 |
|
|
Connahhh
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 12, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jan 12, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Razor sharp, I personally like the focal length, Fast enough AF, wonderful bokeh, screw on metal lens hood.
|
|
Cons:
|
High purple fringing and LCA, almost unusable un-corrected.
|
|
|
This lens is almost permanently glued onto my D50. It's an amazing focal length for indoor sports such as basketball, and even with my D50's weak AF motor it gets focus 75% of the time (Most of that 25% is under the net, players running full speed right at me and <F/2.8).
Build quality is more than acceptable, it has a bit of heft to make it not feel plasticy but light enough to carry around all day.
I personally love the screw-on lens hood and it is now a permanent part of my lens. It offers a lot of protection and I know that if I ever dropped it the lens hood wouldn't just break like some of the plastic bayonet types.
I had a big problem with the high CA and purple fringing and hadn't heard of the problem before I bought it. I have found software that completely removes it for no loss of image quality (Shay Stephen's Color Fringe Reducer 5.0) and I run it on most of my wide open shots. It's not a problem stopped down to F/5.6 and is completely gone by F/8. I bought this lens to shoot it wide open, and most of my shots aren't stopped down to F/8.
It's a good portrait focal length for headshots unless you have a good amount of space. I never reach for my 50/1.8 anymore.
All in all? Buy this lens. You won't regret it. For me, it wasn't worth $700 more for the F/1.4 version.
|
|
 Jan 12, 2008
|
|
Jeff Spain
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 4, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 4, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Quality images, great low light photography
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
This was my all time favorite lens back in the day of film cameras. Great quaility photos and nice bokeh wide open. Since switching to digital, this has become my portrait lens. Portraits shot in the f2.8-f4 range have wonderful defocused backgrounds that makes the subject pop in the picture. Haven't needed the extra spped of the f1.4
|
|
|
Jan 4, 2008
|
|
dj dunzie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6908
|
|
Review Date: May 31, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp... incredibly sharp. Easily my favorite portrait lens, with amazing bokkeh. Still sharp wide open. Terrific bargain. Reasonably light for use on a second body, where I love the focal range.
|
|
Cons:
|
For my intended uses, none at all.
|
|
|
In some ways, I consider this lens in the same positive light as the 50mm f1.8. Surprisingly sharp and detailed results for a bargain price. While it's a little more money than the 50mm, it's also better built for that money. For portrait type work, I don't think there's a better lens I've tried. I love the 85mm range for close shots, and the image quality is outstanding, with phenominal bokkeh. It's also pretty sharp wide open, which is a nice advantage for low-light shooting. For the dollar, you can't go wrong with this lens. Nikon has a winner here... and the price makes it more than a worthwhile addition to your camera bag.
|
|
|
May 31, 2007
|
|
James Markus
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3840
|
|
Review Date: Apr 22, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
This is an excellent fast lens and an excellent price. Sharpness, contrast, bokeh, and color are all top notch.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2007
|
|
gaopa
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 24
|
|
Review Date: Feb 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $399.95
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
this lens is light, but well constructed... low cost and super sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
shot wide open it does tend to exhibit some purple fringe with a high contrast subject...this can be corrected in PS
|
|
|
I bought this lens a few months ago after a friend kept talking about how much he liked his lens. I am glad I bought the lens and love it mounted on a D200. I think the 85/1.8 is a real Nikkor winner!
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2007
|
|
Grognard
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2140
|
|
Review Date: Dec 10, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $369.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Small, sharp, and lightweight
|
|
Cons:
|
None so far
|
|
|
So far, I am very pleased with this nice little lens. The metal lens hood was a very nice suprise.
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2006
|
|
crosstrainer
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 7, 2006
Location: Philippines
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 27, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $340.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, crisp, bright lens, good bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
AF a bit slow (or is it because of the noise)
awful focus distance, awkward range on digital body
unfriendly metal hood
|
|
this is one lens that i always keep in my bag, but I hardly get to use it. quite enigmatic to be honest.
It has all the goodies that you'd want in a prime lens:
excellent image quality (sharp, contrasty images)
surprisingly bright (you may want to underexpose by a third or more lest you blow the highlights)
good bokeh
however, it's range is rather weird. being weaned on the cheapo 50mm f/1.8 as the "standard" portrait lens on a digital body, the additional length makes the 85mm a bit awkward. I'd have to take a step or two back as when I'd use my 50mm.
but enough of the niggles. this is an excellent lens if you don't mind the length and specially if you like shooting indoors. I even used it for a badminton tournament shoot, and it came out great!
here are some samples:
the agony of defeat-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chewychua/190904066/in/set-72157594177744551/
christmas portrait
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chewychua/301664389/in/set-72157594177744551/
|
|
|
Nov 27, 2006
|
|
rabin_m
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 28, 2005
Location: India
Posts: 46
|
|
Review Date: Nov 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
small, sharp and contrasty, good image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
A very fine lens.
|
|
|
Nov 9, 2006
|
|
zalex
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 19, 2006
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 2, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp. Excellent contrast and colors. Lightweight
|
|
Cons:
|
AF noise. Screw-in hood.
|
|
|
Without comments! Great lens (D200)!
|
|
|
Oct 2, 2006
|
|
Remy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 9, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 177
|
|
Review Date: Oct 2, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness at every aperture, contrast, colour rendition.
|
|
Cons:
|
Close focus distance: minimum of 85cm.
|
|
|
I bought this lens after the 50mm: a light teleprime for not too much money. This 85mm feels just sorted right: great sharpness, contrast and colour: AF on a D70 is ok, on a D200/D2-series just good. From f/2.8 and up incredibly sharp. Tight build, and good focus ring for manual focussing. One of my best lenses, but sees too little application: both because of its tele-characteristics, and because of the only con for me: minimum focus distance of 85cm, which is just about the worst of any of Nikon's short primes. The 50mm has a min. focus dist of 45cm, for instance.
Still, all in all a great lens and highly recommended for anyone interested in this range.
|
|
|
Oct 2, 2006
|
|
prashant
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 436
|
|
Review Date: Oct 1, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Feel, well balanced on D200, D80, bookeh, sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
none I can think of
|
|
|
A super optic for both film and digital Nikons. Highly recommended for those who prefer primes and do portrait work.
|
|
|
Oct 1, 2006
|
|
John Basic
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 15, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 18, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $386.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Crystal clear images, fairly fast AF, lightweight and well-made. Best low-light lens I have ever used -- even better than the much touted 50mm f1.4, with less flare and ghosting than the 50mm as well. Versatile for a wide range of subjects.
|
|
Cons:
|
None. Some hate the metal screw-in hood, but it's really only an issue if you're changing filters a lot (and use a hood anyway).
|
|
|
While many tout this as a "portrait lens" (I'm sure it's very good at that) I've found this lens to be perfect for any kind of still-lifes where precision focus and fore/background blur are important. I shoot a lot of scenes in agricultural settings, like old barns, tractors, rustic equipment, livestock, etc., including cropped landscapes from the roadside, and I've found the 85mm to be very adaptable to a wide variety of scenes.
It also flares and ghosts much less than my 50mm f1.4.
As a low-light lens, it is unsurpassed. I recently shot some nighttime shots of the recent "Day Fire" in Castaic/Fillmore, CA, and even though the 85mm is 2/3rds stop slower than my 50mm f1.4, it had no problem autofocusing on dimly lit buildings in extremely poor foreground lighting in order to capture the firelight beyond. I switched to my 50mm just to see if it too would perform as well, and it wouldn't lock focus on ANYthing, even compensating for the spacial difference by moving closer to the foreground buildings. When I considered the price difference between the 50mm and the 85mm, it was about $65, so in my book the extra cost of the 85mm is warranted for it's low-light performance and versatility.
As far as image sharpness goes, it's everything it's been praised as being. Obviously photographer shake and error can result in out-of-focus images of anything with ANY lens -- even the VRs -- but when you shoot with this 85mm and your dead-on focused you'd be hard pressed to find a sharper, perfect contrast lens anywhere--especially at this price.
Get one!
|
|
|
Sep 18, 2006
|
|
paparazzinick
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 8, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 7001
|
|
Review Date: Feb 7, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $310.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
fast, small, light, good price, great colors
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
This is my favorite lens in my bag. Sharpest lens, best colors and it focuses fast. I also had this lens in the Canon version when I was a Canon guy, this is by far better than Canon. I would never look back on this. Buy it, it is great. If this lens ever breaks on me, I will buy it again. In fact, I may buy a second one for my second shooter at weddings, I love it so much.
|
|
|
Feb 7, 2006
|
|
lowlitedigital
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Mar 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 144
|
|
Review Date: Apr 5, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $275.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp sharp sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
af noise
|
|
|
very bright great indoor lens
|
|
|
Apr 5, 2005
|
|
johnnymg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 26, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 914
|
|
Review Date: Jan 26, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
small, sharp, nice bokeh.
|
|
Cons:
|
I feel soooooo inferior since it isn't a 1.4 ;)
|
|
|
GREAT lens................ !!!!!
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2005
|
|
ColoLense
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 5, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 287
|
|
Review Date: Dec 27, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $359.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, Color
|
|
Cons:
|
Plastic feel, noisy AF
|
|
|
Wanted something for portraits with D70. Sharpness at every aperture on my copy is impressive (disclaimer, I'm only comparing this to the 18-20 kit lense, which is nice in the smaller aperatures). The color I got with this lense was dead on also. Highly recommended for the price.
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
40
|
152830
|
Mar 22, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
95% of reviewers
|
$340.32
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.97
|
8.93
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
