Canon 85mm f/1.8 EF USM vs. Nikon 105mm f/2.5

[pc_cap]

<p>Quick vote:<br>

I have a Canon eos 2000 film camera and I'm looking for a lens that is good for portraits both close and medium shot. I'm considering the Canon 85mm f/1.8 EF USM (which I believe will attach no problems) and the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 (which would have to be used with an adapter). I'm not very worried about autofocus, more on which will give me the best results with film. </p>

<p>Any convincing thoughts either way? Any other suggestions in the same price range?</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>Any convincing thoughts either way?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I wouldn't underestimate the value of AF for Portraiture.<br />The 85 will give you more flexibility, apropos Shooting Distance.<br />The difference in compression, etc, will be minor between the 85mm and the 105mm.<br />I'd like the 8 blades of the 85, and not the seven blades of the Nikon.<br />The (small) advantage of slightly shallow DoF at F/1.8 . . . is 'useful' sometimes.<br />The EF85 F/1.8 USM is a fine lens - I have Canon DSLR gear and I use this lens.<br />I've used Nikon 135Film Gear and I know the 105/2.5 . . . but ‘adapters’ . . .<br />And the EF 85’s Auto Focus can be used for other purposes, thus rendering it a more ‘versatile’ purchase.</p>

<p>All these points lead me to choose the EF85/1.8 as my suggestion to you.</p>

<p>WW</p>

[markonestudios]

<p>I agree fully with WW. I have the 85 f/1.8 and can confidently say, it is a stunningly good lens.</p>

[dennisgg]

Or you could even get both. The Nikkor-P 105mm f2.5 can be had for under $125 on ebay.

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>As much as I love the Nikkor 105 f/2.5 (it's a classic, for all the right reasons), I think having the "native EOS" 85 f/1.8 is much more convenient (since I'm a Nikon user, the Ai lenses aren't very inconvenient for me). And while I do not mind using MF lenses at all, I do have a AF 85mm as well, because sometimes AF is just really useful - and so, in your case, I'd prioritise the 85mm lens.</p>

<p>All that said, the Nikkor is a nice-to-have; the colour rendering is very gentle (in my view) for skintones, and less "punchy" and contrast-y, and less saturated that many modern lenses. Personally, I much like this look. The 105 f/2.5 is really one of the nicest Nikkors out there with a lovely smooth transition between in-focus and OoF, and sharp from f/2.5 on, in a small and unobtrusive package. <br />But obviously, I have not that much experience with the Canon to know how it compares in this sense. So I really can't say which is better or worse, optically.</p>

 

[mark_punch]

<p>I have both, and they are both great....in different ways.<br>

As a day to day lens on a Canon body, don't hesitate, get the 85 1.8 USM, it's fantastic, but as Dennis says, you can get a nice Nikon 105 2.5 AIS for very little money, and have the best of both worlds</p>

[tom_bloomer1]

<p>Ain't it funny how after 40 years people are still comparing other "portrait lenses" to the 105 F2.5 Nikkor.<br>

;-) <br>

<img src="http://blackburnforge.com/images/Image0176.jpg" alt="" /></p>

 

[g dan mitchell]

<p>Keep it simple. The 85mm f/1.8 is a great performer.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[pc_cap]

<p>thank you, i appreciate the helpful comments!</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>If you like the 100mm focal length, there's also Canon's 100mm f/2.0, which is reportedly very similar to the 85/1.8. I own the 100/2.0 and the Nikkor 105/2.5, which I adapt to my Canon 5D. Both are outstanding lenses that differ very little in image quality or character. Both have similar bokeh. Both are very sharp. I can't speak personally for the 85/1.8, but I would expect much of the same.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I would never argue against the virtues of the Canon lenses, but I have to say that I really do believe that the <a href="http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/portfolio/about/history/nikkor/n05_e.htm">Nikkor 105mm f/2.5</a> lenses are some of the best all-time lenses. In the earlier formula and in non-AI mount (mach's nix for using on a Canon) it sells for astonishingly low prices.<br /> One source had this to say about the lens:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The next in the line, the Nikkor<br />105mm,f/2.5, can rightfully be called<br />a Nikon legend, and many photographers<br />consider it to be the finest<br />lens Nikon has ever produced.<br /> <em> Nikon Compendium</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>One of these days I plan to get the Canon 85mm of one aperture or another. The price for the f/1.8 version is a bargain, anyhow.<br /> So get both, in having any of the Nikon 105mm f/2.5 lenses, you have a piece of optics history.<em><br /></em></p>

[pc_cap]

<p>How do I know which version of the Nikon lens is the one to get?</p>

[mark_punch]

<p>I would go for the last AIS version, made '81-2005 serial #'s 890172 - 1053928,<br>

with a built-in hood ... fantastic lens</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>This isn't going to help, but I personally went for the original Sonnar formula lens in non-AI mount.</p>

<p>There are technical improvements in the later formula, but there's just something about the character of the earlier one that I really like. For a discussion see http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/105mmnikkor/105mm25.htm as well as the Nikon link in my original post here.</p><div></div>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>I have two: one is an early sample of the <a href="http://imaging.nikon.com/history/nikkor/5/index.htm">new formula</a>, but not yet multi-coated; it's AI converted. The other one is a much later AiS sample. While these two should be optically identical, I managed to squeeze different bokeh out of them, and the multi-coating versus single-coating is slightly visible (less contrast, and more tendency to flare). The older one is (considerably) heavier, and the focus ring feels much better. The integrated hood on the AiS is a nice touch. I usually use the AiS.<br>

Since you can use non-AI lenses safely on a EOS-Nikon F adapter (as far as I know, JDM can confirm), I would try to find a non-AI; they're cheaper and optically as good as the newer lenses.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Confirmation: I use my Nikkor-P 105mm f/2.5 regularly on my EOS cameras with a simple Nikon>EOS adapter. In fact, the one shown above has the adapter on it.</p>

<p>The only place where there are some problems lies in the so-called "full-frame" (35mm) cameras where a few wide-angle Nikkors have rearward projections that don't clear the mirror. Pretty much everything works on the APS-C bodies.</p>

[pc_cap]

<p>I have a Canon EOS 2000 film camera, so I think that would be considered full frame. Would either lens work better on this camera? also, would you be able to recommend a particular adapter?</p>

[dennisgg]

<p>I too have the old Nikkor-P non-ai version and it is quite nice. Colors are subtle not overly contrasty like newer lenses. I would suggest getting this version personally (lowest price and it is has its own personality).</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p><a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html">Bjorn Rorslett</a> rates the newer Gauss 105/2.5 as better than the earlier Sonnar, but I'm sure both are outstanding. I have three copies of the latter (one non-AI PC, the other two Ai-S), so I can't provide any comparative assessment.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<blockquote>

<p>The only place where there are some problems lies in the so-called "full-frame" (35mm) cameras where a few wide-angle Nikkors have rearward projections that don't clear the mirror. Pretty much everything works on the APS-C bodies.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>JDM, I presume you're talking about the aluminum shield around the rear element that allows the lens to be laid on a table, rear-down, without damage to the rear element. I simply trimmed the one on my 105 with a sharp pair of kitchen shears and touched up the bright edge with a sharpie. It looks like it was made that way.</p>

<p>PC cap, any cheap Ebay adapter will probably work just as well. If you can find one in black, all the better, although the bright aluminum or chrome isn't a deal-breaker. (Use a sharpie.) A lot of people prefer the adapters with the focus confirm chips, but the chips can break off and rattle around between the sensor, shutter, mirror, and lens. They can also be mounted poorly and short out your camera. Ask JDM about his 20D that got fried!</p>