hardlyboring wrote:
If you have made up your mind then why even ask? If you like the 85L so much then use that...in the end it is just a lens.
Also Spencer I do believe the actual body of the 1.4 and 1.8 as well as the other G lenses are made of the magnesium composite. There is little info on this and people "claim" online it is plastic but my buddy who works at MPEX just confirmed it is thin magnesium alloy with other plastic parts.
Also form are you shooting a double Nikon and Canon setup? How can you afford to have 85's in both the Canon and Nikon variety? I used to shoot the wide side on Canon and the tele side on Nikon but it sounds like you have a double kit....still trying to decide?...Show more →
I am trying to get feedback about whether the 85 f/1.4g does better at the nature of the bokeh than the 85 f/1.8g as compared to the Canon 85L, because I want to know if it will give me more of the effect I get from the 85L except on Nikon. I don't want to buy the 85 f/1.4g if I won't be satisfied with it. I own the 85L and 85 f/1.8g now.
I can afford the lenses because they are generally a one-time purchase, and also because I have been making the canon-to-nikon "transition" very, very slowly.
I want to like Nikon (because the body is really nice) but I keep running into issues with lens performance of the two focal lengths I use the most (35, 85). I am basically at the point where I want to make a long-term decision soon to either keep going towards Nikon (currently just 1 body and 2 lenses) or to dump my Nikon stuff and go back to all Canon. I'm trying to get feedback and as much information as possible before I make this very financially-significant decision.
So...the lenses may be the turning point for me whether I keep Nikon or go back to all Canon. In spite of the great Nikon sensor, in spite of the great functionality of Auto ISO with EV adjustment and spot metering on any active point, in spite of the DK-17M eyepiece magnifier and the very good AF tracking of the 85 f/1.8g...if the lenses don't give me the "look" I want no matter whether the subjects are in focus or not, then the Nikon system will have to remain a sideline set for me and I may sell it off.
The magnesium is supposedly part of the components inside Nikon lens bodies and not part of the outer shell (which is plastic) by most reports I have found.
I'm actually a fan of interesting bokeh, that's why the sigmas don't do it for me...
And the fact that the 85L shots I like are wide open makes me doubt that I would ever be satisfied with anything less than f/1.2 as a max aperture for 85mm...
The cutoffs I notice sometimes, I used to consider it a bigger deal but now I generally prefer less perfect bokeh.
This link is one thing I came across in my search for more data:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/5057691550/sizes/l/in/photostream/ - especially the close distance center/corner CA/bokeh comparison that shows a really big difference in how each lens renders OOF detail. The center detail one in particular shows a trait of a few lenses that I strongly dislike: The back OOF text still retains an effect of sharp edges that makes it easy to read on the 85 f/1.4g, but the 85L distorts the edges to such a degree as to simulate greater blur effect. This IMO helps with the delineation of in-focus vs out-of-focus, which might make the effect more punchy on the 85L.
Mykal wrote:
Search Flickr for Nikon 85 1.4 shots and compare.
The 85 f/1.4D is a very different animal from the G version, and I have found it very difficult to find good photo sample sources (besides pbase) showing ONLY the G version.
D. Diggler wrote:
Whenever I wonder if a piece of gear is right for purchase I rent it to see for myself. You should consider renting the lens.
Renting guarantees money is lost (spent with no product received, just like leasing a car then giving it back after the term is over). I don't rent, I buy. If I buy and find out I don't like it, then I sell at a loss or return it. If I like it, then I don't ever have to pay any additional rent charges.
However, before I buy, I try to do a lot of information gathering first.
I never said inferior, I said I didn't like it as much. Also, at a different background and subject distance (e.g. waist-high subject crop with background ~10ft+ behind), the one on the right won't produce the same really striking effect with large bokeh cat's eyes and circles...probably because the bokeh is already too small to produce the effect. The sample shots I took are framed just far enough away for a single head to fit vertically or most of a head to fit horizontally...ergo, it's not a common or practical framing for me to use.
The comparison images are there to show ONLY that the 85L (left) does make much larger highlight circles (due mostly to shape) and overall bokeh is bigger and more blurred at f/1.8 than the 85 f/1.8g. Personal preference at that distance and aperture varies, I like the cat's eye effect myself - however, there are other things there that I don't like.
Form, check out photozone.de the lens tests there are very simple, and he does a bokeh and LoCA test for most lenses using the same targets.
Scroll down a bit to get to the bokeh test. Looks like the 85 1.4 may show the type of cats eyes that you like. I am not a fan of the bokeh of the 1.4 or the 1.8, so I use the Sig85. You may love the 1.4g.
I think I understand your trouble. I think of myself not that much of a gear head, but I had my lows too. I try to concentrate on the important things of photography but I think when it comes to choose the gear that you want to work with the next years it is worth to put in some brain-energy.
I had my time where I was considering moving to Canon cause of the L-primes (35, 50, 135) but finally I stayed with Leica and Nikon. Do not know if I am totally happy with it, but so be it for now. JUst cut it off and move on...
So, why I am posting? I think bokeh (which is very important for me too, because I think it often defines the mood of a picture) is very changing in relation to light, and background subject.
I had Leica and Nikon lenses which showed both great and awful bokeh in different situations. So I think it is wasted time to search for single pictures on flickr and think this or that lens is nice. There is nothing that goes beyond having both lenses and shooting it site by site in the situations that are important for you. For me it just takes 30 minutes outside in strong sun and trees to decide if a particular lens is working for me or not.
wow I am a massive gearhead but even I'm getting a headache reading this thread...
However, before I buy, I try to do a lot of information gathering first.
I'm sure you did a heap of research and forum posting prior to buying the 85L and 85 f/1.8G, yet you're now dissatisfied with the latter, which suggests that regardless of whether people give glowing reviews of the f/1.4 to you or not, there is still a risk that the satisfaction of others may not match yours
It's not unusual that two lenses of the same focal length do not have the same bokeh at identical apertures - issues of lens design, spherical aberration correction, aperture diaphragm construction etc. all affect it
That a cheap 85 f/1.8 lens does not have as nice bokeh as a 85 f/1.2L at identical apertures is no surprise.
Will a 85 f/1.4 be better? without objective tests being performed between it and the 85L in a controlled environment that is applicable for you - it's tough to say
Dawei Ye wrote:
wow I am a massive gearhead but even I'm getting a headache reading this thread...
I'm sure you did a heap of research and forum posting prior to buying the 85L and 85 f/1.8G, yet you're now dissatisfied with the latter, which suggests that regardless of whether people give glowing reviews of the f/1.4 to you or not, there is still a risk that the satisfaction of others may not match yours
It's not unusual that two lenses of the same focal length do not have the same bokeh at identical apertures - issues of lens design, spherical aberration correction, aperture diaphragm construction etc. all affect it
That a cheap 85 f/1.8 lens does not have as nice bokeh as a 85 f/1.2L at identical apertures is no surprise.
Will a 85 f/1.4 be better? without objective tests being performed between it and the 85L in a controlled environment that is applicable for you - it's tough to say...Show more →
In fact, I did some research but I had no idea that I would really dislike the bokeh so much...because before I bought a Nikon I didn't ever have really bokeh I didn't like (outside Canon EF 50 f/1.4, which was too ugly, and Sigma 50 f/1.4, which was too smooth). So when I got the 85 f/1.8g, I bought the only lens I could afford that was a focal length I use often (35/85). I didn't expect to dislike the bokeh because I didn't research the bokeh beforehand to realize that 85mm lenses could have such a significant difference and I might actually dislike one...
And just for reference, at about f/2.2 the Nikon 85 f/1.8g bokeh looks about as good as the 85L at f/2.2, roughly, approximately...at least as far as highlight size and shape are concerned.
I am holding off on any new purchases right now because I am thinking about going back to Canon exclusively...however, I'm still very un-satisfied with the sensor flexibility and low ISO dynamic range due to the shadow noise. If they could correct that completely, then I would probably go back to Canon to stay...for a while. However, that will at least be 3 years down the road and possibly much more.
joelconner wrote:
whoa...for reals? Totally off subject, but I find that very interesting (and challenging).One of my favorite things about the 5D3 is the one-button, on-demand servo (so you can use it whenever you want without changing any settings...it's super sweet), but I could not imagine using it all of the time. Maybe it's because I shoot Canon, but I love my focus confirmation
It's a Nikon thing. AF-C (the servo equivalent) provides focus confirmation, and IMO the algorithm is near indistinguishable from single shot with still subjects, and obviously better for moving. There's pretty much no reason to use AF-S (single shot AF).
hardlyboring wrote:
If you have made up your mind then why even ask? If you like the 85L so much then use that...in the end it is just a lens.
Also Spencer I do believe the actual body of the 1.4 and 1.8 as well as the other G lenses are made of the magnesium composite. There is little info on this and people "claim" online it is plastic but my buddy who works at MPEX just confirmed it is thin magnesium alloy with other plastic parts.
Also form are you shooting a double Nikon and Canon setup? How can you afford to have 85's in both the Canon and Nikon variety? I used to shoot the wide side on Canon and the tele side on Nikon but it sounds like you have a double kit....still trying to decide?...Show more →
The shell is plastic, same as the 24 and 35 1.4s. That's not a bad thing. Better impact resistance and fracture toughness, lower weight. I think a lot of the internal assembly is still metal though (better stiffness).
This post confirms that the 85 1.8G is such an excellent lens for the money. I love mine and I definite love the fact that it's so light too. ;-)
Speaking of bokeh.. took this shot for my brother & his gf's Christmas card with the 85G a few weeks ago. Can't complain about this kind of bokeh with a $500 lens, imo.
I can notice the difference, I can't tell why it matters, in particular to someone trying to make money. If it makes your clients happy and you are happy with what you give them, go with that.
The difference in this particular sample image isn't what matters so much as the difference in the overall look when shot near wide open and the general appearance of the bokeh itself...it's the effect it produces.
