p.1 #1 · best result quality comparing this 2 lenses
I was about to take a plunge into zeiss 85 f/1,4. But I found that it wont auto focus. so there's only one which could take the place, which is the nikkor 85 f/1,4. so here's the dilemma. with nikkor, I could get the auto focus, but not with zeiss. but if auto focus isn't an issue here, what do you guys get for the best quality result comparing this 2?
many thanks for your opinions
p.1 #3 · best result quality comparing this 2 lenses
hi, J! I'm planning to shoot portrait mostly. and I use D300. already have the nikkor 50 f/1,4 and tokina 11-16 f/2,8. get those lenses after reading many reviews on the internet.
p.1 #4 · best result quality comparing this 2 lenses
I'd get the Nikkor. IMO, the cost difference between the Zeiss and Nikkor glass is not worth the marginal difference in quality. Plus, the Nikkor will AF, and while you don't need AF to shoot portraits, it makes the lens a far more useful addition to your arsenal.
EDIT: If you're fine with manual glass, get the excellent and bargain priced Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIS. Smoothest bokeh EVER.
p.1 #5 · best result quality comparing this 2 lenses
jasoncallen wrote:
I'd get the Nikkor. IMO, the cost difference between the Zeiss and Nikkor glass is not worth the marginal difference in quality. Plus, the Nikkor will AF, and while you don't need AF to shoot portraits, it makes the lens a far more useful addition to your arsenal.
EDIT: If you're fine with manual glass, get the excellent and bargain priced Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIS. Smoothest bokeh EVER.
EXCELLENT suggestion. ~$150-200 and you get a razor sharp, beautifully smooth MF lens.
p.1 #6 · best result quality comparing this 2 lenses
jasoncallen wrote:
I'd get the Nikkor. IMO, the cost difference between the Zeiss and Nikkor glass is not worth the marginal difference in quality. Plus, the Nikkor will AF, and while you don't need AF to shoot portraits, it makes the lens a far more useful addition to your arsenal.
EDIT: If you're fine with manual glass, get the excellent and bargain priced Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIS. Smoothest bokeh EVER.
have the 85 1.4D and had a very nice 105 2.5 wich i used on a d200 and a d2h and the 105 wasn't really up to matching the 85 on dx. it's also a bit long on dx for people.
p.1 #7 · best result quality comparing this 2 lenses
I would go with Nikon. Even if you don't use AF, having AF for just in case is nice. If you really want a MF lens, then there is old Nikkor AIS as well (and Korean lens, too)...
p.1 #10 · best result quality comparing this 2 lenses
ok, many thanks for your opinions about nikkor, guys. nikkor 50 f/1,4 surely can make nice bokeh. wouldn't worry about it on 85. but how about the 3D effect that I've seen on the internet that zeiss or leica lenses could produce when you shoot wide open? are there any nikkor lenses could match up or at least make the same results like them?
p.1 #11 · best result quality comparing this 2 lenses
ferdin wrote:
ok, many thanks for your opinions about nikkor, guys. nikkor 50 f/1,4 surely can make nice bokeh. wouldn't worry about it on 85. but how about the 3D effect that I've seen on the internet that zeiss or leica lenses could produce when you shoot wide open? are there any nikkor lenses could match up or at least make the same results like them?
I think that the 3D effect you're talking about is a result of the thin depth of field at medium telephoto distances with a background that is far behind your subject. This is my favorite thing about the Nikon 85 f/1.4, but I think it's a function of the lens length and aperture, rather than the bokeh or any other quality of the lens. The following images exhibit the effect I'm talking about, and I think it must be the one you're talking about too:
)...