Not ratting on the lens itself here, but *some* of the posted images seem to have a clumpier, busier rear bokeh than others—or am I the only one seeing it? It could be certain distance, but more likely perhaps over-processing? I’ve seen good bokeh go bad when I add too much clarity or go too heavy with shadow/highlight.
Anyone who owns both, have you compared it to the 105/1.4? About the same size with the FTZ, and very similar DoF’s. I own the latter and actually sold the 85/1.8 because I hardly ever used it over the 105 because of the rendering, but am trying to decide if this 1.2 version is worth considering in addition to…
gear-nut wrote:
Not ratting on the lens itself here, but *some* of the posted images seem to have a clumpier, busier rear bokeh than others—or am I the only one seeing it? It could be certain distance, but more likely perhaps over-processing? I’ve seen good bokeh go bad when I add too much clarity or go too heavy with shadow/highlight.
Anyone who owns both, have you compared it to the 105/1.4? About the same size with the FTZ, and very similar DoF’s. I own the latter and actually sold the 85/1.8 because I hardly ever used it over the 105 because of the rendering, but am trying to decide if this 1.2 version is worth considering in addition to…...Show more →
I could possibly do a controlled comparison if there’s some interest from the forum.
Buckeye2604 wrote:
I could possibly do a controlled comparison if there’s some interest from the forum.
For me, it wouldn't have to be overly controlled -- just three basic wide open shots showing subjects about the same relative size and then for interest the 85 at the same shooting distance as the 105. Personally I am not overly concerned with detailed sharpness, more the overall character of each lens in a "normal use" situation. Hopefully others would be interested too.
Anyway, appreciate the offer and thanks in advance if you manage it!
I have both. You can search my posts on here in both threads and even my general Flickr profile. I use the 85 1.2 more these days for AF performance and a much more easier to work with working distance reasons gear-nut wrote:
Not ratting on the lens itself here, but *some* of the posted images seem to have a clumpier, busier rear bokeh than others—or am I the only one seeing it? It could be certain distance, but more likely perhaps over-processing? I’ve seen good bokeh go bad when I add too much clarity or go too heavy with shadow/highlight.
Anyone who owns both, have you compared it to the 105/1.4? About the same size with the FTZ, and very similar DoF’s. I own the latter and actually sold the 85/1.8 because I hardly ever used it over the 105 because of the rendering, but am trying to decide if this 1.2 version is worth considering in addition to…...Show more →
gear-nut wrote:
For me, it wouldn't have to be overly controlled -- just three basic wide open shots showing subjects about the same relative size and then for interest the 85 at the same shooting distance as the 105. Personally I am not overly concerned with detailed sharpness, more the overall character of each lens in a "normal use" situation. Hopefully others would be interested too.
Anyway, appreciate the offer and thanks in advance if you manage it!
I'm in a similar boat, I have the 105E but am wondering how much more the 85 1.2 S may offer. Obviously the S is a dedicated Z lens and assume AF acquisition is going to be faster vs. the 105E with FTZ adapter, but I love how the 105 renders the bokeh. What about flaring and fringing, I would assume the 85 1.2 S is going to control this much better but curious nonetheless.
JadedWriter wrote:
I have both. You can search my posts on here in both threads and even my general Flickr profile. I use the 85 1.2 more these days for AF performance and a much more easier to work with working distance reasons
Marcus does have a great variety of images with the 85mm f1.2S and the 105mm f1.4E which I looked at a few weeks back and appreciated. With Marcus' permission first, I've taken a couple of screenshots of his images with what was a quick search for comparable images (not perfect....especially the first comparison, but perhaps close enough for some reasonable assessment):
The 105mm f1.4E shots are on the left and the 85mm f1.2S shots are on the right.
I have the 105mm f1.4E but haven't used the 85mm f1.2S yet.....one day perhaps as it looks beautiful. So I would be interested in hearing more from those who have used both. My early bias from looking at the images is that the 105mm holds its own and is perhaps the cost-effective way to go (especially if you already own it).....but if there are no budget concerns or if you are a working professional using these focal lengths for portraits often, the 85mm f1.2S is perhaps more versatile (closer to the subject) and you can get rid of the ftz. The 85mm f1.2S is likely a bit sharper I would imagine but the 105mm provides more than enough sharpness for portraits IMO. Otherwise I'm not sure that the image quality difference is enough to sway me one way or the other (other than the field of view).
Keen to see / read more comparisons between the 85mm f1.2S and the 105mm f1.4E (and the Sigma 85mm f1.4 art)......flickr doesn't have much in the way of 85mm f1.2S images tagged / grouped.
I'd have way more from the 85 by now, but my job had me change offices and I'm not at my street photography spot anymore. A lot of Sony gear went towards my 85 and no...I don't miss any of it, was the right decision, it's a great lens, should come with a gym membership, but it gets the job done. I use it a lot for work if I have the chance. The working distance is a lot easier to deal with and if you know stuff is going to get cropped a certain way than that extra 20mm makes a difference. Same goes with studio stuff. I have used both for studio portraits and sometimes a 105 is not going to cut it unless you want to get close or have enough back up room.
JadedWriter wrote:
I'd have way more from the 85 by now, but my job had me change offices and I'm not at my street photography spot anymore. A lot of Sony gear went towards my 85 and no...I don't miss any of it, was the right decision, it's a great lens, should come with a gym membership, but it gets the job done. I use it a lot for work if I have the chance. The working distance is a lot easier to deal with and if you know stuff is going to get cropped a certain way than that extra 20mm makes a difference. Same goes with studio stuff. I have used both for studio portraits and sometimes a 105 is not going to cut it unless you want to get close or have enough back up room....Show more →
Thank you for that. For "street" photography did you notice a significant different between focus speed in low light between the 85S and 105E? Were you using a Z9 or Z6/Z7? I find this work much more taxing on AF than studio shots, but if I want to pick up camera and lens and capture a fast moment in low light, if the AF in the 85 1.2 S is quite a bit quicker then it means I may get the shot while the 105E is still hunting. Hopefully that makes sense.
Yes. I mostly use it on the Z9. I have used the 105 to photograph dancers in a window lit studio. I have also used the 85 1.2 to get dancers on a stage with stage lights. I'm kinda not scientific, I just shoot. wjmeyer wrote:
Thank you for that. For "street" photography did you notice a significant different between focus speed in low light between the 85S and 105E? Were you using a Z9 or Z6/Z7? I find this work much more taxing on AF than studio shots, but if I want to pick up camera and lens and capture a fast moment in low light, if the AF in the 85 1.2 S is quite a bit quicker then it means I may get the shot while the 105E is still hunting. Hopefully that makes sense.
JadedWriter wrote:
Yes. I mostly use it on the Z9. I have used the 105 to photograph dancers in a window lit studio. I have also used the 85 1.2 to get dancers on a stage with stage lights. I'm kinda not scientific, I just shoot.
That is exactly what I'm thinking, indoor dance, wedding reception, etc. So it sounds like you have not noticed any limitations with the 105E on the Z9 even in these situations AF wise, so the biggest limitation may be the 105 vs. the 85mm experience with 85 offering a little more flexibility.
wjmeyer wrote:
Thank you for that. For "street" photography did you notice a significant different between focus speed in low light between the 85S and 105E? Were you using a Z9 or Z6/Z7? I find this work much more taxing on AF than studio shots, but if I want to pick up camera and lens and capture a fast moment in low light, if the AF in the 85 1.2 S is quite a bit quicker then it means I may get the shot while the 105E is still hunting. Hopefully that makes sense.
85/1.2S focus speed is much much faster. If you look at earlier page, I even managed to track bif with it (granted one of the bigger slower birds). The sumo shots I did was in an indoor shot and 85/1.2S really did not have any problem following the action.
In my experience, 105/1.4e probably has cateye bokeh all over the frame except for may be the very center whereas 85/1.2S shows cateye bokey only in the periphery. For me, I was using 105/1.4e a lot but since I got 85/1.2S, I have not touch 105/1.4 much.
