haleheartless wrote:
Is anyone bothered by the "cat's eye" bokeh of this lens?
The Angry Photographer made me start to notice when bokeh isn't round. I used to really like the effect but I've started to be bothered by it for absolutely no other reason.
Elijah wrote:
Your 85mm will be VEERY pissed and your 200VRII will be slightly pissed. But it will not piss off your 58G at all.
The 85 will be pissed yes, The 200 will have a giggle to itself as it knows it's still the king.
The thought crossed my mind to sell the 85mm But first I just can't bring myself to do it and used prices for the 85 are not much and still has it uses.
MazeRunner wrote:
Should I just sell my 85 if I get the 105?
I had the 85 f/1.4d and the 105 VR for a while and they are really close enough in FL to be interchangeable most of the time. Lots of other differences, but FL mostly interchangeable. I'd keep the 85 for a while (at least until after the honeymoon phase wears off with the 105) and see if the 105 is $1500 better than the 85 for your use :-/
BSPhotog wrote:
I had the 85 f/1.4d and the 105 VR for a while and they are really close enough in FL to be interchangeable most of the time. Lots of other differences, but FL mostly interchangeable. I'd keep the 85 for a while (at least until after the honeymoon phase wears off with the 105) and see if the 105 is $1500 better than the 85 for your use :-/
I know what my 58, 85/1.4G, and 200/2 can do, and the 105 looks nicer than the 85. I would love a lens that is close enough to the 200/2 without carrying the 200/2 (the Zeiss 135/2 APO Sonnar was, but it was MF-only). $1,500 better than the 85? Maybe not that much, but then again, is the 200/2 worth $4,500+ more than the 85?
The better it gets, the more we have to pay for that extra pop.
Here's a night shot with the 105. Not the best shot since the little one just wanted to run around and play but the lens did well with minimal lighting.
