You can probably check my Flickr since I have both. I prefer the 85 1.2's easier working distance to be honest since I feel like I can plop down anywhere and get a decent composition with it. The 105 requires a lot of adjustment if you're trying to get a decent half body going and if you're stomach down in the dirt you don't want to make too many adjustments.
85: Z09_5074 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
105: Z62_2418 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Not exactly 1:1, but hopefully close enough. Nathan Padgett wrote:
So who has the 85 1.2 and the 105 1.4? I would love to see a comparison. These 85 shots look great, but man I love my 105. Hard to justify both.
The favorite Portrait lens focal of 85mm and the 50mm and the 105mm are a never ending debate!
Add to the sauce a Nikon 200/2 and a 135/2 and a 50/1.2s and the choice depend on the subject to Camera distance and your mood at the time of shooting.
To add to the mix. I also like to shoot with a 24G.
These were shot with a Z9 + 85/1.2 S and a second Z9 + 50/1.2 S.
A couple more here - all jobs have had recently are for sporting events, so haven't had chance to really give it a test so grabbed my son trying on an outfit for a wedding
I use this thing a lot for event work so far. It being a little tighter than the 50, while also being effective in DX mode has been making all the difference. suteetat wrote:
A lot of fun as a walikaround lens at night. All shot wide opened. I really love the
way it isolates a person out of the crowd.
Some pics from the garden. This is very unscientific as these shots were done hand held, but I tried to replicate the focus point on the flower in the 100% crops. First pic (& 100% crop) is f/1.2, second is at f/1.8. The f/1.8 pic and crop were adjusted +1/3 stop in Capture to sort of match exposure (ignore exif). I believe these were near MFD on the lens. Really like the focus transition zones on this lens. There is not a big gap between the two apertures in resolution and contrast, other than the obvious DOF differences. The little mites or aphids may resolve better with just a bit more contrast on the f/1.8 pic, but it's hard to tell. Resolution at f/1.2 on this lens is very satisfying, if not outright sharp, DOF is just razor thin at close distances!
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.21/250s64 ISO+0.3 EV
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.21/250s64 ISO+0.3 EV
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.81/160s64 ISO0.0 EV
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.81/160s64 ISO0.0 EV
If anyone lucky enough to have this lens is open to trying this, I'd love to see the difference between f1.2, f1.4 and f1.8 for a full length (or 2/3 body) portrait taken with a static subject from the same distance and ideally with objects throughout the scene (i.e. not an open field). A lot to ask I realize but I think this is the true test for needing the 1.2 aperture. I think any of these apertures do well with headshots or close-ups......and 1.8 may be better for having more of the face in focus. But full body shots or 2/3 body shots are the question for me.
Thanks in advance if you don't mind me asking . Renting new lenses is not an easy thing to do here. I have the Sigma 85mm f1.4 art and I think I'm good with this but I am still curious (and realize there are other factors like contrast differences)!
You need to be aware that f1.8 on the 85mm f1.2 S is not identical to f1.8 on the 85mm f1.8 S. The way focus evolves as a function of the distance to the plane of focus is strongly impacted by technological aspects in terms of lens design.
So the test you are requesting may not allow you to decide whether another lens would do as well.
bernardl wrote:
You need to be aware that f1.8 on the 85mm f1.2 S is not identical to f1.8 on the 85mm f1.8 S. The way focus evolves as a function of the distance to the plane of focus is strongly impacted by technological aspects in terms of lens design.
So the test you are requesting may not allow you to decide whether another lens would do as well.
Cheers,
Bernard
Thanks and I appreciate this......I don't understand the technical part but I have observed how the 50mm f1.2S at f1.8 is smoother than the 50mm f1.8S at f1.8. Good point.
The proper apples to apples comparison for me would be the f1.2S vs the f1.8S vs the Sigma 85mm f1.4 art all wide open, but that's an even bigger ask so I thought this would be the "close enough" approximation to assess the type of image I'm thinking of at the different apertures.
In the next few weeks I'll also try to get a copy of this lens to do the comparison and post the results as well.
@JadedWriter - your Flickr collection gives a pretty selection of the 105mm 1.4E and 85mm f1.2S shots which is quite helpful (thanks!).
Tough decision. My 1.2 is waiting for my in the shop and I am still debating about going there or feeling happy with the 1.8. Getting the 50 1.2 was a much easier decision (selling the 50 1.8 hasn't worked so far)
mholdef wrote:
A couple more here - all jobs have had recently are for sporting events, so haven't had chance to really give it a test so grabbed my son trying on an outfit for a wedding
aisnikkor wrote:
Some pics from the garden. This is very unscientific as these shots were done hand held, but I tried to replicate the focus point on the flower in the 100% crops. First pic (& 100% crop) is f/1.2, second is at f/1.8. The f/1.8 pic and crop were adjusted +1/3 stop in Capture to sort of match exposure (ignore exif). I believe these were near MFD on the lens. Really like the focus transition zones on this lens. There is not a big gap between the two apertures in resolution and contrast, other than the obvious DOF differences. The little mites or aphids may resolve better with just a bit more contrast on the f/1.8 pic, but it's hard to tell. Resolution at f/1.2 on this lens is very satisfying, if not outright sharp, DOF is just razor thin at close distances!...Show more →
1- It depends on what you are shooting.
2- Only you would see the difference in the lenses. (that's OK as many of us do that including myself)
3- I have quite a few 70mm to 85mm focal from Nikon Zeiss and Leica.
I dropped the Nikon 85/1.4 for the 85/1.8 as mainly lighter.Then. I dropped the 1.8 for the 105/1.4 as shooting full body with any 85 means a distance of approx 4m.
The difference between a 50 and 85 is higher than the diff between the 85 and 105 which means the combi with a 50 and 105 is more practical.
To make it more clear when shooting "full body" you need approx 2m with the 50 and approx 4.5 m for the 105 and the 80 is just 2 feet shorter than the 105.
No issues with open space as you can walk back to fit the model. But a big issue for constricted spaces such a studio or indoor location as you don't have the flexibility of having a longer distance with the model.
For C/U and H/S shots, the 85 and 105 are great but with reservation about the distance.
The 50 wins all bets.
I am considering returning the 85/1.2 S as redundant albeit with a creamy Bokeh.
For artistic shots i.e Bokeh and mood I use the Leica R 80 Sumi.
I am very content with the 50/1.2 S and might get a second one.
The 105 has earned it's stripes and still have a long way ahead.
N.B
- Distance may vary for different lens
- Variables may differ.
- The 85/1.2 S and the 50/1.2 S balance better on the Z7 v Z9/
Z9 body = 2.95 lb
Z7/Z7 II body = 1.49 lb
Add an 85 or 50 and do the math.
Redlands Bicycle Classic is in town. Shot some pics with the 85 f/1.2S as an experiment. AF was working well, even close in. AF was not perfect, but it was agile and keeping up. Not sure what part of this was from the Z9 and what was from the lens. More examples of very sharp performance at f/1.2. For reference, the cyclists were moving by me at around 16 to 20 mph (uphill section).
Last time I shot here was several years ago with the D700 and 70-200 2.8 AF-S (1st version). Z9 and the 85 f/1.2 felt like cheating compared to my recollection of the D700 performance.
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.21/5000s64 ISO-0.3 EV
100 % crop
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.21/5000s64 ISO-0.3 EV
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.21/2000s64 ISO+0.3 EV
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.61/1600s100 ISO+0.3 EV
100 % crop
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.61/1600s100 ISO+0.3 EV
Some further comments about my previous post on this thread, regarding the AF on this lens with the Nikon Z9 not being 'perfect'. (Though it's pretty close IMHO). The pics below are part of about a two second shutter activation of about 45 frames (at 20fps). Every photo is in focus in the series, but the focus point moved around, particularly at the end of the sequence as the rider got close (maybe 8 feet away at speed?). The first photo below is the first frame in the sequence, sharp on the rider's face from the start. The second photo and the 100% crops are the 40th frame in the sequence. Photos 1 through 30 in the sequence had perfect focus on the rider's face. 31 through 33 the focus point was behind. 34 and 35 were perfect again. 36 to 39 were behind again. 40 (below) and 41 were perfect again, and the last four were behind, but my panning dropped off and the framing changed as the rider was passing me (less than 6 feet away at 20 mph.) While not perfect, this is insanely good performance at close range, keeping in mind that I am panning pretty quickly as the rider is starting to pass me.
The other thing I was impressed with was being able to jump back and start panning with another rider in the pack, less than a second of not taking pics, and get another sequence, 90%+ in focus. And then again, and again, and again in the large pack in this race (more than 200 started). 90% of the pics are in focus on the rider's faces. An occasional sequence would miss the face entirely, and be focused on the rider's jersey, but I put these down to operator error on not initiating AF in the right spot. I was using 3D AF with subject tracking on people.
One of the YouTube reviewers commented that this lens was not 'sports fast' for AF. I am not sure this is true as it seems quite fast to me. It may not rack through MFD to infinity as fast as one would want, but in practical use this thing is spot on for AF in quick action and fast changes of the focus point. Having a very usable f/1.2 aperture for indoor volleyball or basketball pics has interesting possibilities...
Going back to my comparison of the last time I was shooting this race with the D700 I was previously getting maybe 10 percent keepers at best. Now we are in the 85 to 90% plus range, with better image quality and 2 to 3x the shooting speed. Loving it.
1st in sequence
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.21/5000s64 ISO-0.3 EV
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.21/3200s64 ISO-0.3 EV
100% crop
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.21/3200s64 ISO-0.3 EV
Another 100% crop
NIKON Z 9NIKKOR Z 85mm f/1.2 S lens85mmf/1.21/3200s64 ISO-0.3 EV
but I think this is the true test for needing the 1.2 aperture. I think any of these apertures do well with headshots or close-ups......and 1.8 may be better for having more of the face in focus. But full body shots or 2/3 body shots are the question for me. 
