Which lens is Better than 85mm f/1.4?

[edwin_mendoza]

<p>I have had many Nikon Lenses but none has given me the image quality of the 85mm f/1.4. If there anything better or equal to it?<br>

I had the 300mm f/2.8 which is also excellent.</p>

[dave_petley2]

<p>85MM F/1.8 35 70mmF/ 2.8 80 200mmF/ 2.8 50MMF/1.4</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>See <a href="00T84X"><strong>this very recent thread</strong> </a> , one of many on this same topic.</p>

[bmm]

<p>Of course this begs the question - image quality for doing what? But I agree that for me, on DX nothing beats the 85/1.4 as a short tele and portrait lens.<br>

I'm obviously only going to comment on other lenses that I own in my response to you but I want to mention two - one longer and one wider than the 85/1.4 - both of which are absolutely marvellous in my opinion.<br>

180/2.8 and 35/2, both AF-D. I cannot speak highly enough of either of these and find both a joy to use. The latter, especially at its price point, for me is a no-brainer and would be the first lens I would replace if I lost my entire kit.</p>

[edwin_mendoza]

<p>Dave, Lex, Bernard. Thank you all. I should have mentioned auto focus. I am looking at adding something new to my collection. Currently I own 20mm f/2.8 , 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4 and 70-200 f/2.8vr.</p>

[peter]

<p>I often use the 50mm f1.4 AF as a short tele / portrait lens on my D200. As it has the field of view of a 75mm on a DX camera combined with nice bokeh wide open, it performs very nicely when used in this manner. Plus its many times cheaper than the 85mm f1.4 if thats an issue. Of course I would LOVE the 85 1.4 or the 85 1.8 for that matter but for now this does OK<br>

Here is a link to a photo taken by that lens. Nice color, good bokeh, good sharpness - although I have missed the mark slightly and focused on the knee!<br>

<a href="http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o251/peterm1_bucket/_DSC0785.jpg">http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o251/peterm1_bucket/_DSC0785.jpg</a></p>

[shuo_zhao]

<p>Which aspect of the 85 f/1.4's image rendition capability do you find appealing? Sharpness wide open? Bokeh?</p>

<p>Let us know. </p>

[edwin_mendoza]

<p>Peter, Thanks, your image is excellent. I own this lens as well and like it a lot.</p>

[edwin_mendoza]

<p>Shuo, I love everything about this lens and use it as much as I can. Sharpness, Bokeh, Contrast and color rendition.<br>

When I take a photo with this lens and compare to another the difference is very clear.</p>

[alex_b9]

<p>The 200/2 deserves mention. At a more modest size/weight (and that, too!), is the 180/2.8.</p>

[brian_cheng2]

<p>Long ago I rented the 85/1.4 for a wedding. I love this lens. It's got a snap that's hard to describe. My only other comparison to this lens is my 80-200/2.8, also a nice lens.</p>

[brian_cheng2]

<p>Sorry, here's my attachment.</p>

<p>I'm also noticing some scanning artifacts in the image. Rest assured that the original is sweeeeet.</p><div></div>

[shuo_zhao]

<p>The 85 f/1.4 is a fairly unique and specialized lens. It falls into the "ultra-fast" category. Other lenses that share some of the 85 f/1.4's characteristics (other than the relatively plain 50 f/1.4) are fairly exotic. The now discontinued 28 f/1.8 and the 200 f/2 VR would be 2 of them. </p>

[edwin_mendoza]

<p>Alex, Brian, Shuo, Thank you. I am now considering the 180 f/2.8 as an option and would love the 200 f/2 vr but price is a bit intimidating. Someone also recomende the Nikon 135mm f/2 DC.</p>

[mark liddell]

<p>105mm f/2.5. It doesn't have the same speed but performance as almst as good wide open as stopped down, when I tested it every aperture looked the same right up until diffraction kicked in. Very impressive.</p>

<p>The 85mm f/1.4 is a great lens but the corners wide open are poor. It takes stopping down to f/4 to get corner sharpness.</p>

[anthony_bez]

<blockquote>

<p>Which lens is Better than 85mm f/1.4?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p><strong>None!</strong></p>

[rob_malkin]

<p>I hate to say it, but....</p>

<p>Canon 85mm f1.2</p>

<p>R</p>

[anthony_bez]

<blockquote>

<p>I hate to say it, but....Canon 85mm f1.2</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not really it has a badly designed mount, it will not attach to my camera.<br>

Unlike the fabulous Nikkor f1.4 AFD which fits perfectly.</p>

[rob_malkin]

<p>You got a bad sample. A lens that costs £1,800.00 will not have a bad mount. Either your camera or your sample.</p>

[glenn_c1]

<p>I think he means it will not attach to his <em>Nikon</em> camera ;-)</p>

[rob_malkin]

<p>Haha, well keep trying in that case. And if it still does not fit push really hard and twist till you hear a really nice SNAP. When that happens you have it mounted ok</p>

[frank_skomial]

<p>84/1.4 Nikkor, Zeiss 85/1.4, and Canon 85/1.2 were directly compared in some "unbiased" review that showed lenses equal on average, with advantages on one aspect or another in multiple computed and measured graphs results in the review. I hope someone will find that old review, if that matters.</p>

<p>180/2.8 Nikkor comes very close to 85/1.4 quality.</p>

[mars790]

<p>Dave Petley, I'm sorry to heartily disagree but before you give people the wrong idea - none of your choices stand up to the 85mm 1.4 for that magical image quality:</p>

 

<p>85MM F/1.8 35 70mmF/ 2.8 80 200mmF/ 2.8 50MMF/1.4</p>

 

<p>Nice lenses, yes but BETTER - no.</p>

[rob_malkin]

<p>There has been a fair few reviews that show the f1.8 to be sharper than the f1.4. Guess it depends on what you are after.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>The 85/1.4 is one of the finest lenses in the Nikon lineup. The 85/1.8 has slightly better stopped down sharpness but it flares more easily than the 1.4 and is not mechanically as nicely built. The 1.4 has nicer manual focus feel, better bokeh, and is overall an excellent people lens (if not the very best).</p>

<p>Not exactly alike but of very high image quality are the 50/1.4 AF-S, the 35mm f/2 ZF, the 100mm f/2 ZF, the 180/2.8. I haven't used the 200/2 or the 300/2.8 but people who have generally consider them right up there.</p>