Poor man photographer here. I have the 1.8G and am in love with it. I don't see the need to spend 3 to 4 times more money for the 1.4G, when I can get more lenses in addition to the 1.8 G. That's just me.
1.8 has worse color fringing. I have them both, and although the sharpness is comparable, I love 1.4 better. As for the value - 1.8 is definitely better choice.
I just got the 1.8G. I love it! I was checking all the reviews on the 85mm lenses including the 3rd party lenses. Overall I agree with you that this is the better lens for the money and 1.8 is more than enough for my needs and it rounds out my prime lens collection of the Nikkor 35mm, 50mm and the 85mm. All of them are the G series. Can't be beat for the money.
Having owned both, and using them commercially, I’ll add this. The 1.4 may offer better color and micro contrast on unedited images. The differences VANISH once run through a professional post production workflow. I am not hating on the folks trying to justify their purchases of a ~$1000 increase in price lens, but get real. With today’s software, and more importantly final client end outlets/media, it’s hard to justify.
Ok, so I’m not so good at editing photos lol. However I found a 1.4g 85mm Prime lens locally relatively new for $700, I also found an 85mm f1.8g for $220. Should I just go for the 1.8? I have a Nikon D750, I’ve owned d3400 and d5200 before so I’m not an Amateur but not advanced either what should I buy?
@@mlrivera565 I can buy the 85mm 1.4 but I can't really justify the cost. I'm not good at post either and I don't want spend a lot of time editing photos. I want my photos to look as "real" as possible with mostly natural light. If the 1.4 is sharper with better realistic colors and better contrast and bokeh, I might just go with the 1.4. I (after extensive searching) will not buy the Sigma Art 85mm 1.4 due to the horrible auto focus and I'm not going to consider Samyang/Rokinon 84mm 1.4 due to AF and colors issues. Other than that there's Zeiss out there and that's out of my league and budget.
Matt, Nikon f1.4G and 1.8G are almost the same on a cropped sensor body. But the f1.4G really shines on a full frame body like the D810 (30 P-Mpix for f1.4G as opposed to 26 P-Mpix with the f1.8G). Only the Zeiss Otus (prohibitively priced) and Zeiss Milvus are better. However, I have the Nikon 85mm f1.8G and am perfectly happy with it.
it is not always value is measured in money in a lens but how the lens is drawing the image, color sharpness vignetting etc.,There are many photographers who believes 85mm 1.4 has better value not in money but how the lens drawing the images
I very often take my 85 mm 1.8G with me (on the D750) to use it as a makeshift telephoto lens, instead of my heavy 70-200. The 85 1.8G is so darn sharp, that I can easily crop it down to simulate the 200 mm focal range, and still results incredibly sharp, more than usable image. The best thing, that at f2.2, at the center it reaches peak sharpness already, but even at 1.8 it's fantastic. Sometimes the bokeh is a bit too harsh for me, but it can be easily softened up in post process.
Nothing fancy: when you crop down a 85 mm 24 MP image to half, you get the same perspective as a 170 mm 1.8 lens gets on a 12 MP M4/3 sensor. I can even crop down 4 times, which emulates 340 mm 6 MP resolution, much more than enough for screen.
You hear similar comparisons regards Nikons 50mm f1.4 vs the 50mm f1.8. The concensus seems to be that the f1.8 is overall a better lens optically. I own the f1.4 version and am perfectly happy with its performance :-D
The difference is actually huge. The 1.4G is sharper, has better contrast, better AF acquisition in low light, better colour rendition and nicer bokeh. The 1.8 IS a good lense, just not as good as the 1.4G. The fact that it cost much less, doesn't make it better or _as good_ , only more affordable.
Hi Matt, I own both lenses and I feel the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 G lens is far superior to the 85mm f/1.8 for portrait photography. Where as both lenses are adequately sharp the real differences are in build quality, color rendition, bokeh and micro contrast. Of course the 85mm f/1.8 is the better value, but the 85mm f/1.4 G lens is simply superior in every way and one of the finest portrait lenses that I've used.
Same, I've just replaced the 1.8 with 1.4 and straight away the colours and look and feel of the image just have that bit more. My 1.8 was very good and I have a family fav that I took on it but you can tell the difference of a 1.4. It was probably Dani Diamond's work that drew me to the 1.4
If you're a amateur, like me, budget is a huge factor, since I'll not have any monetary return with a new lens. In this case, seems that 1.4 is not worth twice the price (value in Brazil) of the 1.8 just for 1/3 of a stop and a little more bokeh. Sharpness will be imperceptible on my D610, and the lower chromatic aberration and distortion are more valuable. Thanks for showing that!
I agree with you entirely. In the UK. the F1.4 is £1000 more expensive than the F1.8. My 85 F1.8 is possibly my favourite lens. Image Quality is stunning.
The decision for many, I'd imagine, will pend on whether the 85mm lens will be heavily used or just for occasionally use. I deduced the higher grade of material and better build quality of the 1.4g will have a longer life span ( thereby worth the investment ) than the much cheaper plastic casing of the 1.8g, which if dropped from a height on concrete, will seriously damage , if not kill it.
I have no use for either because both are G lenses with no aperture ring. I use a pre-ai 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor manual focus lens and an f/1,4 Nikkor 85mm D auto focus lens.
I have a number of mid to long portrait lenses, including the 85 1.4D and 85 1.8G, 105 and 135 2.0DC, 50 1.2mf, Simga 50 1.4 and others. The one that stays in my bag is the 85 1.8G. Not only is it a great deal, the size and weight versus performance is excellent and more likely to be used since if so convenient to take. If feels solid for a plastic housing, Nikon has done a very good job with their 1.8 series lower cost lenses including the 20 1.8g and 50 1.8G I used to have a 85 1.4D and it was quite a bit less competitive to the 85 1.4D of the same era. Unless one is doing full time portrait photography it is hard to recommend the 85 1.4G when the 1.8G is so close,95% of its 3x more costly big brother. Another poster cited color fringing on the 1.8G yet that is not the case from my daily use of it. It might be a copy to copy variation but the two I have used did not have such a problem. The old 85 1.8D did have that problem however. A big advantage over the older 1.4 and 1.8D is from the modern coatings of the G series.
Next to my 16-35 mm, the 85mm F1.8 is my favourite in my bag. The results from it are outstanding. I am sure the F1.4 is just as good. The 1.4 is £1000 more than the 1.8. To me it is a no brainer. I would not, (could not) spend that amount of money on a slightly faster lens. If anyone is thinking which one, buy the 1.8, you will not regret it. At the risk of repeating myself. The 85mm F1.8 is a brilliant lens.
Ok, so I’m not so good at editing photos lol. However I found a 1.4g 85mm Prime lens locally relatively new for $700, I also found an 85mm f1.8g for $220. Should I just go for the 1.8? I have a Nikon D750, I’ve owned d3400 and d5200 before so I’m not an Amateur but not advanced either what should I buy?
Man I'm going round and round trying to decide on an 85. I have a 50 1.4 that performs well and am wondering if the 85 1.8 will compare, or if I need to splurge for the 1.4. Anyone know how the 85 1.8 compares to the 50 1.4 in performance?
I am NOT questioning the optical quality of the f/1.8, but the f/1.4 version is not just about a little more light gathering ability. When you purchase the 85mm f/1.4, you are also paying for the better build quality of the lens; one that can take a beating during professional use. Having said that, I would still buy the f/1.8 over the f/1.4 since I don't see the point in paying more than three times the price.
The lower mass 1.8 is solid but also does not need to be as rugged for the same survival rates, due to its smaller size and weight. I have a lot of lenses include the all metal 1.4D version and the smaller lighter 1.8G is the one that gets tossed into the bag daily unless absolutely needing a larger lens. 90% of the time the 1.4 sits on the shelf.
I agree with you, I own the 85mm f1.8G to fit my Nikon D810 .... it's awesome. I found a copy, used, at $400 Canadian dollars, very cheap for this quality.
Hi Matt, Thank you for your videos. I must say I agree with most of your opiniones. I already purchased the 85mm f1.8 and the 24 -120 f4. Excelent value for the money! Cheers Dario
85mm f1.4 has better color rendition plus slightly better bokeh but is has worse corner and edge sharpness. f1.8 has better sharpness at edges so overal a sharper image across the entire image. colors can be fixed with preset in your raw software. so f1.8 is a good buy. I actually own one. f1.4 also actually has better build quality, but then again you can buy three f1.8 85mm's for one f1.4. even if you have the money for the f1.4,. maybe it is wiser to buy the f1.8 and spend the rest on some strobes or something. if your light is bad, your f1.4 will still make bad pictures.
Ok, Is Matt Granger good enough for you? He also discovered the f/1.8 is as good as f/1.4 for most of us. Please also look at Darren Miles video oon 85 mm f/1.8G. Don't attack a person just for the sake of it, it is called Ad Hominem and is illogical. Your premise is "A good photographer is more knowledgeable about all lenses" and that premise is flawed. Many of them haven't used all lenses.
Let’s not fool ourselves here. Bokeh on the 1.4 is better period. The bokeh on the 1.8 is exceptional. The 1.8 is a better value at the end of the day. The 1.4 also has a warmer color saturation than the the 1.8 leaning more on the red side. The 1.8 has a cooler color saturation leaning note to the blue side. Side by side and shit wide open the 1.8 looks mite lifeless against the 1.4. The 1.4’s color pops a tad bit more because of the warmness.
I have both lenses. The 1.8 is sharper wide open so I use it for that. The 1.4 is much sharper from about f2.2 to f-11 where it is crazy sharp. I use the 1.4 in my studio. The 1.8 will produce pretty significant chromatic aberration in a back lit image. You will get good a fixing in post if you use it that way. The 1.4 also does this, though not near as bad. For most applications the f1.4 is a better lens....Build quality is on an entirely different level than the 1.8. Whether you are willing to spend the money to get it is up to you, but there certainly is a difference. Just don't waste your money on Sigma! DXO Mark is less useless than a one legged man...In an ass kicking contest.
I can buy the 85mm 1.4 but I can't really justify the cost. I'm not good at post either and I don't want spend a lot of time editing photos. I want my photos to look as "real" as possible with mostly natural light. If the 1.4 is sharper with better realistic colors and better contrast and bokeh, I might just go with the 1.4. I (after extensive searching) will not buy the Sigma Art 85mm 1.4 due to the horrible auto focus and I'm not going to consider Samyang/Rokinon 84mm 1.4 due to AF and colors issues. Other than that there's Zeiss out there and that's out of my league and budget.
I wouldn't bother with the 85mm 1.4G, I own the Nikon 85mm 1.8G and this lens is so sharp its almost ridiculous. Love this lens and don't see any reason to get the far more expensive 1.4 lens. Today after going through lots of prime lenses my 2 favorite Nikon prime lenses are the 35mm 1.8G ED and 85mm 1.8G on full frame body.
ArtoftheImage agreed Never the less I like my 24-70mm 2.8 and 70-200mm 2.8 got weddings but with these 2 primes you cover yourself for most of the event.
The f 1.8 it's a better choice, is three times cheaper and the image quality it's almost the same. There is no such big difference between this two lenses, just the price. :)
The difference is actually huge. The 1.4G is sharper, has better contrast, better AF acquisition in low light, better colour rendition and nicer bokeh.
I have most fast 1.4s and theres not much difference . The 1.8 you cant tell colour rendition its a myth , i use zooms at the mo because this weather is crappy with muck in the air , but using the 1.4 against the 1.8 theres only build quality , and a fraction of a stop which you wont use i rarely use any prime wide open , conditions contradict otherwise , life eh ! So buy the 1.8
I currently own the Nikon 85mm F/1.4 G lens. It’s horrible. It’s way too soft and not sharp. There is also color fringing. Canon much cheaper and does a better job. Now Sony is starting to catch up.
Crystal Chai Nikon is known for its ridiculous prices. Even its 35mm 1.4 is ridiculously expensive and they claim it is the sharpest lens ever made. I use the 85mm 1.4 by sigma and it never disappoints.
I can see your strategy here. Most people visiting your channel, could not afford the more expencive model. You therefore, decide to talk out of your ass (aka. BS), stating that the budget friendly models are equal to the expencive ones. People need to get confirmation that they have made the right choise, even though it is based on a lie. As a result you get more subscribers, and likes. In the long run, I think this strategy is a failoure.
Seriously? The folks believing the 1.8 is superior are the ones too cheap to buy the 1.4. There is no comparison and if you put that 85mm 1.4 on a body like the D850, it will run circles around the 1.8. The only attraction of the 1.8 is the price. It's a good lenses, but get real people. It is not better than the 1.4 except for its affordability. It's irritating when some people try to justify their cheapness by saying the 1.8 is sharper. That is simply not true and there are a whole lot of other factors that come into play like color, fringing, etc.
You will always remain in our hearts Matt. R.I.P.
@Snooty Fox commited suicide few months ago
@Snooty Fox me too, what a shame. may he rest in peace.
@Snooty Fox what do you mean
@Snooty Fox I dont know.. maybe home troubles, stress, cound be countless of other reasons
gonna miss this guy , had some good arguments , he was always whitty , god bless buddy
Poor man photographer here. I have the 1.8G and am in love with it. I don't see the need to spend 3 to 4 times more money for the 1.4G, when I can get more lenses in addition to the 1.8 G. That's just me.
Good for you ..theres not a bit of difference , but price
Rest In Peace . Your videos were invaluable. I wish your family the best.
I had both of them but 1.4G has better color rendition specially for portrait as well as much better bokeh plus much sharper on my D810.
1.8 has worse color fringing. I have them both, and although the sharpness is comparable, I love 1.4 better. As for the value - 1.8 is definitely better choice.
I love my 85mm f1.4G. I have had it a number of years and I not sure about these DXO marks I now jus look at the results.
i have the 1.8G and love it. the bokeh is gorgeous and it's light enough to be in my bag along with the 50 1.8G all the time.
I just got the 1.8G. I love it! I was checking all the reviews on the 85mm lenses including the 3rd party lenses. Overall I agree with you that this is the better lens for the money and 1.8 is more than enough for my needs and it rounds out my prime lens collection of the Nikkor 35mm, 50mm and the 85mm. All of them are the G series. Can't be beat for the money.
Having owned both, and using them commercially, I’ll add this. The 1.4 may offer better color and micro contrast on unedited images. The differences VANISH once run through a professional post production workflow. I am not hating on the folks trying to justify their purchases of a ~$1000 increase in price lens, but get real. With today’s software, and more importantly final client end outlets/media, it’s hard to justify.
Ok, so I’m not so good at editing photos lol. However I found a 1.4g 85mm Prime lens locally relatively new for $700, I also found an 85mm f1.8g for $220. Should I just go for the 1.8? I have a Nikon D750, I’ve owned d3400 and d5200 before so I’m not an Amateur but not advanced either what should I buy?
@@mlrivera565 I can buy the 85mm 1.4 but I can't really justify the cost. I'm not good at post either and I don't want spend a lot of time editing photos. I want my photos to look as "real" as possible with mostly natural light. If the 1.4 is sharper with better realistic colors and better contrast and bokeh, I might just go with the 1.4. I (after extensive searching) will not buy the Sigma Art 85mm 1.4 due to the horrible auto focus and I'm not going to consider Samyang/Rokinon 84mm 1.4 due to AF and colors issues. Other than that there's Zeiss out there and that's out of my league and budget.
Matt, Nikon f1.4G and 1.8G are almost the same on a cropped sensor body. But the f1.4G really shines on a full frame body like the D810 (30 P-Mpix for f1.4G as opposed to 26 P-Mpix with the f1.8G). Only the Zeiss Otus (prohibitively priced) and Zeiss Milvus are better.
However, I have the Nikon 85mm f1.8G and am perfectly happy with it.
Perfectly happy is perfect :-)
What about the Sigma 85mm 1.4
You see folks, this is the problem with youtube. Any person with an opinion can make a video, even if it is not based upon facts, science, or truth.
I have the 85mm 1.4d, how does it compare?
it is not always value is measured in money in a lens but how the lens is drawing the image, color sharpness vignetting etc.,There are many photographers who believes 85mm 1.4 has better value not in money but how the lens drawing the images
i've heard that as well.
also that the 1.8 focuses faster than the 1.4
Good point. That is often the case with the f1.4 lenses :-)
I very often take my 85 mm 1.8G with me (on the D750) to use it as a makeshift telephoto lens, instead of my heavy 70-200. The 85 1.8G is so darn sharp, that I can easily crop it down to simulate the 200 mm focal range, and still results incredibly sharp, more than usable image.
The best thing, that at f2.2, at the center it reaches peak sharpness already, but even at 1.8 it's fantastic. Sometimes the bokeh is a bit too harsh for me, but it can be easily softened up in post process.
EDC Gadgets care to do the math?
Nothing fancy: when you crop down a 85 mm 24 MP image to half, you get the same perspective as a 170 mm 1.8 lens gets on a 12 MP M4/3 sensor.
I can even crop down 4 times, which emulates 340 mm 6 MP resolution, much more than enough for screen.
EDC Gadgets 2x crop cuts MP by 4 and 4x crop cuts MP by 16
You hear similar comparisons regards Nikons 50mm f1.4 vs the 50mm f1.8. The concensus seems to be that the f1.8 is overall a better lens optically. I own the f1.4 version and am perfectly happy with its performance :-D
The f/1.4G has the nano crystal coating, versus the f/1.8G does not. ‘That’ is why it costs so much more.
The difference is actually huge. The 1.4G is sharper, has better contrast, better AF acquisition in low light, better colour rendition and nicer bokeh. The 1.8 IS a good lense, just not as good as the 1.4G. The fact that it cost much less, doesn't make it better or _as good_ , only more affordable.
I'm a startup photographer, what do you recommend?
i would buy the 85mm f/1.4D
Hi Matt, I own both lenses and I feel the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 G lens is far superior to the 85mm f/1.8 for portrait photography. Where as both lenses are adequately sharp the real differences are in build quality, color rendition, bokeh and micro contrast. Of course the 85mm f/1.8 is the better value, but the 85mm f/1.4 G lens is simply superior in every way and one of the finest portrait lenses that I've used.
Same, I've just replaced the 1.8 with 1.4 and straight away the colours and look and feel of the image just have that bit more. My 1.8 was very good and I have a family fav that I took on it but you can tell the difference of a 1.4. It was probably Dani Diamond's work that drew me to the 1.4
If you're a amateur, like me, budget is a huge factor, since I'll not have any monetary return with a new lens. In this case, seems that 1.4 is not worth twice the price (value in Brazil) of the 1.8 just for 1/3 of a stop and a little more bokeh. Sharpness will be imperceptible on my D610, and the lower chromatic aberration and distortion are more valuable. Thanks for showing that!
I agree with you entirely. In the UK. the F1.4 is £1000 more expensive than the F1.8. My 85 F1.8 is possibly my favourite lens. Image Quality is stunning.
I'm looking to buy the Nikon d7100 would you recommend the nikon 85- 1.8 what are your thoughts
The decision for many, I'd imagine, will pend on whether the 85mm lens will be heavily used or just for occasionally use.
I deduced the higher grade of material and better build quality of the 1.4g will have a longer life span ( thereby worth the investment ) than the much cheaper plastic casing of the 1.8g, which if dropped from a height on concrete, will seriously damage , if not kill it.
I have no use for either because both are G lenses with no aperture ring.
I use a pre-ai 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor manual focus lens and an f/1,4 Nikkor 85mm D auto focus lens.
Did you test them at all or just go by specs on paper?
I have a number of mid to long portrait lenses, including the 85 1.4D and 85 1.8G, 105 and 135 2.0DC, 50 1.2mf, Simga 50 1.4 and others. The one that stays in my bag is the 85 1.8G. Not only is it a great deal, the size and weight versus performance is excellent and more likely to be used since if so convenient to take. If feels solid for a plastic housing, Nikon has done a very good job with their 1.8 series lower cost lenses including the 20 1.8g and 50 1.8G
I used to have a 85 1.4D and it was quite a bit less competitive to the 85 1.4D of the same era. Unless one is doing full time portrait photography it is hard to recommend the 85 1.4G when the 1.8G is so close,95% of its 3x more costly big brother. Another poster cited color fringing on the 1.8G yet that is not the case from my daily use of it. It might be a copy to copy variation but the two I have used did not have such a problem. The old 85 1.8D did have that problem however. A big advantage over the older 1.4 and 1.8D is from the modern coatings of the G series.
Next to my 16-35 mm, the 85mm F1.8 is my favourite in my bag. The results from it are outstanding. I am sure the F1.4 is just as good. The 1.4 is £1000 more than the 1.8. To me it is a no brainer. I would not, (could not) spend that amount of money on a slightly faster lens. If anyone is thinking which one, buy the 1.8, you will not regret it. At the risk of repeating myself. The 85mm F1.8 is a brilliant lens.
hi how about 85mm 1.4d? does it worth to buy?
I love my 1.8G on my D750 !
ron topp agree
I am also looking to buy this lens... But confused...
And mine on my D610
Ok, so I’m not so good at editing photos lol. However I found a 1.4g 85mm Prime lens locally relatively new for $700, I also found an 85mm f1.8g for $220. Should I just go for the 1.8? I have a Nikon D750, I’ve owned d3400 and d5200 before so I’m not an Amateur but not advanced either what should I buy?
what about sigma art 1.4 vs. Nikon 1.8 for 85mm ? is the size and price worth the sigma lens ?
Sigma 85mm f1,4 Art is not optically superior to the Nikon.
that's not what most are saying
ended up with a used nikon 85mm 1.4g, so good :)
@@belleslovinit hows the nikon after 1 year of use?
The acid test would be to place identical photos taken at f2.0 and blind test which lens 1.4 vs 1.8 took each photo…
Man I'm going round and round trying to decide on an 85. I have a 50 1.4 that performs well and am wondering if the 85 1.8 will compare, or if I need to splurge for the 1.4. Anyone know how the 85 1.8 compares to the 50 1.4 in performance?
can I use the 1.8g 85mm combined with the Nikon 17-55 2.8 on my nikon d3200 for small weddings
I am NOT questioning the optical quality of the f/1.8, but the f/1.4 version is not just about a little more light gathering ability. When you purchase the 85mm f/1.4, you are also paying for the better build quality of the lens; one that can take a beating during professional use. Having said that, I would still buy the f/1.8 over the f/1.4 since I don't see the point in paying more than three times the price.
I'm NOT convinced the 85mm f1.4G is better built than the 85mm f1.8G :-)
The lower mass 1.8 is solid but also does not need to be as rugged for the same survival rates, due to its smaller size and weight. I have a lot of lenses include the all metal 1.4D version and the smaller lighter 1.8G is the one that gets tossed into the bag daily unless absolutely needing a larger lens. 90% of the time the 1.4 sits on the shelf.
I agree with you, I own the 85mm f1.8G to fit my Nikon D810 .... it's awesome. I found a copy, used, at $400 Canadian dollars, very cheap for this quality.
Great review Matt. Miss you my friend.
Great survey. Many thanks. My vote 1.8g
What would be your recommendation on a DX in that size lens?
Steven Lench you can buy this for the f2f it's 120mm
Hi Matt,
Thank you for your videos. I must say I agree with most of your opiniones. I already purchased the 85mm f1.8 and the 24 -120 f4. Excelent value for the money!
Cheers
Dario
How is it with the D7000
85mm f1.4 has better color rendition plus slightly better bokeh but is has worse corner and edge sharpness. f1.8 has better sharpness at edges so overal a sharper image across the entire image. colors can be fixed with preset in your raw software.
so f1.8 is a good buy. I actually own one.
f1.4 also actually has better build quality, but then again you can buy three f1.8 85mm's for one f1.4.
even if you have the money for the f1.4,. maybe it is wiser to buy the f1.8 and spend the rest on some strobes or something. if your light is bad, your f1.4 will still make bad pictures.
Still helping us out🙏🏾
Ken Wheeler has been saying this for years.
Ken Wheeler is not a good photographer and hos opinion is not relevant. He is only the lens collector.
Ok, Is Matt Granger good enough for you? He also discovered the f/1.8 is as good as f/1.4 for most of us. Please also look at Darren Miles video oon 85 mm f/1.8G. Don't attack a person just for the sake of it, it is called Ad Hominem and is illogical. Your premise is "A good photographer is more knowledgeable about all lenses" and that premise is flawed. Many of them haven't used all lenses.
Let’s not fool ourselves here. Bokeh on the 1.4 is better period. The bokeh on the 1.8 is exceptional. The 1.8 is a better value at the end of the day. The 1.4 also has a warmer color saturation than the the 1.8 leaning more on the red side. The 1.8 has a cooler color saturation leaning note to the blue side. Side by side and shit wide open the 1.8 looks mite lifeless against the 1.4. The 1.4’s color pops a tad bit more because of the warmness.
I have both lenses.
The 1.8 is sharper wide open so I use it for that. The 1.4 is much sharper from about f2.2 to f-11 where it is crazy sharp. I use the 1.4 in my studio. The 1.8 will produce pretty significant chromatic aberration in a back lit image. You will get good a fixing in post if you use it that way. The 1.4 also does this, though not near as bad. For most applications the f1.4 is a better lens....Build quality is on an entirely different level than the 1.8. Whether you are willing to spend the money to get it is up to you, but there certainly is a difference. Just don't waste your money on Sigma!
DXO Mark is less useless than a one legged man...In an ass kicking contest.
I can buy the 85mm 1.4 but I can't really justify the cost. I'm not good at post either and I don't want spend a lot of time editing photos. I want my photos to look as "real" as possible with mostly natural light. If the 1.4 is sharper with better realistic colors and better contrast and bokeh, I might just go with the 1.4. I (after extensive searching) will not buy the Sigma Art 85mm 1.4 due to the horrible auto focus and I'm not going to consider Samyang/Rokinon 84mm 1.4 due to AF and colors issues. Other than that there's Zeiss out there and that's out of my league and budget.
How does it compare to the Sigma art?
thank u for the advise i just ordered Nikon 85 1.8G. lets see how it perform.
DXO mark is a joke man
I find DXO to be a useful tool.
LOL... I'm pretty sure the folks at DXO offer some pretty valuable information if you know how to read and apply it :-)
Great information, and a great video. I'd def go for the 1.8
So sad I didnt realize he had passed.
I wouldn't bother with the 85mm 1.4G, I own the Nikon 85mm 1.8G and this lens is so sharp its almost ridiculous. Love this lens and don't see any reason to get the far more expensive 1.4 lens. Today after going through lots of prime lenses my 2 favorite Nikon prime lenses are the 35mm 1.8G ED and 85mm 1.8G on full frame body.
Not surprised Amir. I could comfortably shoot a whole wedding with the 35mm f1.8G and 85mm f1.8G on an FX full frame body :-)
ArtoftheImage agreed
Never the less I like my 24-70mm 2.8 and 70-200mm 2.8 got weddings but with these 2 primes you cover yourself for most of the event.
Thanks for the solid advice. Value for money is in my view is this one.
I love my 85 1.8G you are spot on.
The f 1.8 it's a better choice, is three times cheaper and the image quality it's almost the same. There is no such big difference between this two lenses, just the price. :)
The difference is actually huge. The 1.4G is sharper, has better contrast, better AF acquisition in low light, better colour rendition and nicer bokeh.
I agree 100%....
just i get a d7200 ,how it will perform on it ?
gutted i didnt have a clue , kind of bothered me that ,
I have most fast 1.4s and theres not much difference . The 1.8 you cant tell colour rendition its a myth , i use zooms at the mo because this weather is crappy with muck in the air , but using the 1.4 against the 1.8 theres only build quality , and a fraction of a stop which you wont use i rarely use any prime wide open , conditions contradict otherwise , life eh ! So buy the 1.8
Rip bro
Diminishing returns.
f/1.8 is being shipped to me right now.
very sensable argument thanks
I tested Nikon 85mm 1.4 in b&h store. Bokeh at top end. No other lens match.
Sad, you should pay attention to what every other RUclips reviewer has to say about these two lenses.
Thanks a lot!! I was in doubt between these 2 lenses and 50-100mm sigma art 1.8, since 100mm works on fullframe, in case I upgrade someday.
the same goes for the 50mm 1.8G
No it does not. Nor for the 85mm.
hi
DXOmark =BSmark
I currently own the Nikon 85mm F/1.4 G lens. It’s horrible. It’s way too soft and not sharp. There is also color fringing.
Canon much cheaper and does a better job. Now Sony is starting to catch up.
Crystal Chai Nikon is known for its ridiculous prices. Even its 35mm 1.4 is ridiculously expensive and they claim it is the sharpest lens ever made. I use the 85mm 1.4 by sigma and it never disappoints.
did he say- viGnetting?
Steve Sargente 😁😂
Wanna more subscribes? Use sample photos for camparation
I can see your strategy here. Most people visiting your channel, could not afford the more expencive model. You therefore, decide to talk out of your ass (aka. BS), stating that the budget friendly models are equal to the expencive ones. People need to get confirmation that they have made the right choise, even though it is based on a lie. As a result you get more subscribers, and likes. In the long run, I think this strategy is a failoure.
Seriously? The folks believing the 1.8 is superior are the ones too cheap to buy the 1.4. There is no comparison and if you put that 85mm 1.4 on a body like the D850, it will run circles around the 1.8. The only attraction of the 1.8 is the price. It's a good lenses, but get real people. It is not better than the 1.4 except for its affordability. It's irritating when some people try to justify their cheapness by saying the 1.8 is sharper. That is simply not true and there are a whole lot of other factors that come into play like color, fringing, etc.