nikon 85 /f1.4. Is it worth the price?

[leonard_forte1]

I am considering buy8ing the nikon 85 f/1.4 lens. I already have a 24-84 2.4-

4.0 and 80-200 f2.8 lenses. Is the 85mm 1.4 worth the money since I already

have that focal length covered in the 80-200 f/2.8? Thanks

If anyone has samples using the 85 1.4 lens maybe you can post them.

[Ed_Ingold]

A lot depends on the kind of pictures you take, and with what camera. An 85mm lens is pretty useful with a film camera, but not so useful (=125mm) on a DSLR. How useful is the 80-200 (a very fine lens) to you at the short end?

 

If you just want to own an 85/1.4 because it is such a superlative lens (a symptom of NAS - Nikon Acquisition Syndrome), then nothing should stand in your way. If you want something you will use every day, sell the 2-85 get a 17-35/2.8 or 17-55/2.8 for a DSLR, or a 28-70/2.8 for film, for about the same price as the 85/1.4.

[mitchfalk]

For low light situations like wedding halls and churches where flash is frowned upon, the 85 1.4 cant be beat. The 50 1.4 ain't bad neither.

[anthony_bez]

It is worth more! :-)

[tonybeach]

For someone who earns money with that focal length and needs the extra speed, it is clearly worth the money. For someone who can afford it, and wants to shoot wide open with near perfect IQ, it is also clearly worth it. If you have to ask if it is worth it, then there are probably other ways to spend your money that have a higher priority.

 

I wish I could afford one, but I don't need one so I have other more urgent priorities at this time -- but this lens is on my "to get" list. I would add though that I already have a Tokina 12-24/4, a Tokina 90/2.5 macro lens, three f/2.8 Nikkor zoom lenses (17mm to 200mm), a Tokina 300/2.8 AIS lens, three Speedlights (and will be buying another one soon), a D200 with another one on the way, three RAW converters, Photoshop CS2, some other photo editing software, a pretty powerful computer with a 22" wide monitor and 17" monitor, two tripods and ballheads, etc. Personally, I'm debating whether the 85/1.4 or the 105/2 will be my next major purchase; though I'll probably get the 85/1.4 next -- YMMV.

[ellis_vener_photography]

"Is it worth the price?"

 

 

How often do you need f/1.4?

[juanjo_viagran]

"Is it worth the price?"

 

if you use it it's worth the price no doubt..

 

if you keep it on the bag or at home because is to big or to heavy, then is WAY to expensive.

[harvey_edelstein1]

On a dslr a 50 f1.4 is more useful as a 75mm lens effective FL. If you need extra reach for indoor events like the crop factor makes this a short tele. If you like film then its great. Maybe its worth keeping in case there is a near full frame dslr in Nikon mount.

[albertdarmali]

What has been mentioned above was correct, usually people who really wants/needs this lens already know what they wanna use it for. Are you sure you wanna spend more than a grand for something you are not even sure you need it?

 

Well unless of course money isn't a problem for you and you are sort of collector of great lenses.

 

I got 3 pictures under my gallery which were taken with the 85mm 1.4 wide open. I let you guess which one they are. :)

[todd peach seattle, washi]

With all due 'props' to Ellis V., IMO this regime is so beyond most folk's experience that it's hard to answer his qualifying Q.

 

I shot other semi-fast lenses in this focal length for many years, and then stumbled upon the Nikon 85mm f/1.8 AF, later the AF-D (on a trade-up). When you have a tool like this, you might learn to explore the wide-open range, and be limited by even an f/1.8 aperture. To some extent, it's about trading off 'edge to edge sharpness' for a certain look and the ability to shoot in low light / narrow DOF.

 

Having whet my appetite with that 85/1.8 AFD, I bought an 85/1.4 AIS (I shoot a lot of manual focus / film as well). That caused me to look into the 85/1.4 AFD version, and that pretty quickly replaced the 85/1.8 for 'usefulness' for me.

 

I had a bunch of stuff stolen, and I replaced the 85/1.4 AFD, but not as yet the 85/1.8 AFD.

 

So back to the OP Q: If you're questioning the 'is it worth it?' part, I would suggest maybe renting either of the fast 85's, or perhaps try buying the slower f/1.8. Once you develop the eye and/or appetite for fast 85's, then you may or may not think the f/1.4 version is worth it.

[leonard_forte1]

Thank you all for your input! I am not too concerned about the extra speed since there is not much deifference between f/1.4 and f/1.8 but more the difference in iQ. I can use the 80-200 f/2.8 for that focal length.

I am using a D200 and would be using the 84 1.4 as a portrait lens.

 

 

Albert, is it the shots of the bee taken with the 85mm f1.4?

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Don't overlook the 85mm f/1.8 AF-D. It, too, is an excellent lens - and only a fraction of the cost of the f/1.4. A plus is that they are equally sharp at f/2.0, so it's really a question of how much the extra speed is worth. And if you prefer the bokeh of one over the other.

 

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_85_18/index.htm

 

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_85_18/index.htm

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Meant to add this link, too:

 

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

[hayward]

Nice lens. I have one. I don't use it much, except for stuff indoors that is somewhat far away, such as performances or sports. Then it's invaluable.

[elliot]

the 85mm f1.4 is better than the 80-200 and better than the 24-85.

The question is "do you need the f1.4", "are you going to use the f1.4", and since you're using only zooms, it seems, "how much will you use this lens since it is a prime"

 

It will certainly be better than your zooms at f2.8, but if you end up leaving the 80-200 on your camera because its easier and lazier, and if you for some reason never need faster than f2.8, then you probably won't get much benefit from it.

 

I think it's one of the best lenses.

[albertdarmali]

Leonard, I couldn't see the link or picture. Which shot were you talking about? If you paste the link or tell me the title/description of the shot then I can let you know.

[jose_angel]

The 85/1.4 is a must for film, it turns to 127.5mm on digitals, losting the polivalence. IMO yes, it is worth it if you want to have the narrowest DOF on your portraits. You will have a clearer finder, smaller sized lens, etc. but there isn`t any other reason to buy it (from the NAS perspective, it is a highly satisfying big piece of glass).

 

All has been said here, I contribute with a portrait (which I have posted several times here). Film "sensor" (TX?), hand-held, natural light, time ago with a sold F4 (I`m afraid not at f/1.4!):<div></div>

[hermanjr]

i just bought the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 used for $150. is a nice piece of lens, but in digital it converts to a 80mm f/1.4, and there is a good use for it in low lights. New its worth $340.while the 50mm f/1.8 is $130. I big change in price for a 1/3 step more. Any lens that you use is good the difference is whether you shoot in a tripod or hand. Then that is when you need to think about apertures and even if they are f/4-5.6 apertures, in a tripod it wont matter as long as is not sports. Other wise nature and even a portrait can stop for a second resulting in rich colored pictures. Don't buy just to have a collection. Buy for the need, not the greed of having the best when you are only going to use it to photograph grandma.

[bjørn rørslett]

The difference is 2/3 of a stop, so is significant.

[albertdarmali]

Leonard:

 

Oh sorry I just re-read your post. No, the bee wasn't taken with 85mm 1.4, it was taken with a Panasonic prosumer. Now are you sure you still wanna get the 1.4? :)

 

By the way, with 85mm 1.4 wide open, it can take very good grandma pictures, trust me. But the thing is, again, do you need it? (or like what it offers?) By the way, if the grandma has funny grandma smell, longer focal length like 85mm will prove to be more useful than 50mm.

[markci]

<i>An 85mm lens is pretty useful with a film camera, but not so useful (=125mm) on a DSLR.</i>

<p>

Says who?

[umesh_bhatt1]

Its very highly rated - I have one, and the rest of the lenses are just crap compared to it (well, maybe not the 28 f1.4 lens)...

 

I read an article that compared it Canon's 85mm f1.2 and Zeiss 85mm f1.4 - the Nikon came out as a winner.

 

Warning: Shooting at f1.4 and getting absolute sharpness is not easy -

Here is a sample for you:

http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/onblack.php?id=861865820&size=large

[blake_abbott]

You'll find some pics here:<p>

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00LU9W

[John Crowe]

Well, I have the Zeiss 85/1.4 and it is about the same sharpness (or should I say softness) as my Nikon 50/1.4 AIS at f1.4 and f2. This with the added bokeh makes it handy for portraits. At f2.8 it suddenly takes off into superstar territory and becomes sharper than my Nikon 200/2 also set at f2.8! I cannot put into words just how sharp this is. I have used several L and ED lenses and nothing comes even close to these two lenses at these apertures. This is useful for landscape and sports photography when you have the extra light.

 

 

I suspect the Nikon 85/1.4 will make the Nikon 85/1.8 look awfully soft at any aperture. Investing in one really depends on your needs. I bought the Zeiss at a bargain basement price of $200 USD so even if I only use it for 3 or 4 week-ends in the year it is well worth it for me.

[dcraton]

I have an 80-200/2.8 and opted for the 85/1.8 on a D80. I will tell you it was a great decision. I tend to be a lens snob, but I am in a 12 step group for it. I do a lot of portraits (and many other uses) with this lens and find it remarkable. As far as being soft, not. It has better bokeh, is sharper than my 80-200mm (which I love as well), and a remarkable portrait lens if you have the room and are not shooting short. I only offer this because I have both and am accustomed to the crop factor. The 85/1.8 is one of my favorite lenses and I preferred it over the 1.4. I do use my 80-200 a ton for different applications and would not trade it. I suggest you try one out if you can. Examples: http://www.photo.net/photo/6084336&size=lg and http://www.photo.net/photo/5856594&size=lg and http://www.photo.net/photo/6229864&size=lg. But, that's just me, a bit of old school mixed with new tech. Both the 1.4 and 1.8 are great lenses as is the 50mm/1.8 as well for 100.00. Have fun and these are just my thoughts and opinions, good hunting.