p.2 #2 · Sigma 85mm vs Nikon 85mm 1.4D vs Nikon 85mm 1.4G - The good, the bad and the ugly.
Thorsten wrote:
I measured it. Have you?
Same here. But the D is still faster.
Have I measured it? Nope. I had both lenses but already knew I wasn't keeping the D so I didn't see the point. But based on usage, there's no way the D is TWICE AS FAST as the 85 G? You sure you measured correctly? I've seen videos of side by sides that place the D slightly faster than the G. Slightly faster isn't exactly "twice as fast". Besides, who gives a flying you know what about speed if it can't focus consistently and accurately. With the G, you have a lens that's more than a specialized portrait lens. You have a much more versatile lens.
Never understood the love fest over the 85 1.4 D. I've shot some jaw dropping lenses in my day but again, just never understood the whole "Milky Bokeh", "Cream Machine", "Best Portrait Lens Ever" type comments. I guess when that's all you have, you learn to love it eh?
p.2 #3 · Sigma 85mm vs Nikon 85mm 1.4D vs Nikon 85mm 1.4G - The good, the bad and the ugly.
It's subjective, Nick. I never needed to "learn to love" my 85/1.4 D. It just came naturally to me.
There are a lot of Nikon shooters out there who would absolutely love to shoot the D, but can't afford it. You make it out to be some kind of bargain bin lens.
p.2 #4 · Sigma 85mm vs Nikon 85mm 1.4D vs Nikon 85mm 1.4G - The good, the bad and the ugly.
luminosity wrote:
It's subjective, Nick. I never needed to "learn to love" my 85/1.4 D. It just came naturally to me.
There are a lot of Nikon shooters out there who would absolutely love to shoot the D, but can't afford it. You make it out to be some kind of bargain bin lens.
Didn't mean to make is sound like a "bargain bin" lens.
I guess since I switched from Canon earlier this year, I am not in that group of 85 1.4 D lovers. Believe me, when I switched, that was one of the first lenses I wanted to get b/c of all the wonderful things said about it. I've owned the Canon 85L MKI and MKII in the past so was looking forward to it. Found a used one. I'll just say in bluntly. That one sucked. Then I bought a new one. That one sucked too. When it hit, yes, the IQ was there. I've seen side by sides comparing the D to the G and the D holds up well. Maybe there's a lack of micro contrast on the D but IQ wise, it held its own. Where it failed for me was AF. I went through something similar with Canon's 50L. IQ was great, but AF was a major fail.
When I bough the G, I felt like I was running with the weights off. It would hit, hit, hit. at f1.4 under any lighting type. Tracking moving targets? No problem. I can shoot that lens at f1.4 all day long. Don't think I can say that with the D. Hey, it could be me right? Except I have both the G and the Sigma now and they behave pretty much the same, as do my other lenses, and the countless lenses I've used on the Canon side.
Perhaps it's all relative. I just can't recommend the 85 1.4 D at any level when there's the Sigma 85.
p.2 #5 · Sigma 85mm vs Nikon 85mm 1.4D vs Nikon 85mm 1.4G - The good, the bad and the ugly.
I have the 85 f14D and have for some time. I tried the 85 f1.4G and there is definately a little difference in colors and contrast. I think it would be a personal choice which one you liked best. I did feel the D was the faster focusing of the two.
For myself I coud not justify purchasing the new 85 f1.4G. I am perfectly happy with my 85 f1.4D. For me the biggest feature of the G lens is the manual focus override, I woud like that. Hoods I do preffer the screw in hood, it works exstremely well with a circular polarizer you just turn the hood.
And I do feel the D lens will go longer with out needing a repair. The only lens I have ever had to have repaired are the AFS lens.
Dennis
I sure wish I had a girl friend to buy me a 400 f2.8 lens
p.2 #7 · Sigma 85mm vs Nikon 85mm 1.4D vs Nikon 85mm 1.4G - The good, the bad and the ugly.
Is it not logical to think the latest greatest version is going to be superior to the original. The Sigma is an improvement on the original as is the 85G, maybe they are not better in all aspects, but they do a lot more and there is a lot more technology behind them. This is just evolution, the older model has been replaced, and the price will drop acordingly, unless the demand for the older version increases.
The startack was a great phone in it's time, but i will take the iphone4 any day of the week.
Can't make up your mind about these things but in 2 days (if you got the lens on Christmas day) you can declare the price of a very good lens be cut in half.
Sorry you maybe a very nice person but your post make you out to be a snob.
"Sadly I've already returned the lens as I told my fiancee I really need a 400mm F2.8 VR." Nothing like telling someone that their 1K gift is not good enough that they need to get you one that cost 9X more
BTW, I tried something similar with my wife. She bought me something (not photo related) for Fathers Day, i told her I actually needed a slightly better version, and returned it. That was 4 years ago - to this day I still hear about it at least once a month.
p.2 #11 · Sigma 85mm vs Nikon 85mm 1.4D vs Nikon 85mm 1.4G - The good, the bad and the ugly.
Nick Nishizaka wroteHaven't really noticed worse CA on the G. They are both pretty bad when it comes to this. IMO, the Sigma handles CA the best ironically.
Ironic, maybe, but hardly surprising. The Sigma includes and extra low dispersion element, while neither Nikkor does.
Dec 28, 2010 at 07:50 PM
mshi Offline • • • • [X]
p.2 #12 · Sigma 85mm vs Nikon 85mm 1.4D vs Nikon 85mm 1.4G - The good, the bad and the ugly.
Here is my 85 1.4G's AF Test, shot at f/1.4. You can judge CA yourself.
p.2 #15 · Sigma 85mm vs Nikon 85mm 1.4D vs Nikon 85mm 1.4G - The good, the bad and the ugly.
Nick Nishizaka wrote:
Didn't mean to make is sound like a "bargain bin" lens.
I guess since I switched from Canon earlier this year, I am not in that group of 85 1.4 D lovers. Believe me, when I switched, that was one of the first lenses I wanted to get b/c of all the wonderful things said about it. I've owned the Canon 85L MKI and MKII in the past so was looking forward to it. Found a used one. I'll just say in bluntly. That one sucked. Then I bought a new one. That one sucked too. When it hit, yes, the IQ was there. I've seen side by sides comparing the D to the G and the D holds up well. Maybe there's a lack of micro contrast on the D but IQ wise, it held its own. Where it failed for me was AF. I went through something similar with Canon's 50L. IQ was great, but AF was a major fail.
When I bough the G, I felt like I was running with the weights off. It would hit, hit, hit. at f1.4 under any lighting type. Tracking moving targets? No problem. I can shoot that lens at f1.4 all day long. Don't think I can say that with the D. Hey, it could be me right? Except I have both the G and the Sigma now and they behave pretty much the same, as do my other lenses, and the countless lenses I've used on the Canon side.
Perhaps it's all relative. I just can't recommend the 85 1.4 D at any level when there's the Sigma 85. ...Show more →
I for one wouldn't re-purchase the AF-D if i had a choice. Sometimes i feel AF-D owners (like me) have trouble accepting there are better lenses out there and are struggling to justify why they shouldn't "upgrade". If you know the lens's flaws you can try to work your way around things. There are limits though which can be frustrating (like how it can't really track, but thats not to say i haven't done action shots with it, the keep rate is abysmal though). But when i read this thread i didn't like how it was run down just like that. It's almost like a fall from grace really. I suppose its true that "cream machine" and all those terms made it a bit overhyped and the fact there wasn't a replacement until this year and how differently it rendered images (thin dof, etc), it was really something else in the nikon lineup until the new boys came around. And well it is something like 15 years old in terms of design and tech..
p.2 #17 · Sigma 85mm vs Nikon 85mm 1.4D vs Nikon 85mm 1.4G - The good, the bad and the ugly.
Basically any of the three copies will have a small degree of sample variation as well. This is likely why we are seeing reviews from some that state they had issues with both the Sigma and 85mm 1.4G.
AF speed was never an issue. The AF performance of the 85mm 1.4D as has been stated by a number of people is not up to par with the 85mm 1.4G or the Sigma 85mm. To be clear the focus accuracy is poor at best. In low light it gets even worse. The AF on the Nikon 85mm 1.4G is smooth and fast enough to keep up with moving subjects that are walking something I could never get the 85mm 1.4D to do. I find the sigma 85mm has faster AF then both the 85mm 1.4D and the 85mm 1.4G. The only issue I find with the Sigma was the wierd issue where it was locking on focus that was clearly not right. That and the 85mm 1.4G was focusing better in low light.
To be clear the 85mm 1.4D is not worth $800 or $900. If you think it is you are showing a clear bias to the lens likely because you own it. The Sigma will outperform that lens in every single way and at $899 is well priced. The 85mm 1.4G is still the most solid of the bunch from build quality, AF performance to overall image quality.
The lens hood and overall design of the 85mm 1.4D is not a plus in my opinion and I know several others personally that feel the same way. I'm not saying it's by any means a horrible lens, just when compared to the competition it's performance and overall value is not equal to that of the Sigma 85mm.
The same thing happened to the D3 when the D3s came out. It depreciated extremely fast as it was no longer new and current technology. The Sigma and 85mm 1.4G are just way more flexible for situations they can be used in and for that they are more valuable.
