I just sold off my Z 35mm 1.8 and bought a 28mm 1.8g. I feel like this one has really nice bokeh rendering, better than the z 35mm which can render highlights in contrasty areas quite harsh. It is funny,I came to the Z System because of the lenses but ended up with ancient F-mount lenses
What do you guys pair with the 58mm? I am contemplating getting an 85mm too, as I want to be on the safer side with close-ups and have more compression when the situation calls for it. But honestly I could 95% of my stuff with my 58mm...
The Z 85mm 1.8s looks stellar and is the most attractive Z-lens rendering wise for someone like me who does more people photography. Also balancing wise it would fit nicely into that trio, all around ~~500g weight....Show more →
A few years back, I had the 1.8G lenses in 28/50/85 flavors. The 50 and 85 paired nicely together and I have many great shots with in on a D700. I've also shot portraits with a Rokinon/Bower/Samyang 85/1.4 MF lens. Those are all long gone though; I also like Nikon's 105mm lenses and my longest tenured lens is a 105/2.5 AI-S. It's still a fine portrait lens although not as modern in performance. With the 58mm now, I've held off on buying an 85/1.8G again for F mount bodies and am really leaning towards saving for the 105/1.4E in a few years. The 70-200E would also be a fine companion to the 58 as would an Z mount 85. I would consider what working distances/environments you're in and how much compression and subject you want when using a longer lens. 85 and 105 aren't vastly different, but there is enough difference in my experience that its worth considering the utility vs magic you want at that focal length. The 105/1.4E has magic in it's own way that is really only surpassed by a 200/2 when shooting Nikon or maybe longer lenses or large/medium format.
My budget is very limited. I'd like to transition to paid photography next year ( then price finally becomes no objective) and I am not even sure I like 28mm focal length
I am so in love with the 58mm and that focal length in general( just love 50mm perspective) that It will definitely will be my workhorse and the other 2 lenses are just there for added flexibility, so no need for cream de la creme.. for now atleast.
Even tho the 85mm is close, it still serves it purpose.. I think. There is just no good alternative for me at 105mm / 135mm. All being either way too heavy or too expensive, or both.
Lugging around two light stands, a Strobe and 1-2 speedlights for most of my portrait shoots without a car makes me think twice adding a Sigma 105mm 1.4 or a 70 - 200 to my kit.
Never wanted to become that guy, that shoots at 1.4 only.. but damn, that rendering at that aperture. Maria by Anh Pham Viet, auf Flickr
GoroMajima wrote:
My budget is very limited. I'd like to transition to paid photography next year ( then price finally becomes no objective) and I am not even sure I like 28mm focal length
Looking at your work, I think you would really enjoy the 28mm for scenic portraits. The wider FOV will also enable you to create some exaggeration in features based on perspective and will work well for some of the character subjects.
I agree w/ charles.K. The 28mm f/1.4E is superb and in a class of its own. Wide open, the lens is incredibly sharp in the center of the frame and shows fantastic contrast (even when focused within its MFD). Stopped down, it just keeps getting better and better. OOF areas are wonderfully smooth and soft.
My partner and I often compare images between my Nikon 28mm f/1.4E and her Leica Q's 28mm f/1.7 Summilux. Most of our critiques between these two exceptional pieces of glass are typically attributed to SOOC color output (something completely subjective, often scene dependent, and resolved in post).
GoroMajima wrote:
Even tho the 85mm is close, it still serves it purpose.. I think. There is just no good alternative for me at 105mm / 135mm. All being either way too heavy or too expensive, or both.
You can cover all these FLs for portrait purpose with the Nikkor 70-200/4: cheaper, lighter, just as sharp as big-brother E. One stop slower but not an issue in daylight or with your own strobes, plus stopping down gives a practical DOF. I have both and use the big E only for dynamic subjects when light is ambient (and low).
The 70-200/4 looks nice but at that weight I would rather go with the 105 1.4
That Sigma 70 - 200mm looks attractive when you talk about heavy 70-200/2.8 zooms, I doubt at this point one notices the extra 300g. Sigma seems to work really good on mirrorless too...
Maybe I am just overthinking. I've heard there are some wedding photographers using the 58mm as their longest focal length. I seriously love this one to death right now...
Very nice set @An, 58mm is a very versatile lens with such smooth bokeh even stepping down in the 2ish mark. I could imagine lots of wedding photographer would have one sticking it to one camera full-time. Wheres the best place to get models? I am keen get back to do pro shoots for fun.
ivan.cai wrote:
Very nice set @An, 58mm is a very versatile lens with such smooth bokeh even stepping down in the 2ish mark. I could imagine lots of wedding photographer would have one sticking it to one camera full-time. Wheres the best place to get models? I am keen get back to do pro shoots for fun.
Agree about the images above!
I think this lens really shines at around f./2-2,5 roughly (depending on the shooting distance).
Thank you everyone! I agree, this lens shines at F2. The separation is still insanely beautiful if you manage to get good rim light.
Actually I shot the whole shoot at F2. I used the Z 35mm and 50mm extensively for some months and I had to spend time retouching lot more. For people photography the 58mm is just a blessing in the 50 range.
So I got my holy trinity (always had the classic 35/85mm before getting the 58mm.) and used them for two shootings this weekened.
Used my 58mm 1.4g about 60%, Z 85mm 1.8 35%, and 28mm 1.8g 5% of the time.
28mm is not so versatile for my style, but I love what it can do. Definitely not worth it for me to get the 28mm 1.4 for now.
