ever made. Zeiss quality for 600 bucks. Amazing.
I recently purchased the s50mm 1.8. I was so impressed, I also purchased the s85mm 1.8 a week later. I did a cross comparison with my older 50mm and 85mm 1.4g f mount lenses via the FTZ adapter. I couldn't believe the difference in Sharpness and reduced chromatic abberations and fringing,. Plus the difference in bokeh is marginal. Without hesitation, I sold both the 1.4's whilst they still have value to them and they covered the cost of the Z mounts with a little bit of change left over. Cleaner images, less work in lightroom, higher response and hit rate. I've never looked back. My only niggles with the mirrorless system so far is battery life and how much longer the lenses are compared to the f mount. The f1.2 looks phenominal too but with all this advance in new glass technology with clean and clinical images, I hope it doesn't detract from the "character" that lenses give us. Occasionally I like vignetting and flaring in my portraits styles
I recently bought a 1.8 f mount used and then sold it because it was so soft at 1.8. I now have the 1.8z and can say I don't need to stop it down for sharpness. It's going to stay wide open it's whole life. It's not really bigger than the f mount 1.8. The adapter makes them the same size. And the old cameras were bigger.
@@veneratedmortal4369 Hi, I'm very surprised by that. I've owned both the 50mm 1.8g and 1.4g for the f mount, and I found the f 1.8g far sharper wide open. It was the 1.4g that was softer in sharpness wide open, and it was necessary to stop down a little. My 50mm 1.8g was always used confidently at f1.8, and I found the difference to be marginal to the Z version. Obviously, the Z version wins hand down for contolling chromatic abberations and resolving more detail, etc. I can only assume there's a lot of sample variations out there. I've heard a lot of conflicting stories with lenses, and personally, I think it comes down to the quality of the postal service 🤣
@@harvymckiernan93 I had the 1.4 years ago and it was ok sharp at 1.8 or 2.I may be remembering it better tho. The 1.8 F that i boughtwas really bad up until 2.8. Possibly sample was bad, the 1.8z is as shart at 1.8 as both of the old lenses at 4. I was hoping to keep the cheap 1.8f mount, but no amount of testing, focusing manual and auto, tripod, bright lights or any other method made it acceptable. skin wrinkles, eyelashes, detail in the eye is just gone. after about 5 hours of comparing test charts I found it was definitly the lense. it was used, perhaps dropped. but the lady i bought it from was a perfectionist house was amazing, still has the box etc, the lense is perfect to look at and everything else is fine.
@@veneratedmortal4369 Gosh, yes! The grueling hours of testing. I did the same a few years ago. I spent hours and hours painfully testing lenses and camera bodies; looking at forward and back focus issues, field curvatures, planar distortions, decentering, and so on. I even set up a lazer aligned rig to make sure the camera sensor was perfectly aligned to a 2 meter test chart on a wall. Even the focus point aspect ratios were measured. Dear 'o' dear, I was certainly a little OCD. This was (and still is) viewed using a 40" 4k monitor. I certainly remember being shocked by sample variations. Sigma, I found to being one of the worst at the time. I remember selling my Sigma art 50mm f1.4 in favour of keeping my 50mm f1.8g. Thats why I was surprised by your story, but I know it happens. There was some serious pixel peeping done, plus quality control played a large part too. That was also the pinnacle moment I decided to stay with native glass in future purchases. I come across a lot of people who mock brand dedicated Photographers. In my case it comes with good solid evidence and wasting money to find out the hard way. With the Z system, I've kept to the same philosophy. In saying that, we don't have many options anyway. I love the system, and I find I don't even bother to look a third party offering anymore. I certainly haven't been disappointed by their glass so far. In fact since owning the Z system, it's made me focus more on the art of my photography. Coming from an engineering background, you can certainly get distracted with the technicality and misplace the artistry
I can’t separate my 50 1.2 from my Z9. They just love each other! I used to be a 35 and 85 photographer, now all I feel the need to photograph every wedding with this simple (if heavy) combo.
I am amazed at how sharp the 1.8 lens is. As a wedding and portrait photographer I could us the 1.8 and never look back, as compared to my F 1.4 50mm. I do like the extra light for lower ISO and great depth of field of the 1.2. The size and weight difference is now a major element in my selection. In the F days, I selected the fastest lens because they were a lot better and just paid the price and killed my back and arms with the weight of all the lens. Now I really going to consider how many really fast lens do I want in my pack when the 1.8's are really very good.
Ricci, you are the most thorough and careful reviewer of these lenses (I bought the 0.95 based upon yours plus one other excellent review) -- it would just be helpful if you would add an overall conclusion at the very end of your videos: "To sum up...". Keep up the great work!
Before I bought my Z6 I had never owned a prime lens, just the 18-55 kit lens that came with my D5500, plus a 70-300 DX lens, then the Tamron 150-600 G2, I love the wildlife photos i get with the Tamron on the Z6, but after watching your review of the 50mm 1.8 i bought one, I am absolutely blown away with the images it produces, one of my friends has started a vegan take away business, he shot all his product photos on a phone, the looked quite good, but I offered to re-shoot them, I have never done anything like that before, I can tell you how pleased I am with what the 50mm 1.8 did, the colours, sharpness and bokeh are incredible, I love this lens.
Nikon have played a blinder. Giving us an affordable but exceptionally good 1.8 + a top of the range 1.2 option to aspire to. I hope they roll out this 1.8 + 1.2 format in all future Z primes
That's a great comparison. It shows exactly what I thought when I took mine for a walk. It is simply ridiculously sharp at 1.2. Actually for me it would not be a problem for my pictures if it would be less sharp, but the AF works better if it is. I am using the Smallrig plate on my Z6 and with that the weight can be handled. It would be difficult without.
Thank you so Much. I've been torn between these two lenses. In the past a fast 50 has often saved the shoot. I really love fast glass but smaller is so much easier to carry around...
Great review but I think the 1.2 was much better in terms of contrast than it was given credit for. Not so much on the obvious edges but when I look at the black, curved buttons and grips the tones have a much richer gradient to them. I also feel that the colours look less harsh on the 1.2... I'm going to have to buy it now :(
Sep/2022, I just bought the 50mm 1.8S for my Z6II (waiting for delivery)... I'm in the midst of the "was that a good idea?" run on YT. In terms of price vs performance, I cannot justify the ~AU$2000 difference in price vs the 1.2S. I can clearly see differences between the 2 lenses, especially check out night image differences elsewhere on YT. They're not something you couldn't correct in a good image editor these days anyway, so not a deal-breaker. I'm not a "pro", just a "weekend warrior/dabbler". I don't expect I'd make any money off the photos I'd shoot. I want to be able to look at them on a screen, maybe printed out, and not even consider "I wish I had the more expensive lens". This video just made my day... It solidified my enthusiasm for my purchase!
Awesome video Ricci! Was REALLY looking forward to this comparison video too! Excellent showing the details from different apertures and how the bokeh 'looks'. Man, I can see why so many folks said the 1.8S is a beast, especially compared to the 1.2S. It's close but it's definitely personal preference at the end of the day too. Great video man!
This review is eye opening. I just received the 50mm 1.8 and am super happy with it. I am a professional pet photographer and it's not my style to take photos wide open. I seldom go below F4 as I want the eyes to nose to be sharp. I'm also a little jaded regarding F1.2 and F1.4 lenses because they weren't very good in the DSLR days. I determined a long time ago that F1.4 F mount lenses were not worth the price difference. In fact, they didn't always focus as accurately as their F1.8 counterparts even at F1.8. So, I stuck with the F1.8's. I figured that in the Z mount the F1.2 would be useable wide open. I did not expect it to be much sharper in general and I just love the micro-contrast and out of focus areas. Your review might have just cost me a ton of money. I might even photograph pets at a wider aperture than normal to add a more dreamy look. So, in this case, I think the F1.2 is worth it for a lot of photographers.
This 50 f1.2 lens is just mind blowingly good. Wow. Considering that the 50 f1.8 S is one of the sharpest lenses every made, that performance at f1.2 is quite frankly astonishing.
@@RicciTalks I received my 50 f1.2 S the other day and haven’t had a chance to test it against my f1.8 S. The 50 f1.8 S was already almost perfect in sharpness wide open, so this lens really had a lot to live up to. I got the f1.8 S when they had them on discount for £350 here in the UK, which was an absolute steal! So for me to fork out almost 6-7 times the amount to get the f1.2 S (which I need for my line of work), I wasn’t sure, but seeing these results have laid my concerns to rest. The 50mm is one of my most used focal lengths, and having both the f1.8 and f1.2 has me covered for all situations.
Great comparison video. It actually looked to me like the 1.2 was sharper at 1.2 than the 1.8 was at 1.8. That's an amazing result. Great news for pro (close) portraitists, landscape shooters, and others. Seems like saturation/contrast was overall better too on the 1.2 at apertures below f/8. I'd also say they both have really nice out-of-focus rendering, but I suppose you'd expect that for a 50mm prime. Of course for a hobbyist like me who will probably never shoot anything even above 30 megapixels, it's all gravy. I'd be very happy with that 50mm f/1.8 on a Z5 or a Z 6/6II. Thanks!
If I was still shooting weddings and outdoor portraits I would really think about picking up that 1.2 for full length portraits. The extra shallow depth of field would be sweet.
Hi Ricci, thank you for the comparison. Very informative. One question I have - if you look from around 10:13 of your video - yes, I agree that there are more details in the coin area in the 50 1.2 photo. However, the Fn1 & Fn2 markings in 50 1.8 are a lot sharper. I am generally not into pixel peeping. But when you point to the coins, I also notice the Fn1 / Fn2 markings.
Yes, frankly, I noticed that as well on all the comparisons at least until f/4, or even f/8, and was waiting for your comment or explanation. At the same aperture, it was not due to depth of field.
Im mainly putting this down to depth of field and the placement off centre both shots are focused in the same place and I take multiple shots to ensure that I don’t get strange occurrences I just don’t show you every frame obviously but you can see all the other frames I use for reference at the bottom of the Lightroom screen I think because the 1.2 is larger and Iv not moved the position of the camera the position of the aperture blades are not exactly in the same place giving slightly different depths of field. Keep in mind I always want to compare images taken from the same spot and focused on the same spot as an actual photographer wouldn’t move they would make the lens work for the composition
What a treat, I'd say the 1.2 has an advantage of speed and corner performance, apart from these two aspects the 1.8 is a mighty performer. Out of focus highlights and bokeh are fine from both lenses though smoother on the more expensive lens. Another interesting review Ricci, thanks for sharing it here. Seasons greetings to you, hope you have a fantastic 2021, stay safe. cheers.
Well...I have to admit that the 50mm 1.8 is a terrific lens, which makes it a tough go for the 1.2 in practical use. I have no financial limitations, but I think I'll go for the 1.8 as the quality is fantastic and the size makes it a far more usable lens. Great comparison and you won't go wrong with either!
iii love cameras/ lenses! however, 'i have no financial limitations'. was the DOPEST most inspirinG thinG about m'whole experience w. this video. new mantra, so calm. thank you, and biGGest blessinGs!
Some considerations worth noting for me were the difference in size, weight and price. I just bought a refurbished Z 50mm 1.8 from Nikon USA, which was also on sale. I only paid $416 US dollars, which included my state sales tax. Can't beat that, I'm happy! It's in pristine condition as well. Thanks for the interesting comparison, but for someone like myself who just likes to walk around with a camera it doesn't make any difference. I'm so happy to know I got a damn good lens; a real bang for the buck. : )
I think you nailed it when you said how many times you’d need that f/1.2 which even from an advocate of the fastest lens possible, the cost difference and usage of the f/1.2 S over the f/1.8 is very small, at least for me as seeing how stunning the f/1.8 is, I’ll stick with it. I was truly blown away by its sharpness and having owned and used many nifty 50’s, the S f/1.8 is a true optical bargain and without doubt the best bang for buck you can get. You will not be disappointed with any images from it which says an awful lot.
This video has made me even more anxious to get my 1.2 now... Thanks Ricci =P I just am hoping for that call from my store that my preorder is ready. Any day now...
The 1.2 is the better lens. I sold my sigma art 50 for the 50 1.8 and am very happy. The 50mm 1.2 looks as big and heavy as the sigma 85 art which i sold just because of its size. The 50 1.8 is sharp enough for the 47mp sensor so that will do for me. Really good comparison Ricci :)
Love my Z50 f1.8. I can see how good the 1.2 is but no way could I justify the jump from the 1.8 for my level of photography. For me the two most interesting lenses, yet to come, will be the 105mm macro and an affordable telephoto. Currently I have the F-mount 300 PF prime (+1.4 tc) and the 200-500. I am waiting to see what Z-mount lenses will be offered to replace these.
Thank you! This test is very accurate and useful. I wonder if you could you help me to understand if there is a significative difference between the two lenses regarding speed and precision of the autofocus. Thank you again! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
From what I seen so far, I thought the 50mm 1.2 S would have slightly less bokeh goodness then the 50mm 1.8 S. But this video proved that wrong. Thank you ricci. The 50mm 1.2 S lens is probably the best 50mm ever made. I'm keen now to test it myself since I'm a sucker for bokeh. BUT - I'll probably stick to my 50mm 1.8 S anyway - it's just the bang for buck in the Z-System and my photo bag is already tight. :)
Viewing in my iMac, at 4K, from f/2 on ward I could not see a difference (youtube compression and my older eyes to blame?) in the scene comparison. The out of focus area is better in the f/1.2 for sure. I'd really like to see some astro shots from the f/1.2. I suspect they would be jaw dropping. That said, for my use case I have a hard time justifying the 1.2. Ufdah!
Interesting. I have the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S for my FM2 which I adore, so have been mulling over whether the Z 50mm f/1.2 is worth the investment. Great to see how good the 1.8 is - I've only just started shooting with this on my new z7ii and I'm delighted with the results so far.
Lovely reviews, just found out about your channel, thank you for the great content! I'd love the 50mm f/1.2 for night time street photography, but people tend to notice when you point a cannon at them (thankfully I use a Nikon, haha). Keep up the good work!
No real talk on autofocus performance or build quality between the two, lots of comparison images, but I would have liked to see and have learned much more about the other differences outside of image quality. Otherwise I guess if you're into this kind of review, that's cool. You're reviews are usually great and I've been a subscriber for a long time and you've come a long way in a short amount of time, so great job Ricci and congratulations on gaining so many new subscribers recently. I think you'll continue to grow and it would be nice if you could also do DSLR gear reviews, as I know you own or have tested the D6, D5 and 180-400mm, etc. As someone who is more interested in DSLR Nikon gear over mirrorless, it would be nice to see more balance and I think that would help grow your channel immensely. The majority of Nikon users are still using DSLR cameras and F-mount lenses and some are hybrid, shooting Z-series and DSLR side by side. I think you're mostly getting subscribers that are Z-mount users, so you could really benefit from doing some DSLR gear reviews. I know I would appreciate that and I think so would many other Nikon users. Thanks!
Many thanks for the video. As a non-professional enthusiast what I saw from the sample photos - F 1.8 S at 1.8 is 97% the same good as F 1.2S at 1.2. I should to zoom in and review them side-to-side to see a difference. 1.2 S will be definitely better at 1.8. But as a photographer I will be much more happier with smaller and lighter 1.8 S after a long day of shooting in the different locations. My neck will be happier :)
From the beginning, I was impressed by the 50mm f/1.8S -- so much that I passed up the 24-70 f/4.0 "kit lens" and bought the 50 1.8 with my first Z6. Undoubtedly, the 1.2 is another stellar lens from Nikon and I wouldn't pass it up if someone wanted to buy one for me. But since I'm thinking of selling my last DSLR (D800) I'm thinking of the zooms next w/ teleconverters.
I am planning the same. To skip the kit lens and buy this 50 mm 1.8S. And then later on, I can always buy 20 mm 1.8s so wide angle landscape photography. 24-70 F4 is a very tempting lens but based on my usage, I mostly shoot at 24 mm or 50 mm so buying a 50 mm along with the 20 mm (later on) sounds more practical.
Hello Ricci, It's quite funny because I've just done a comparison of my 50mm lenses, a Nikon AI-S f1.8S ("pancake") vs the Nikon AI-S f1.2 vs the Canon rangefinder f0.95... which all now appear in the Nikon Z mount.. and quite interesting how the rendering of out of focus areas at full aperture compare! Would be interesting to pit the older vs newer lenses in that one area. Obviously sharpness of the newer lenses is superb and the older ones don't hold a candle.. but OOF?! That is subjective and may need some exploring. One area where the older lenses win hands-down though is size and weight. No contest there. Obviously they are also for different users, as the AF vs Manual focus makes them worlds apart. The one nice thing about the Nikon Z mount is that all these lens comparisons now become possible.. Even the Canon EF 50 1.2! :-) I'll try that one next.. And it autofocuses on the Z7ii
It would be nice if one day someone, does a camera or lens review, looking at pictures , instead of walls or garbage cans, that will be the ultimate review.
I don't really use my 50mm 1.8 as much anymore. I mainly use my 24, 35, and 85mm S lenses. But the 1.2 intrigues me as I do a lot of weddings. I want to wait to see what the upcoming 85mm 1.2 is like and see which one I'd like to get first for my professional work.
Thank you, Ricci, for continuing to show us the real quality differences between these lenses! Off-topic, but curious... Do you have the habit of turning image stabilization off, when shooting on a tripod, or do the Z cameras "know" not to affect the shot when the camera's not moving?
@@RicciTalks That's good to know! Thank you for the very fast answer. (I have the 50mm 1.8 S lens, and love it.) Hey, stay safe and have a great holiday season! :)
@@1973Antoniob I've used my z6 a bunch on tripod without turning off IBIS and I've never noticed any difference in sharpness. It's a precautionary thing I think but camera seems to just be smart enough to know when it's stationary and not to overcompensate with IBIS
Ah, Ricci posted. Great. Comment first, before viewing. When we discuss 50/1.8 versus 50/1.2, we cannot ignore the difference between F-stop and T-stop. And for Depth of Field (DoF), we cannot ignore the Circle of Confusion (CoC). I have seen 1.2 lenses with a T-stop of 1.5 and 1.4 lenses with a T-stop of 1.5, meaning for how much light they allow to pass that these two, 1.4 and 1.2, would be equally "fast". The CoC relates to the variable part in the DoF formula that is slightly subjective. Basically it says that a sharper lens has a smaller CoC and hence a shallower DoF. Or, a very sharp f/1.8 can have a shallower DoF at f/1.8 than a less sharp f/1.2 lens at aperture f/1.2. Note that DoF relates to the f/number and exposure to the T-number. Would the 1.2 be worth the price? Well, I should know how it deals with blur and breathing. Some people complain about focus breathing but that is just the law of physics you see for a "normal" lens. Cat eye blur balls are just the consequence of a circle looking like a circle only when you look at it front center perpendicular. When you look from the side, you see an ellipse. I actually would not complain about this. I point to Ansel Adams 's highly priced art landscape photos that are sharp between nearby and infinity. Or, it's all relative. Now start watching this video. Note: the Japanese word bokeh just means blur, so every time I used the work blur, you can replace it with bokeh, if you prefer.
If you notice on the comparative shot, wide open the f1.2 seems to let in more than one stop of light than the f1.8 and if I’m not mistaken, f1.2 to f1.8 is one stop? Would this indicate a very low T number on the f1.2?
Thanks, perfect comparison. I like the 1.2, I'd really want it for night photography, but because of the size and price I went for the 1.8. I feel like I'll be able to use it more carefree and capture more opportunities that way.
As usual - a great informative video. The only thing missing was comparing the focus breathing with the f1.8 lens.The colour chart white graticules looked to be very slightly sharper on the f1.8 when both were wide open but that may have been minute focussing differences or even my imagination.
Thanks Ricci! Your work with the Z cameras and S lenses is truly remarkable! A super big thank your for all you do sharing this information. As a Z6 owner, I am humbled by your expertise! Cheers!
Thank you for your lens comparing videos. They are among the very best one can find in the net. And to this video, the price leads to the best purchase.
Hi Ricci, Yes it show how good that F1.8 is for the cost. There is a difference in quality as such if a 50mm prim was what I was looking for I would save up a bit long to get the F1.2. As it is alway head to get the last bit of quality for any thing with out a cost. Keep well keep save and be happy.
I feel like the 1.8 is good enough for me. BUT I am pretty happy to have the 1.2 to rent if I have a shoot that demands it. I just bought the 85mm 1.8 now I am thinking maybe I should have waited for the 1.2 version of that.
As Z users, can we now stop our habit of the past (used to be talking about the chromatic aberration (CA) of our Nikon lenses)? Yes we can. And as the Z 7ii has no glass AA layer, this has another culprit removed in what we once might have called CA but that actually was total reflection between glass AA layer and another surface.
the comparison at the end with the image of yourself, it doesn't seem like the 1.2 image is sharp on you eye? Did it front focus there? The 1.8 in that image looks sharper on the intended target . have you done any focus testing between the two ? thanks!
I would personally prefer a 70mm 1.2 and 40mm 1.2 - 20mm 1.2 combo. To me the “boring” 50mm focal length doesn’t really make sense to capture close portraits so a 70mm would be much more interesting on a FX or even on a DX body. This may sound bizarre to some but this would be a selling point and really define a system that offers exotic fast 1.2 primes, like Leica is offering.
just found this comparison while daydreaming of the f/1.2, and well, looks like I will go on daydreaming. The only reason I will not purchase the f/1.2 is that I suffer from acute arthritis, and the associated pain points at neck and shoulders mean that I just cannot contemplate the idea of carrying such a lens as "standard" walkabout for hours at a time (same goes for 85 f/1.2 and 135 f/1.8 and longer zooms, but they are not usually on camera for full days). The price is entirely justified, the rendition and low light capabilities are out of this world.
I have been watching your very good Nikon videos for some time, and just to say you have renewed my interest in Nikon, since I have been with Nikon since the first F in 1960 , but having left a few years ago for Fuji due to their better customer Kaiser philosophy. I will be purchasing a Z5 but as a stills shooter only, I wish Nikon had dumped video and made it a stills camera only, and put in a BSI as in Fuji's and Z6. Nikon already has many models with video. Thanks, I am now subscribed.
I know you primarily work with Nikon, but would love to see the Nikon z50 f1.2 vs Canon RF 50 f1.2 since people have been saying the Canon is the sharpest 50.
Thanks for the good review. In my view, 50/1.8 beats 50/1.2 by sharpness. People who chose to buy f1.2 model, suppose to know why are they doing so (beside the "pro" look).
Unless you do a side by side comparison I don't think you can tell the difference in any aspect. I would get the 1.2 still as it's basically lense poon if i had the money. However if I was a professional wedding photographer I might just keep the 1.8 because it's light and small.
if you were in my place, would you buy a 20mm 1.8 and 35mm 1.8 or 24-70 2. 8 lens, but I already have a 50mm 1.2 lens, or should I take some out of the first two and take 85mm 1.8? I haven't seen the 50mm 1.2 and 85mm 1.8 test and I'm interested in blurring the background between the two tests by shooting or photographing a person as a portrait or the whole person in the frame. If 50mm 1.2 gives a bigger and similar blur, ie blurring the background, then I would reject 85mm 1.8 because I also have a sigma art 1.4 lens. and painting fitness and photo models and shooting and photographing dogs. so if you were me, what would you do? so imamsigma art 105mm 1.4 i have sigma art 50mm 1.4 and nikon older model which is not for z series 24mm 1.4 that sigma of 50mm and that nikon of 24mm 1.4 i would definitely sell, so I will have 105 sigma art 1.4 and nikon z 50mm 1.2 what to do I want to buy more?
It has been a long time since the prime 50mm focal length was relevant to me. But when I shot with the 50/1.8S that changed especially in low light situations. I’d rather have a large aperture short tele but the 50/1.2S is awfully tempting. Wow, simply wow. I can’t remember the methodology but assume the focus was achieved using AF and not MF with image zoom.
I have been thrilled with the 1.8 s and imaging my imagination, I wanted to get the 1.2 has been shaken a bit. Both are so good that any image seen alone would be impossible to fault. The smoothness of the lines and transitions do look great on the 1.2 but not $2000 better for my work. Maybe after the pandemic passes I have more work again I could rethink my decision. I need the 70-200 2.8 S more. My most use lens for client work is the 85 1.8 S. I will be selling the D850 and a lot of F lenses and will add the Z7 2 and stick with the Z6 because for what I shoot, I really do not need any of the improvements in the Z6 2. The AF in the version 3.x firmware is performing great for me.
Hi Ricci Thanks for this, it has helped me decide which one to buy. I have unrelated questions, what version Lightroom are you using? I thought Z7 II raw was not supported yet.
When I'm shooting video with the 50mm f1.8S and when I pull focus or use autofocus, I see flickering, like the exposures changes slightly for a split second and then jumps back. Does anyone else have this? For photography I really love it, it's superb.
I pre-ordered my 50 1.2 on day one, but looks like I missed the first shipment. Looking at this result, it really looks like my 1.8 might be good enough, and I should maybe just wait for the 85 (assuming that's a 1.2 as well) if my preorder is gonna take months to come.
Thank you very much for this great lens test. Did you also do a test on the Z6? I'm looking into that combo in the future, and I love to work wide open. But the price of the f1.2 will keep me wating longer. Is the difference the same as on the Z7? Thank you very much again.
Thanks! Please create reviews comparing Z lenses to Sigma Art and Tamron G2 lenses. Many of us have these 3rd party lenses because they were also better than the Nikon f mount counterparts. We know that often: Z > F, Art > F, G2 >F, But we don’t know by how much: Z > Art ???, Z > G2 ??? Of course professional photographers will go Z lenses , but should advanced enthusiasts?
Hey Everyone !
What are you Thinking ?
Do you think the F1.2 is worth the extra cost for you and what you shoot ?
Does this also show how good that Nikon Z 50mm F1.8S is?
Let me know in the comments below !
as always Thank you so much for watching !
I think for wedding 1.2 is really worth it in term of sharpness and bokeh, because we can do almost all purpose shot like candid and documentation if the space is available (dont need a wider lens)
dang. I haven't used the 1.8S yet but wow, this really shows how well it performs next to the 1.2S. I guess it just comes down to personal preference and budget. That 1.8S is amazing but at the same time, I would LOVE the 1.2S too. Personally, I would jump on the 1.2S. I've been waiting for it ever since there were images of it nearly 2 years ago(i think) :D
Thanks, this confirms that everything is as one would expect from a Nikon f/1.2. I think I may still need to see it used in its right element before coming to a final conclusion. Hoping to see some portrait and wedding photographers take it for a spin in the near future.
I have the 1.8 and it is good enough for now. Maybe I'll buy the 1.2 when they discount it -if ever. Thank you for posting this comparison review.
50mm is not my favorite focal length, so f1.8 is good enough for me. Save money for 85mm f1.2 for 2021. I think it will beat all 85mm lens on the market. Obviously, it must be big and heavy too
At the end of the day, Nikon has made both 50mm Z lenses for any type of shooter. You can focus incredibly fast with the 1.2 for stills and video but also have the 1.8 with image quality close to the 1.2 that doesn’t break the bank. Nikon has done well.
Well, at least for people who are actually using these lenses and not just sitting back and complaining about the fact that they “only released 1.8 lenses.” Instead of saying that their image quality is impeccable, they complain and that’s all sticks with the public.
For me it just reconfirms how great the 50mm f/1.8 S lens is. This is the one I want, best price-performance lens Nikon ever made. Zeiss quality for 600 bucks. Amazing.
Right now is $500 so even better :)
Bought it new for 350€. Best deal I‘ve ever made
Better-than-Zeiss
400 used in prestine condition its a steal
@@romanpul bought it new for 250€ 😉
I recently purchased the s50mm 1.8. I was so impressed, I also purchased the s85mm 1.8 a week later. I did a cross comparison with my older 50mm and 85mm 1.4g f mount lenses via the FTZ adapter. I couldn't believe the difference in Sharpness and reduced chromatic abberations and fringing,. Plus the difference in bokeh is marginal. Without hesitation, I sold both the 1.4's whilst they still have value to them and they covered the cost of the Z mounts with a little bit of change left over. Cleaner images, less work in lightroom, higher response and hit rate. I've never looked back. My only niggles with the mirrorless system so far is battery life and how much longer the lenses are compared to the f mount. The f1.2 looks phenominal too but with all this advance in new glass technology with clean and clinical images, I hope it doesn't detract from the "character" that lenses give us. Occasionally I like vignetting and flaring in my portraits styles
I recently bought a 1.8 f mount used and then sold it because it was so soft at 1.8. I now have the 1.8z and can say I don't need to stop it down for sharpness. It's going to stay wide open it's whole life.
It's not really bigger than the f mount 1.8. The adapter makes them the same size. And the old cameras were bigger.
@@veneratedmortal4369 Hi, I'm very surprised by that. I've owned both the 50mm 1.8g and 1.4g for the f mount, and I found the f 1.8g far sharper wide open. It was the 1.4g that was softer in sharpness wide open, and it was necessary to stop down a little. My 50mm 1.8g was always used confidently at f1.8, and I found the difference to be marginal to the Z version. Obviously, the Z version wins hand down for contolling chromatic abberations and resolving more detail, etc. I can only assume there's a lot of sample variations out there. I've heard a lot of conflicting stories with lenses, and personally, I think it comes down to the quality of the postal service 🤣
@@harvymckiernan93 I had the 1.4 years ago and it was ok sharp at 1.8 or 2.I may be remembering it better tho. The 1.8 F that i boughtwas really bad up until 2.8. Possibly sample was bad, the 1.8z is as shart at 1.8 as both of the old lenses at 4. I was hoping to keep the cheap 1.8f mount, but no amount of testing, focusing manual and auto, tripod, bright lights or any other method made it acceptable. skin wrinkles, eyelashes, detail in the eye is just gone. after about 5 hours of comparing test charts I found it was definitly the lense. it was used, perhaps dropped. but the lady i bought it from was a perfectionist house was amazing, still has the box etc, the lense is perfect to look at and everything else is fine.
@@veneratedmortal4369 Gosh, yes! The grueling hours of testing. I did the same a few years ago. I spent hours and hours painfully testing lenses and camera bodies; looking at forward and back focus issues, field curvatures, planar distortions, decentering, and so on. I even set up a lazer aligned rig to make sure the camera sensor was perfectly aligned to a 2 meter test chart on a wall. Even the focus point aspect ratios were measured. Dear 'o' dear, I was certainly a little OCD. This was (and still is) viewed using a 40" 4k monitor.
I certainly remember being shocked by sample variations. Sigma, I found to being one of the worst at the time. I remember selling my Sigma art 50mm f1.4 in favour of keeping my 50mm f1.8g. Thats why I was surprised by your story, but I know it happens. There was some serious pixel peeping done, plus quality control played a large part too.
That was also the pinnacle moment I decided to stay with native glass in future purchases. I come across a lot of people who mock brand dedicated Photographers. In my case it comes with good solid evidence and wasting money to find out the hard way. With the Z system, I've kept to the same philosophy. In saying that, we don't have many options anyway. I love the system, and I find I don't even bother to look a third party offering anymore. I certainly haven't been disappointed by their glass so far.
In fact since owning the Z system, it's made me focus more on the art of my photography. Coming from an engineering background, you can certainly get distracted with the technicality and misplace the artistry
I can’t separate my 50 1.2 from my Z9. They just love each other! I used to be a 35 and 85 photographer, now all I feel the need to photograph every wedding with this simple (if heavy) combo.
I am amazed at how sharp the 1.8 lens is. As a wedding and portrait photographer I could us the 1.8 and never look back, as compared to my F 1.4 50mm. I do like the extra light for lower ISO and great depth of field of the 1.2. The size and weight difference is now a major element in my selection. In the F days, I selected the fastest lens because they were a lot better and just paid the price and killed my back and arms with the weight of all the lens. Now I really going to consider how many really fast lens do I want in my pack when the 1.8's are really very good.
Can you compare the new 14-24 S vs the 14-30 S? Your content is awesome! Thanks Ricci
Ricci, you are the most thorough and careful reviewer of these lenses (I bought the 0.95 based upon yours plus one other excellent review) -- it would just be helpful if you would add an overall conclusion at the very end of your videos: "To sum up...". Keep up the great work!
Before I bought my Z6 I had never owned a prime lens, just the 18-55 kit lens that came with my D5500, plus a 70-300 DX lens, then the Tamron 150-600 G2, I love the wildlife photos i get with the Tamron on the Z6, but after watching your review of the 50mm 1.8 i bought one, I am absolutely blown away with the images it produces, one of my friends has started a vegan take away business, he shot all his product photos on a phone, the looked quite good, but I offered to re-shoot them, I have never done anything like that before, I can tell you how pleased I am with what the 50mm 1.8 did, the colours, sharpness and bokeh are incredible, I love this lens.
Nikon have played a blinder. Giving us an affordable but exceptionally good 1.8 + a top of the range 1.2 option to aspire to. I hope they roll out this 1.8 + 1.2 format in all future Z primes
No need for a midrange 1.4 when the 1.8 is so good.
@Photo Bunny yeah you’re probably right would be a small business decision
That's a great comparison. It shows exactly what I thought when I took mine for a walk. It is simply ridiculously sharp at 1.2.
Actually for me it would not be a problem for my pictures if it would be less sharp, but the AF works better if it is.
I am using the Smallrig plate on my Z6 and with that the weight can be handled. It would be difficult without.
It makes f1.2 more useful
Thank you so Much.
I've been torn between these two lenses.
In the past a fast 50 has often saved the shoot.
I really love fast glass but smaller is so much easier to carry around...
Great review but I think the 1.2 was much better in terms of contrast than it was given credit for. Not so much on the obvious edges but when I look at the black, curved buttons and grips the tones have a much richer gradient to them.
I also feel that the colours look less harsh on the 1.2...
I'm going to have to buy it now :(
Sep/2022, I just bought the 50mm 1.8S for my Z6II (waiting for delivery)... I'm in the midst of the "was that a good idea?" run on YT.
In terms of price vs performance, I cannot justify the ~AU$2000 difference in price vs the 1.2S. I can clearly see differences between the 2 lenses, especially check out night image differences elsewhere on YT. They're not something you couldn't correct in a good image editor these days anyway, so not a deal-breaker.
I'm not a "pro", just a "weekend warrior/dabbler". I don't expect I'd make any money off the photos I'd shoot. I want to be able to look at them on a screen, maybe printed out, and not even consider "I wish I had the more expensive lens". This video just made my day... It solidified my enthusiasm for my purchase!
Firstly, awesome content Ricci - hats off! Secondly, viva my Z 50mm F1.8S :D
I did think it will make a lot of 50mm f1.8 owners happy
I'm still happy with my 50mm 1.8S.
And I love these comparison videos. So informative.
Awesome video Ricci! Was REALLY looking forward to this comparison video too! Excellent showing the details from different apertures and how the bokeh 'looks'. Man, I can see why so many folks said the 1.8S is a beast, especially compared to the 1.2S. It's close but it's definitely personal preference at the end of the day too. Great video man!
Comparision between a Lamborghini and an Ferrari on the highest level possible - THANK YOU - great work !
This review is eye opening. I just received the 50mm 1.8 and am super happy with it. I am a professional pet photographer and it's not my style to take photos wide open. I seldom go below F4 as I want the eyes to nose to be sharp. I'm also a little jaded regarding F1.2 and F1.4 lenses because they weren't very good in the DSLR days. I determined a long time ago that F1.4 F mount lenses were not worth the price difference. In fact, they didn't always focus as accurately as their F1.8 counterparts even at F1.8. So, I stuck with the F1.8's. I figured that in the Z mount the F1.2 would be useable wide open. I did not expect it to be much sharper in general and I just love the micro-contrast and out of focus areas. Your review might have just cost me a ton of money. I might even photograph pets at a wider aperture than normal to add a more dreamy look. So, in this case, I think the F1.2 is worth it for a lot of photographers.
Another great video Ricci, thank you. Awesome lenses both.
Thanks 🙏 😊
This 50 f1.2 lens is just mind blowingly good. Wow. Considering that the 50 f1.8 S is one of the sharpest lenses every made, that performance at f1.2 is quite frankly astonishing.
Welcome to the Z -mount 😊
@@RicciTalks I received my 50 f1.2 S the other day and haven’t had a chance to test it against my f1.8 S.
The 50 f1.8 S was already almost perfect in sharpness wide open, so this lens really had a lot to live up to.
I got the f1.8 S when they had them on discount for £350 here in the UK, which was an absolute steal! So for me to fork out almost 6-7 times the amount to get the f1.2 S (which I need for my line of work), I wasn’t sure, but seeing these results have laid my concerns to rest.
The 50mm is one of my most used focal lengths, and having both the f1.8 and f1.2 has me covered for all situations.
Just got my 50/1.2s today ^^
How's it going?
@@craigtravis6537 It's my favorite lens now
@@zhoufang4503 Why did you say this? Now I have to buy it! 🤣
@@craigtravis6537 same
Im going for the 50mm F1:8, thanks for your review and advice, also the cheaper option!
Great comparison video. It actually looked to me like the 1.2 was sharper at 1.2 than the 1.8 was at 1.8. That's an amazing result. Great news for pro (close) portraitists, landscape shooters, and others. Seems like saturation/contrast was overall better too on the 1.2 at apertures below f/8. I'd also say they both have really nice out-of-focus rendering, but I suppose you'd expect that for a 50mm prime. Of course for a hobbyist like me who will probably never shoot anything even above 30 megapixels, it's all gravy. I'd be very happy with that 50mm f/1.8 on a Z5 or a Z 6/6II. Thanks!
If I was still shooting weddings and outdoor portraits I would really think about picking up that 1.2 for full length portraits. The extra shallow depth of field would be sweet.
Hi Ricci, thank you for the comparison. Very informative. One question I have - if you look from around 10:13 of your video - yes, I agree that there are more details in the coin area in the 50 1.2 photo. However, the Fn1 & Fn2 markings in 50 1.8 are a lot sharper. I am generally not into pixel peeping. But when you point to the coins, I also notice the Fn1 / Fn2 markings.
Yes, frankly, I noticed that as well on all the comparisons at least until f/4, or even f/8, and was waiting for your comment or explanation. At the same aperture, it was not due to depth of field.
The plane of focus seems to be just slightly closer to the camera on the f1.2. That could explain the focus difference in that area.
Im mainly putting this down to depth of field and the placement off centre both shots are focused in the same place and I take multiple shots to ensure that I don’t get strange occurrences I just don’t show you every frame obviously but you can see all the other frames I use for reference at the bottom of the Lightroom screen
I think because the 1.2 is larger and Iv not moved the position of the camera the position of the aperture blades are not exactly in the same place giving slightly different depths of field. Keep in mind I always want to compare images taken from the same spot and focused on the same spot
as an actual photographer wouldn’t move they would make the lens work for the composition
What a treat, I'd say the 1.2 has an advantage of speed and corner performance, apart from these two aspects the 1.8 is a mighty performer. Out of focus highlights and bokeh are fine from both lenses though smoother on the more expensive lens. Another interesting review Ricci, thanks for sharing it here. Seasons greetings to you, hope you have a fantastic 2021, stay safe. cheers.
Thank you for watching! Hope you have a great 2021
So really a no compromise f/1.2 lens at ALL apertures? Well done Nikon, also thanks Ricci!
Well...I have to admit that the 50mm 1.8 is a terrific lens, which makes it a tough go for the 1.2 in practical use. I have no financial limitations, but I think I'll go for the 1.8 as the quality is fantastic and the size makes it a far more usable lens. Great comparison and you won't go wrong with either!
iii love cameras/ lenses! however, 'i have no financial limitations'. was the DOPEST most inspirinG thinG about m'whole experience w. this video. new mantra, so calm. thank you, and biGGest blessinGs!
Awesome video, I was waiting for this one for so long. Thank you Ricci!!
Some considerations worth noting for me were the difference in size, weight and price. I just bought a refurbished Z 50mm 1.8 from Nikon USA, which was also on sale. I only paid $416 US dollars, which included my state sales tax. Can't beat that, I'm happy! It's in pristine condition as well. Thanks for the interesting comparison, but for someone like myself who just likes to walk around with a camera it doesn't make any difference. I'm so happy to know I got a damn good lens; a real bang for the buck. : )
I think you nailed it when you said how many times you’d need that f/1.2 which even from an advocate of the fastest lens possible, the cost difference and usage of the f/1.2 S over the f/1.8 is very small, at least for me as seeing how stunning the f/1.8 is, I’ll stick with it. I was truly blown away by its sharpness and having owned and used many nifty 50’s, the S f/1.8 is a true optical bargain and without doubt the best bang for buck you can get. You will not be disappointed with any images from it which says an awful lot.
This video has made me even more anxious to get my 1.2 now... Thanks Ricci =P
I just am hoping for that call from my store that my preorder is ready. Any day now...
straight to the point, very happy with my 1.8
Great video. For my use I cannot justify the cost of f/1.2, but no doubt it is phenomenal.
The 1.2 is the better lens. I sold my sigma art 50 for the 50 1.8 and am very happy. The 50mm 1.2 looks as big and heavy as the sigma 85 art which i sold just because of its size. The 50 1.8 is sharp enough for the 47mp sensor so that will do for me. Really good comparison Ricci :)
Love my Z50 f1.8. I can see how good the 1.2 is but no way could I justify the jump from the 1.8 for my level of photography. For me the two most interesting lenses, yet to come, will be the 105mm macro and an affordable telephoto. Currently I have the F-mount 300 PF prime (+1.4 tc) and the 200-500. I am waiting to see what Z-mount lenses will be offered to replace these.
Thank you! This test is very accurate and useful. I wonder if you could you help me to understand if there is a significative difference between the two lenses regarding speed and precision of the autofocus. Thank you again! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
From what I seen so far, I thought the 50mm 1.2 S would have slightly less bokeh goodness then the 50mm 1.8 S. But this video proved that wrong. Thank you ricci. The 50mm 1.2 S lens is probably the best 50mm ever made. I'm keen now to test it myself since I'm a sucker for bokeh. BUT - I'll probably stick to my 50mm 1.8 S anyway - it's just the bang for buck in the Z-System and my photo bag is already tight. :)
Viewing in my iMac, at 4K, from f/2 on ward I could not see a difference (youtube compression and my older eyes to blame?) in the scene comparison. The out of focus area is better in the f/1.2 for sure. I'd really like to see some astro shots from the f/1.2. I suspect they would be jaw dropping. That said, for my use case I have a hard time justifying the 1.2. Ufdah!
Interesting. I have the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S for my FM2 which I adore, so have been mulling over whether the Z 50mm f/1.2 is worth the investment. Great to see how good the 1.8 is - I've only just started shooting with this on my new z7ii and I'm delighted with the results so far.
Interesting - how do the Ai-S and 1.8 S compare?
Lovely reviews, just found out about your channel, thank you for the great content!
I'd love the 50mm f/1.2 for night time street photography, but people tend to notice when you point a cannon at them (thankfully I use a Nikon, haha).
Keep up the good work!
No real talk on autofocus performance or build quality between the two, lots of comparison images, but I would have liked to see and have learned much more about the other differences outside of image quality. Otherwise I guess if you're into this kind of review, that's cool. You're reviews are usually great and I've been a subscriber for a long time and you've come a long way in a short amount of time, so great job Ricci and congratulations on gaining so many new subscribers recently. I think you'll continue to grow and it would be nice if you could also do DSLR gear reviews, as I know you own or have tested the D6, D5 and 180-400mm, etc. As someone who is more interested in DSLR Nikon gear over mirrorless, it would be nice to see more balance and I think that would help grow your channel immensely. The majority of Nikon users are still using DSLR cameras and F-mount lenses and some are hybrid, shooting Z-series and DSLR side by side. I think you're mostly getting subscribers that are Z-mount users, so you could really benefit from doing some DSLR gear reviews. I know I would appreciate that and I think so would many other Nikon users. Thanks!
Many thanks for the video.
As a non-professional enthusiast what I saw from the sample photos - F 1.8 S at 1.8 is 97% the same good as F 1.2S at 1.2. I should to zoom in and review them side-to-side to see a difference.
1.2 S will be definitely better at 1.8.
But as a photographer I will be much more happier with smaller and lighter 1.8 S after a long day of shooting in the different locations. My neck will be happier :)
wow that's a pretty surprising result. That F1.8 is amazing !!
From the beginning, I was impressed by the 50mm f/1.8S -- so much that I passed up the 24-70 f/4.0 "kit lens" and bought the 50 1.8 with my first Z6. Undoubtedly, the 1.2 is another stellar lens from Nikon and I wouldn't pass it up if someone wanted to buy one for me. But since I'm thinking of selling my last DSLR (D800) I'm thinking of the zooms next w/ teleconverters.
I am planning the same. To skip the kit lens and buy this 50 mm 1.8S.
And then later on, I can always buy 20 mm 1.8s so wide angle landscape photography.
24-70 F4 is a very tempting lens but based on my usage, I mostly shoot at 24 mm or 50 mm so buying a 50 mm along with the 20 mm (later on) sounds more practical.
GREAT COMPARISON JOB. Lets you really see the quality differences between lenses. Thanks Ricci. Thanks to you I know which one to CHOOSE !!!
Hello Ricci, It's quite funny because I've just done a comparison of my 50mm lenses, a Nikon AI-S f1.8S ("pancake") vs the Nikon AI-S f1.2 vs the Canon rangefinder f0.95... which all now appear in the Nikon Z mount.. and quite interesting how the rendering of out of focus areas at full aperture compare! Would be interesting to pit the older vs newer lenses in that one area. Obviously sharpness of the newer lenses is superb and the older ones don't hold a candle.. but OOF?! That is subjective and may need some exploring. One area where the older lenses win hands-down though is size and weight. No contest there. Obviously they are also for different users, as the AF vs Manual focus makes them worlds apart. The one nice thing about the Nikon Z mount is that all these lens comparisons now become possible.. Even the Canon EF 50 1.2! :-) I'll try that one next.. And it autofocuses on the Z7ii
Thanks for the sound technical review/comparison. You have saved me £1700!
It would be nice if one day someone, does a camera or lens review, looking at pictures , instead of walls or garbage cans, that will be the ultimate review.
I don't really use my 50mm 1.8 as much anymore. I mainly use my 24, 35, and 85mm S lenses. But the 1.2 intrigues me as I do a lot of weddings. I want to wait to see what the upcoming 85mm 1.2 is like and see which one I'd like to get first for my professional work.
At 1.8 vs 1.2, clearly the 50mm 1.8 is noticeably sharper than the 50mm 1.2. At 1.8 vs 1.8, they are the same.
Thank you, Ricci, for continuing to show us the real quality differences between these lenses! Off-topic, but curious... Do you have the habit of turning image stabilization off, when shooting on a tripod, or do the Z cameras "know" not to affect the shot when the camera's not moving?
Z cameras and Z lenses “know” so I leave it on
@@RicciTalks That's good to know! Thank you for the very fast answer. (I have the 50mm 1.8 S lens, and love it.) Hey, stay safe and have a great holiday season! :)
Please can you explain? The manual say that it’s good to turn it off when use on a tripod.
@@1973Antoniob I've used my z6 a bunch on tripod without turning off IBIS and I've never noticed any difference in sharpness. It's a precautionary thing I think but camera seems to just be smart enough to know when it's stationary and not to overcompensate with IBIS
On my monitor, the f/1.2 looks like the colour black is appears very so slightly deeper/darker
Ah, Ricci posted. Great. Comment first, before viewing. When we discuss 50/1.8 versus 50/1.2, we cannot ignore the difference between F-stop and T-stop. And for Depth of Field (DoF), we cannot ignore the Circle of Confusion (CoC).
I have seen 1.2 lenses with a T-stop of 1.5 and 1.4 lenses with a T-stop of 1.5, meaning for how much light they allow to pass that these two, 1.4 and 1.2, would be equally "fast". The CoC relates to the variable part in the DoF formula that is slightly subjective. Basically it says that a sharper lens has a smaller CoC and hence a shallower DoF.
Or, a very sharp f/1.8 can have a shallower DoF at f/1.8 than a less sharp f/1.2 lens at aperture f/1.2. Note that DoF relates to the f/number and exposure to the T-number.
Would the 1.2 be worth the price? Well, I should know how it deals with blur and breathing.
Some people complain about focus breathing but that is just the law of physics you see for a "normal" lens. Cat eye blur balls are just the consequence of a circle looking like a circle only when you look at it front center perpendicular. When you look from the side, you see an ellipse.
I actually would not complain about this. I point to Ansel Adams 's highly priced art landscape photos that are sharp between nearby and infinity. Or, it's all relative.
Now start watching this video.
Note: the Japanese word bokeh just means blur, so every time I used the work blur, you can replace it with bokeh, if you prefer.
Wow, the corner sharpness of the f/1.2.
The 50/1.8S is a bargain.
I totally concur with Ricci (I own all the 1.8S primes and a Z 7 ii)
If you notice on the comparative shot, wide open the f1.2 seems to let in more than one stop of light than the f1.8 and if I’m not mistaken, f1.2 to f1.8 is one stop?
Would this indicate a very low T number on the f1.2?
@@ghas4151 - You got it. Its T-stop number must be very close to its f/number.
Thanks, perfect comparison. I like the 1.2, I'd really want it for night photography, but because of the size and price I went for the 1.8. I feel like I'll be able to use it more carefree and capture more opportunities that way.
I’ve been looking forward to this video! Thank you
As usual - a great informative video. The only thing missing was comparing the focus breathing with the f1.8 lens.The colour chart white graticules looked to be very slightly sharper on the f1.8 when both were wide open but that may have been minute focussing differences or even my imagination.
Thanks Ricci! Your work with the Z cameras and S lenses is truly remarkable! A super big thank your for all you do sharing this information. As a Z6 owner, I am humbled by your expertise! Cheers!
Hoped your teaser for the test vs. the Noct 58mm would be included. To be continued? LOL Happy Holidays.
Thank you for your lens comparing videos. They are among the very best one can find in the net. And to this video, the price leads to the best purchase.
Awesome work as always. I really appreciate what you do!
curious if there is a difference in af speed between the 1.8 and 1.2?
Hi Ricci, Yes it show how good that F1.8 is for the cost. There is a difference in quality as such if a 50mm prim was what I was looking for I would save up a bit long to get the F1.2. As it is alway head to get the last bit of quality for any thing with out a cost. Keep well keep save and be happy.
Completely agree for a lot of photographers there is never going to be a replacement for the absolute best glass and the 1.2 shows how good it is !
both awesome lenses ::: I own the 1.8 and love it, if I ever gather enough cashflow I'll get the 1.2
How much light does the 50 1.2 transmit to the sensor? Is it darker at the same setting?
I think the 1.8 looks a hair sharper wide open but the quality of the 1.2 is definitely exceptional
I feel like the 1.8 is good enough for me. BUT I am pretty happy to have the 1.2 to rent if I have a shoot that demands it. I just bought the 85mm 1.8 now I am thinking maybe I should have waited for the 1.2 version of that.
As Z users, can we now stop our habit of the past (used to be talking about the chromatic aberration (CA) of our Nikon lenses)? Yes we can.
And as the Z 7ii has no glass AA layer, this has another culprit removed in what we once might have called CA but that actually was total reflection between glass AA layer and another surface.
1.8s 50mm is great for me.
Short lens, Lightweight lens, High quality. The 1.2s will be, only in a 85mm
because of the perfect length and bokeh.
You continue to be the voice of reason, talking me off the GAS cliff... lol
Hi Ricci. Great video as always! Did you ever compared the 50mm f1.8 Z with the 50mm f1.4 af-s? Kudos!
Thank you. I love my F1.8 on the Z6 II. The perfect team.
the comparison at the end with the image of yourself, it doesn't seem like the 1.2 image is sharp on you eye? Did it front focus there? The 1.8 in that image looks sharper on the intended target . have you done any focus testing between the two ? thanks!
I would personally prefer a 70mm 1.2 and 40mm 1.2 - 20mm 1.2 combo. To me the “boring” 50mm focal length doesn’t really make sense to capture close portraits so a 70mm would be much more interesting on a FX or even on a DX body. This may sound bizarre to some but this would be a selling point and really define a system that offers exotic fast 1.2 primes, like Leica is offering.
just found this comparison while daydreaming of the f/1.2, and well, looks like I will go on daydreaming. The only reason I will not purchase the f/1.2 is that I suffer from acute arthritis, and the associated pain points at neck and shoulders mean that I just cannot contemplate the idea of carrying such a lens as "standard" walkabout for hours at a time (same goes for 85 f/1.2 and 135 f/1.8 and longer zooms, but they are not usually on camera for full days). The price is entirely justified, the rendition and low light capabilities are out of this world.
I have been watching your very good Nikon videos for some time, and just to say you have renewed my interest in Nikon, since I have been with Nikon since the first F in 1960 , but having left a few years ago for Fuji due to their better customer Kaiser philosophy. I will be purchasing a Z5 but as a stills shooter only, I wish Nikon had dumped video and made it a stills camera only, and put in a BSI as in Fuji's and Z6. Nikon already has many models with video. Thanks, I am now subscribed.
at 6:22 marker, 1.8S is clearly sharper when looking at the "Fn" buttons of that camera in the bg. Anyone know why?
Great video! Perhaps you can add an artificial plant/flower and/or a string of small lights for bokeh effect comparison.
The 1.2 is a very nice lens. But after using my 1.8 I don't think I'll upgrade. Looking forward to the 85mm 1.2.
I know you primarily work with Nikon, but would love to see the Nikon z50 f1.2 vs Canon RF 50 f1.2 since people have been saying the Canon is the sharpest 50.
Iv seen the comparison shots the Nikon is the sharper but you would expect that being the larger lens
@@RicciTalks ok great! Can you link the video? Would love to see it!
Nikon did a fantastic job on the 1.8 it's a no brainier for me but great to have the choice for people wanting a 1.2
Thanks for the good review. In my view, 50/1.8 beats 50/1.2 by sharpness. People who chose to buy f1.2 model, suppose to know why are they doing so (beside the "pro" look).
The 50/1.2 pictures are 2% bigger. What there a difference if you compare with adjusted camera position?
I was exactly searching for this :)
Unless you do a side by side comparison I don't think you can tell the difference in any aspect. I would get the 1.2 still as it's basically lense poon if i had the money. However if I was a professional wedding photographer I might just keep the 1.8 because it's light and small.
if you were in my place, would you buy a 20mm 1.8 and 35mm 1.8 or 24-70 2. 8 lens, but I already have a 50mm 1.2 lens, or should I take some out of the first two and take 85mm 1.8? I haven't seen the 50mm 1.2 and 85mm 1.8 test and I'm interested in blurring the background between the two tests by shooting or photographing a person as a portrait or the whole person in the frame. If 50mm 1.2 gives a bigger and similar blur, ie blurring the background, then I would reject 85mm 1.8 because I also have a sigma art 1.4 lens. and painting fitness and photo models and shooting and photographing dogs. so if you were me, what would you do? so imamsigma art 105mm 1.4 i have sigma art 50mm 1.4 and nikon older model which is not for z series 24mm 1.4 that sigma of 50mm and that nikon of 24mm 1.4 i would definitely sell, so I will have 105 sigma art 1.4 and nikon z 50mm 1.2 what to do I want to buy more?
It has been a long time since the prime 50mm focal length was relevant to me. But when I shot with the 50/1.8S that changed especially in low light situations. I’d rather have a large aperture short tele but the 50/1.2S is awfully tempting. Wow, simply wow.
I can’t remember the methodology but assume the focus was achieved using AF and not MF with image zoom.
I test both I will take some shots with pinpoint and I’ll take some shots with manual focus zoomed in to check if there’s a difference
Hi Ricci, Thanks for another great video.
I have been thrilled with the 1.8 s and imaging my imagination, I wanted to get the 1.2 has been shaken a bit. Both are so good that any image seen alone would be impossible to fault. The smoothness of the lines and transitions do look great on the 1.2 but not $2000 better for my work. Maybe after the pandemic passes I have more work again I could rethink my decision. I need the 70-200 2.8 S more. My most use lens for client work is the 85 1.8 S. I will be selling the D850 and a lot of F lenses and will add the Z7 2 and stick with the Z6 because for what I shoot, I really do not need any of the improvements in the Z6 2. The AF in the version 3.x firmware is performing great for me.
Hi Ricci
Thanks for this, it has helped me decide which one to buy. I have unrelated questions, what version Lightroom are you using? I thought Z7 II raw was not supported yet.
Excellent video, Ricci.
Thank you !
When I'm shooting video with the 50mm f1.8S and when I pull focus or use autofocus, I see flickering, like the exposures changes slightly for a split second and then jumps back. Does anyone else have this?
For photography I really love it, it's superb.
Would you take any if these lenses out for some street photography?
I pre-ordered my 50 1.2 on day one, but looks like I missed the first shipment. Looking at this result, it really looks like my 1.8 might be good enough, and I should maybe just wait for the 85 (assuming that's a 1.2 as well) if my preorder is gonna take months to come.
I’m not aware of any delay on the 1.2 manufacturing so shouldn’t be too long
I wonder what will be new from Nikon and when we will learn about it.
There's always Nikon Rumors! They're pretty good with leaks.
Thank you very much for this great lens test. Did you also do a test on the Z6? I'm looking into that combo in the future, and I love to work wide open. But the price of the f1.2 will keep me wating longer. Is the difference the same as on the Z7? Thank you very much again.
Is the 1.8 noticeably better than the 24-70 2.8 at 50mm? 🤔
as a z6 50mm 1.8 owner, this video made my day.. 1.8 is winner... pity that nikon not able to replicate same with other 1.8 lenses
Z85 1.8 is equally good, so is the 20mm 1.8.
Thanks! Please create reviews comparing Z lenses to Sigma Art and Tamron G2 lenses.
Many of us have these 3rd party lenses because they were also better than the Nikon f mount counterparts.
We know that often: Z > F, Art > F, G2 >F,
But we don’t know by how much: Z > Art ???, Z > G2 ???
Of course professional photographers will go Z lenses , but should advanced enthusiasts?