Chris48 wrote:
The ZA 85/1.4 is much better than the Minolta 85/1.4. Also consider the Pentax FA* 85/1.4 which some consider to be the best portrait lens.
I have owned and shot the Mino and Zeiss. I think the Minolta is a more pleasing lens for portraits, despite I like the Zeiss better overall and it's also better for general photography.
Chris48 wrote:
The ZA 85/1.4 is much better than the Minolta 85/1.4. Also consider the Pentax FA* 85/1.4 which some consider to be the best portrait lens.
I am not 100% sure I agree. I had a very sharp version of Minolta 85 1.4 that I just sold here, but many people prefer bokeh of Minolta to Zeiss. Zeiss 85 1.4 is 'too clinical' for some of us, and Minolta gives this really beautiful
As I stated above, that Leica R 80 1.4 sure gives a very interesting rendering..... I know people that shoot it on every platform... but one has to consider a $2-3K price of this gem.... one can get Zeiss 85 1.4 and 135 1.8 for this price
Frogfish wrote:
An 'out-of-the-box' suggestion for you. One of my all time favourite lenses, very very small, glorious isolation and rendering : Pentax FA77 Ltd (f1.8). In black or silver (mine was the silver).
Actually reading through this thread again reminded me of a lens that's, somewhat surprisingly, not been mentioned yet. The Sigma 85/1.4.
Maybe there is an Art version coming soon, it would be logical. Even though the current version is still excellent, especially for portraits.
I don't know what system you are using other than the A7 but if it's Canon/Nikon/Sony then that lens can have dual use.
A few comments on the Leica R 80 'Lux, which is exactly the same design as the 75 'Lux. Maybe the best known of fabled designed Walter Mandler's lenses. Thorsten von Overgaard states that this is his favorite lens ever. Yet, beware. Wide open, it suffers from uncorrected SA, and this gives it an ample dose of the so-called "Mandler glow", meaning it is not very sharp at all, not unlike the Zeiss 50mm Planar f:1.4.
It is also not very easy to use for longer distances, because the focus throw close to infinity is quite short. But, make no mistake, when you get it right, and the picture plays to the lens' strong suit, the result is fantastic. I traded my 'Cron M 75 AA for it. There are times when I want to kick myself, because it is hard to use, and then I get one right, and fall in love again.
Frogfish: the Art versions seem like outstanding lenses but I think we should narrow it down to existing lenses. I think that most would agree that there really is no shortage of great glass around 70-90mm.
I had the Leica Summarit M 75/2.5 and it was great, I kind of miss it.
The Contax Sonnar 85/2.8 draws nicely and is compact enough.
In a way I think we should gang up and buy ALL of them and then rotate them on a schedule between us.
Frogfish wrote:
Maybe there is an Art version coming soon, it would be logical. Even though the current version is still excellent, especially for portraits.
I don't know what system you are using other than the A7 but if it's Canon/Nikon/Sony then that lens can have dual use.
I disagree with the dual use part.
AF lenses are no joy at all to focus manually, as they lack control and feeling. I can, if forced to, use my AF-Nikkors on the A7 (85/1.4D, 135/2, and so on...), but that is NOT the same, by far, as focusing a lens that was meant to be focused manually. And it does NOT improve with the newer lenses with motors built in as Nikon AF-S or Sigma, be it.
I would opt for the 75 Lux. It is smallish, f/1.4 and with practice is very easy to focus. It has a relatively long throw for accuracy and has a MFD of 0.7m as compared to the 90 Cron AA of 1.0m. The 75 Lux was Mandler's favourite for a reason. It has many personalities and is so unique. As you mentioned it can be used on the M9 and it is brilliant. Only caveat is that it must be well calibrated!!! Once it is, it is a breeze to use! Good luck
AF lenses are no joy at all to focus manually, as they lack control and feeling. I can, if forced to, use my AF-Nikkors on the A7 (85/1.4D, 135/2, and so on...), but that is NOT the same, by far, as focusing a lens that was meant to be focused manually. And it does NOT improve with the newer lenses with motors built in as Nikon AF-S or Sigma, be it.
That depends on both the lens itself and the user's tolerance. For you maybe not, for others maybe not an issue.
If people are very happy using, for example, certain Contax G lenses etc. which are popular on the A7(r) and A7 then it shows that the quality of the manual focusing is a preference not an absolute necessity. For some people the fact the lens can now be used on two systems (increasing both it's functionality and re-sale value) may be an important factor.
Your are right with 'dual use' in general, and maybe Contax especially (which I cannot compare due to not having such a lens).
I was referring to Nikon mostly, and Canon - THEIR MF-Ring on AF-lenses is no where near an MF-Nikkor, a Leica lens, a Zeiss, a Voigtlander... to name a few.
The (bought brand new) Samyang 85/1.4 feels better to MF than a Nikon 85/1.4 AF-S.
Sure, one might be happy with them - personal preference, as you state/name it. I'm fine with that.
ratherfish wrote:
I love my Pentax SMC Takumar 85 1.8 on the A7. Relatively small, fairly light, sharp and gorgeous bokeh. Won't break the bank and feels wonderful in the hand. I've also gotten great results with it for video, e.g., interviews, etc. Mine's the screw mount version. The K mount is said to be better, but I really can't imagine how it could be. Simply put, I love using this lens.
Have you got any examples? I have the Pentax M85mm f2 and I love it's size, focus and most of all the beautiful rendering for portraiture. Never thought of the SMC Tak 1.8 or seen examples from it. The Tak seems to go for over double the price though!
I am biased towards Contax CY as I use them 90% of the time. But since theres a lot of talk about portraiting it's worth to note that you can always "improve" a too sharp and contrasty lens by softening up in post. Endlessly. It is much harder to do the other way around.
The Sony Carl Zeiss has lots of magenta in high contrast areas, worse then the Mino, Canon, Sigma, Nikon G or Samyang I found while shooting. For me, it's the only real negative about the lens. From the photozone.de review:
"The quality of the bokeh is naturally of major interest for an ultra-large aperture lens and the Zeiss does not disappoint here...The highlights show basically no outlining effect - this is about as good as it gets here. The blur is very smooth and uniform. However, you may also notice the rather massive amount of longitudinal chromatic aberrations in the cards - more on this in the next chapter."
