p.1 #2 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
I think it depends on your definition of pseudo !
In point of fact, the DoF difference from each lens wide open *at portrait distances that render the same subject magnification* is going to be trivial. There will be a very small edge --meaning slightly less DoF-- for the 85...
End of day, most working portraits I do with a 105 are at f3.5 to 4 to get the eyes and ears sharp. That said, I also do a lot of 105 portraits at f1.4 for the paper thin, eyes only focus.
p.1 #3 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
I have both and you can not replace one with the other. If you had only 105, you can get away with it but after using 85 for portraits, you will want to get back to it.
105 2.8 is a great lens and little bit better for portraits compared to the F version, but 85 1.8 gives a much cleaner background for my taste.
p.1 #4 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
AccessDenied wrote:
On F mount, the 105 macro was just too slow in my opinion. So that took a dedicated macro purpose while the 85mm F1.8 was dedicated for portrait.
Does the same apply on the Z ...
I do not understand your question.
The laws of optics do not change if a mirror is present or not in a full frame (24×36) camera.
Therefore, if the AF-S 105/2.8 VR did not satisfy you for the f/2.8 maximum aperture, the answer to your question is trivial: use the 85/1.8.
Consider that the AF-S 105/2.8G VR is an excellent (IMO) portrait lens, with very good out of focus (oof) rendition. The 105 MC has similar oof rendition although - according to what I have seen to date - the F-mount sibling is slightly better.
I still use the AF-S 105/2.8G VR, even if I own both Zeiss 100/2 Makro-Planar and Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar, which are top lenses for the quite smooth transition from focus plane to oof planes (a lens characteristics that can't be easily assessed by MTF test).
p.1 #5 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
Ripolini wrote:
I do not understand your question.
The laws of optics do not change if a mirror is present or not in a full frame (24×36) camera.
Therefore, if the AF-S 105/2.8 VR did not satisfy you for the f/2.8 maximum aperture, the answer to your question is trivial: use the 85/1.8.
Consider that the AF-S 105/2.8G VR is an excellent (IMO) portrait lens, with very good out of focus (oof) rendition. The 105 MC has similar oof rendition although - according to what I have seen to date - the F-mount sibling is slightly better.
I still use the AF-S 105/2.8G VR, even if I own both Zeiss 100/2 Makro-Planar and Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar, which are top lenses for the quite smooth transition from focus plane to oof planes (a lens characteristics that can't be easily assessed by MTF test).
Sorry, I didn't mean slow/fast in terms of aperture. I meant in terms of AF performance.
When I say the F-mount 105 macro was slow for portraits, it was challenging to acquire focus on subjects unless they were standing still/studio setting.
Curious how much faster (AF) the Z mount version is.
I just assumed it went without saying that F2.8 was constant here and not part of the discussion comparing the F-mount vs Z-mount 105 macro.
p.1 #6 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
AccessDenied wrote:
I didn't mean slow/fast in terms of aperture. I meant in terms of AF performance.
Ah OK now I understand. Thanks.
I do not own the 105 MC so I can't comment on its AF speed at portrait distances and how fast it is compared to 85/1.8 Z.
Have you read Thom Hogan review and his comments on the focus limiter switch? https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/nikkor-lenses/nikon-z-mount-lens-reviews/nikon-105mm-f28-lens-review.html "The focus limiter switch will be a little controversial: your choices are a narrow macro range (0.29-0.5m) or Full. I can understand the macro range setting, as when you're working up close with small subjects, you don't want the lens hunting out into long focus distances. What I don't understand is why the switch doesn't also have a 1m-infinity setting for when you use it as a regular telephoto lens. In low light, particularly with the Z5 and Z50, I've encountered situations where this lens will hunt for focus."
p.1 #7 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
Ripolini wrote:
Ah OK now I understand. Thanks.
I do not own the 105 MC so I can't comment on its AF speed at portrait distances and how fast it is compared to 85/1.8 Z.
Have you read Thom Hogan review and his comments on the focus limiter switch? https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/nikkor-lenses/nikon-z-mount-lens-reviews/nikon-105mm-f28-lens-review.html "The focus limiter switch will be a little controversial: your choices are a narrow macro range (0.29-0.5m) or Full. I can understand the macro range setting, as when you're working up close with small subjects, you don't want the lens hunting out into long focus distances. What I don't understand is why the switch doesn't also have a 1m-infinity setting for when you use it as a regular telephoto lens. In low light, particularly with the Z5 and Z50, I've encountered situations where this lens will hunt for focus." ...Show more →
Ah I hadn't read that review!
Dang, I didn't even think about the lack of X-infinity focal limiter... I currently shoot a Sigma 150mm F2.8 OS HSM on my D850 and that lens has a focus limiter with three settings - full / MFD to .52m / .53m to infinity. It's not a great portrait lens, but it works in a pinch. It IS however a phenomenal macro lens...
I may just grab an 85mm in Z mount and use the Sigma for the time being (assuming Sigma's website is correct in its compatibility).
I do hope one day Nikon puts out a 150mm or 200mm macro for the Z, especially since the 105 MC can't take a 1.4TC! That is something I just read as well...
p.1 #8 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
One more thing -- if you have not already used both focals for portrait work, there *IS* a difference in use that can make a difference in the final result. It's a little hard to quantify, but IMO it's mostly due to how we interact with the subject due to shooting distance. The 85 is a little more "intimate" while the 105 gives them more "personal space." While it doesn't matter much for most subjects, some will "work better" with one over the other. FWIW
p.1 #9 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
gear-nut wrote:
One more thing -- if you have not already used both focals for portrait work, there *IS* a difference in use that can make a difference in the final result. It's a little hard to quantify, but IMO it's mostly due to how we interact with the subject due to shooting distance. The 85 is a little more "intimate" while the 105 gives them more "personal space." While it doesn't matter much for most subjects, some will "work better" with one over the other. FWIW
For sure. On the F mount system, I shoot with an 85mm F1.8G and 105mm F1.4E.
I also have 3 macro lenses (Tamron 90mm, Nikon 105mm, Sigma 150mm).
I guess I was hoping one lens (MC 105 S) could rule them all, but the reality is there's a speciality use case for everything.
I just found a deal on the 85mm S so I grabbed it. I was hoping I could use a 1.4TC on the new MC 105 S, but that's not the case. So, now I need to decide (when my Z7ii arrives) whether or not the Sigma 150mm macro will suffice...
p.1 #11 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
gear-nut wrote:
You won't regret the 85S for portraits. You probably wouldn't have regretted the 105S macro either
Well, after all that. I picked up the 85S and yes it is amazing.
I also have a gift card to B&H and figured I would just order the MC 105S as well - even though it's currently back-ordered and will likely be months(?) before I receive it. But, that day will be a nice little surprise!
Until then, the Sigma 150mm OS HSM macro with FTZ will do just fine. It's heavy but performs wonderfully on the Z7ii
p.1 #12 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
I figured I would update this thread.
I picked up the 105 MC, finally, after waiting months of it being on backorder!
It's VERY light. I just weighed it compared to the Sigma:
Nikon 105 MC - 707 grams
Sigma 150 OS with FTZ - 1463 grams
Significant weight reduction!
Compared to the 85/1.8, the 105 MC is a tad slower on focusing, without the limiter. With the limiter, it's close in my everyday use. The other day I had a client ask for portraits and I thought "Can I leave the 85 in the bag the entire shoot". Well, I did, and they were happy with the images from the 105! I had to step back a few extra feet, but that's to be expected.
I'm keeping the 85 for now, but I may end up selling it to help fund a 24-120s instead. I don't have an all-around lens like that yet for my Z system and figured it would get more use than the 85. Maybe when the new 85/1.2? comes out, I will consider it. But for now, the 105 and the 50 are a good balance for what I need.
Just thought I'd throw it out there for anyone in a similar situation. The F mount version of the 105 macro would never have contended this closely in my opinion. It was too slow. This new version is simply phenomenal!
p.1 #14 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
AccessDenied wrote:
It's VERY light. I just weighed it compared to the Sigma:
Nikon 105 MC - 707 grams
Sigma 150 OS with FTZ - 1463 grams
Significant weight reduction!
It's not a fair comparison, being the FL of the Sigma 50% longer and both f/2.8.
The 105 MC could be compared to the AF-S 105/2.8 G VR, which weighs 750 g (+ 125/135 g of FTZ II/FTZ).
AccessDenied wrote:
The F mount version of the 105 macro would never have contended this closely in my opinion. It was too slow. This new version is simply phenomenal!
According to pictures I have seen of the 105 MC and of my AF-S 105/2.8G VR, I still prefer the bokeh of the F-mount version (probably due to the absence of aspherical elements). For portraiture, I do not need lightning fast AF, unless I take pictures of escaping models
AdaptedLenses wrote:
What about a 67-62 step down ring and the 6T on the 85 for pseudo macro?
6T close-up attachment lens has a FL of 1000/2.9 = 344.8 mm. This gives a magnification equal to 85/344.8 = 1:4 with the prime focused at infinity. You can get about 1:3-1:2.5 at the minimum focus distance.
p.1 #15 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
Ripolini wrote:
It's not a fair comparison, being the FL of the Sigma 50% longer and both f/2.8.
The 105 MC could be compared to the AF-S 105/2.8 G VR, which weighs 750 g (+ 125/135 g of FTZ II/FTZ).
According to pictures I have seen of the 105 MC and of my AF-S 105/2.8G VR, I still prefer the bokeh of the F-mount version (probably due to the absence of aspherical elements). For portraiture, I do not need lightning fast AF, unless I take pictures of escaping models
6T close-up attachment lens has a FL of 1000/2.9 = 344.8 mm. This gives a magnification equal to 85/344.8 = 1:4 with the prime focused at infinity. You can get about 1:3-1:2.5 at the minimum focus distance.
Yes, obviously 150mm and 100mm are different. I'm simply comparing lens weights, so it's still relevant. I'm either going out with the sigma, or the nikon at this point. I may want the reach some times, and other times I may want the weight reduction. My preference now is to shoot the 150 in my backyard when I can setup macro rails and tripods, and the 100 when I'm going on a walk and shooting handheld for extended periods.
It's a shame the 105MC doesn't take the 1.4xTC. That would have been a nice option; when I shot Pentax, the DFA 100mm with the 1.4xTC was one of my favorite combos.
Regarding bokeh, it's such a subjective thing. I've owned both lenses, and I prefer the S over the G. There a certain feel factor too, where the new lens just is more enjoyable to use.
But, to each their own. If you prefer the 105G, nothing wrong with that. Just sharing my opinion.
p.1 #16 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
I can't say I prefer the G; I have never compared it to 105/2.8 MC. I said that I prefer the bokeh (only). How could I say that? Because the S bokeh has onion rings the G doesn't have. I'm pretty sure the S is sharper, but maximum sharpness is not what I ask for portraiture.
p.1 #17 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
Joining this thread late.
I own both MC and 85mm as well as 105mm f1.4E.
For portait the MC is quite good but I consider the other 2 as some of the best portrait lenses ever designed, regardless of mount and format.
The 85mm f1.8 S is just incredibly good for portrait. I prefer it over my GFX 110mm f2.0 and P1 Schneider 150mm f2.8 Blue Ring. Two lenses that many would probably rank among the very best portraits lenses also.
The Nikon is just magic, light, pretty compact and such an incredible combination of sharpness, lack of CA and
Bokeh to die for while being very affordable. This is a lens to shoot super high end portraits, weddings,… whatever you throw at it.
Many photographers who have not tried it seriously cannot suspect such a level of excellence. This is one of the lenses that make it plain impossible to consider seriously any other mirrorless mount IMHO.
p.1 #18 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
I own both the 85 and 105 lenses for Z. I prefer the 85 for portraits but I do use the 105 as well.
If I could only use one for portraits, it would be the 85. However, if I could only own one of the two lenses, it would likely be the 105 for the macro and the fact it's still a decent portrait lens.
Both are excellent lenses. Without a doubt, the 85 for Z on my Z7II is better than the 85 F mount on the D850. Its not a huge difference, but I prefer the S lens.
p.1 #19 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
For portraits nothing beats the Nikon 105mm f/2.0 DC lens. The ability to adjust background or foreground bokeh and blurring while having the subject perfectly sharp and being able to use a much wider range of aperture settings is unique to the two Nikon DC (defocus control) lenses.
Also twice as much light for the AF sensors with the f/2.0 max aperture which adds options for night or low light shooting.
p.1 #20 · Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S versus Z 85mm f/1.8 S for portrait
elkhornsun wrote:
For portraits nothing beats the Nikon 105mm f/2.0 DC lens. The ability to adjust background or foreground bokeh and blurring while having the subject perfectly sharp and being able to use a much wider range of aperture settings is unique to the two Nikon DC (defocus control) lenses.
Also twice as much light for the AF sensors with the f/2.0 max aperture which adds options for night or low light shooting.
I own an excellent copy of the 135mm DC and compared it recently to the 85mm f1.8 S and 105mm f1.4 E.
The control of the bokeh is nice, but the sharpness, lack of CA, flare control,... is clearly a bit dated compared to the newer options. It may not be a problem for portrait but requires a bit more processing work.
!