Apart from the nicer colours from the 1.4, I also noticed significantly better light transmission, it looked at least 1/2 a stop brighter than the 1.8 at all the tested apertures.
So I just got my 85 f/1.8 and I am loving it! I wasn't sure I would really need it when I have the 50 mm f/1.8 but I do see a huge difference in the compression!
@@a-muse6567 yeah im gonna get this as well 1.8G. years ago i had both 50mm 1.4 and 50mm 1.8 and what he said it's true, rarely you shoot at 1.4 anyway and even for the 50mm, the 1.8 was just as good!
Rented both. (alone with the 105mm 2.8). The Nikon 1.4G is better, but NOT 3 times better. Its like 5-10% better. Matts right, very much the same above f/2. And traveling with lighter gear is always a good thing.
iv got 1.4 lenses and seriously never use them below f2 . theres deffinately a colour change it there is hes used two bodies with a lens on each but not had the white ballance the same on each camera .. coatings stop glare not colour
All but one shot comparison, I liked the 1.8 shot over the 1.4. That makes me happy because I just ordered the 1.8g today and saved some serious cash. Thanks, man. You rock for the work you do. :)
Three months ago I was deciding between the Sigma 85 1.4 and the Nikon 85 1.8G, and decided to take the Nikon! It's quite small, and so light you'll barely notice it in your bag, but it's by far one of the sharpest lenses I've ever tested, and bokeh is nicer than you'd expect too. Totally recommend it!
I can see the difference (granted via video and my computer) but the question is does the difference justify the price difference. I see his point as well, that is, if photography is your living or passion, and you have to have the 1.4G, so be it.
"Honestly, I couldn't tell the difference." Either you are pretty much blind, or you are lying through the teeth. The difference is very much straight in your face, in every photo. Is the difference enough to defend the increase in price? That is individual. I have the 70-200E FL, but if I were to purchase an 85mm prime, it sure would be the f/1.4G.
See the thing is, I don't think they are as close as you make out. The 1.4's colour is soooo much nicer, softer, and the breadth of tones seems to be much higher. The 1.8g is colder and less dynamic, from what I can see. I will of course buy the 1.8g instead, but only because buying the 1.4g would mean sacrificing my testes to a furious wife....
i have a 85 1.8 and a little less color you knot its bcuz nano coating and not have a ed glass . but its not a big deal you can give it more contrast and color in photoshop. and when i take photos with my d3200 when i look at photos its extremely super sharp . and price is so good . you can saw some photos in my 500px.com/behzad_rad acount in big size ( im no t a very good editor but i try to fix my pics ass will )
Behzad Rad ...oh my goodness. Those photos are incredibly beautiful!! All of these are taken with the 85mm 1.8g?! If so, I must get one! I love this one in particular: 500px.com/photo/166187085/tati-by-behzad-rad? 500px.com/photo/132540159/mohaddse-by-behzad-rad?ctx_page=1&from=user&user_id=11571947 500px.com/photo/106629731/beautiful-farmer-by-behzad-rad?ctx_page=2&from=user&user_id=11571947 Wow, I'm in love with all your photos...too many beautiful images to mention!
Snakebloke thank you so much not all. if you see they have exif . all 85mm focal lenght ts by 85 1.8g. this link you pout in comment fist with 85 1.8g - second with 70-300 ed VR and last with 18-55 thank you
Behzad Rad Well I love your work. It makes me want an 85mm and a 70-300mm especially! The clarity and colours are amazing! And Iran seems so fascinating...it seems Iran is full of handsome guys and very, very, beautiful women!
In my opinion, these videos from 'thatnikonguy' are the best, and most informative videos on TH-cam. No bull, just plain talking. Thanks for uploading these great resources.
To my eye, the colors on the 1.4G looked waaaay better, just more pleasing gold tones and looked more contrasty and lively. Also, weirdly the exposure is the same on the background for both lenses but its underexposed on the face for the 1.8G. The thing is, a lens is the only part of the photography gear that can stay for such a long time with you (unlike camera bodies). So if I enjoy this lens much more for the next 20 years, its only like 60 dollars per year. I think its worth it.
Yeah. But is it 3 times better? No way. Also heavy af. And the colors? Seriously, that's a one second correction if at all in Lightroom or capture one. Plus do you really need the speed of 1.4? Lots of talk about bokeh, I know, but if you nail the shot and you are happy with the picture it's not going to matter much. As always it comes down to how good you are, not what lens and stuff you have. Also the real reason to get the 1.4 is a real need, otherwise it's OCD. 1.4 made more sense in the film days, when ISO was way more critical than today. I'd get the 1.8 every time - same with the 35mm - and spend my money on more fun things than a clumsy lens. Check out this comparison: th-cam.com/video/P17yVyBYc4U/w-d-xo.html
95% against the 1.4G is generous. I'd say more like 80%. The skin tones and blemish capture are worlds apart. I'd use the 1.4G for baby shoots or young children in portraits and the 1.8G with acne teenagers and adults have skin imperfections that need not be clarified in the images plus make it easier in Photoshop to edit them out. The lens on the 1.4G is far superior tech than the 1.8G. Imo, it's well worth the extra money to buy the 1.4G in an 85mm and have a 1.8G 50mm as a general purpose and adult portrait lens in the primes. If you obtained the 18-140mm ED VR as a kit lens, then if your rich in pocket, the 70-200mm ED VR2 is an excellent final edition, all of which will cover most needs. The 85mm 1.4G is a must if you can afford it.
I bought the nikon d7100 and got a 18-140 as kit lens, now for more depth of field, I'm going for 85 1.8g. Would you recommend 85 1.8 or 50 1.4? For portraits? Also I'm not rich!😂 also for landscape when you need light, that low aperture can get you alot of light in a low iso to get that quality aswell as a considerable amount of light.
Purchased the 1.4 as it gives a warmer image, more aesthetically pleasing on camera and nice balance in the hand. It is personal choice as both lens do the job.
Thanks for the review Matt. Hope you are keeping well! I so love my 1.8. By far the best lens in my bag. I used it primarily, during our workshop. Continued success to you, and safe travels.
Actually the 1.8 is considered to be a bit sharper then the 1.4. Other then being slightly brighter it’s a waste of money…just get the 1.8 unless you like burning money 😯
Nikon 85 f/1.4 renders skin tones more naturally than Nikon 85 f/1.8. As Granger says, 1.4 is "warmer." Shooting 1.4 at f/2.0 the image is sharp and background is beautiful, soft blur. Nikon 85 f/1.4 has best image. Nikon 85 f/1.8 has best value.
It depends on your type of photography. For head shots choose 85mm and for full body shots choose 50mm. The depth of field is shallower with 85mm at similar distances. If you shoot head shots with 50mm then there is a likelihood of distortion which is not the case with 85mm.
I have the nikon 1.4D. Truly an Amazing amazing lens. I did hire both lenses for a day to try them out. Somehow I feel there is a big difference in bokeh and depth of field, even when you shoot 1.8 on the 1.4 and minimum on 1.8. There is a stark difference.
Compared the 1.8G and 1.4G and both lenses performed equally well. With the 1.8g I did get consistently sharper images and less vignetting, the lens was lighter and focused faster. Tones and hues were exactly the same for both lens using a Nikon 780. Technical reviews indicate less lateral CA with the 1.8g and Versus ranked the 1.8g an 89 and the 1.4g a 78. Some minor difference with bokeh that only a trained eye would notice. I bought the 1.8g.
You can see the aperture open and close if you have a camera with a DOF preview button. This will close the aperture down to the setting on the camera.
man, your videos are so well thought out. useful info, to the point without being boring or poorly produced. thank you so much. i really do gain a lot from watching your channel.
I've got the 85mm 1.8 and the 50mm 1.8. The 85 is beautiful, probably my favorite lens. The 50 works well too, but I have my doubts once in awhile of how it stacks up to the 1.4. Tempted to swap.
Matt, I could easily say which photos belongs to which lens based on the skin tones. Most people in forums say 1.4 represents truer representation of the skin colors as 1.8 produces more saturated colors (not necessarily a bad thing but comprimises the actual skin tones for portraiture). What is your take on this? Did you notice a discernible difference in this regard and if so which lens provides the true representation in your opinion?
Good one Matt. I first took note of the f1.8 in a review by Darren Miles. It's great to hear my favourite reviewers agree on the most important points and make the same overall conclusions very clearly. I was struggling to pick the difference in the comparison images you share in this review. I will add that those hair splitting differences will be eclipsed by the skill and artfulness of the person taking the shots. The 1.8 would be more vulnerable to damage, if that's a consideration. But in careful hands, there's no reason why it shouldn't outlive it's owner. I'm getting the 1.8 for use on an D300 and an F100. 85mm is a great focal length. I use a 90mm f2 Summicron on Leica M cameras, and mostly wide open. I don't suffer anything from it not being faster. Thanks again for this review.
I have done the exact same thing, sold my 5100 to d600 and only have the 85 1.8 great combo. I can see why some only use prime lens, its great for just about everything.
Something's odd about the 1.8 exposures. I think they're a bit dark. Maybe bump iso then compare. The backgrounds are exposed the same but the face seems not just colder but darker.
It’s 2020 and I came here because I had this exact question. I’ll be using this on my recent purchase of Nikon D800 which only cost $800 used! Thanks for saving me tons of $$$.
Thanks for this review Matt! Eventho you say that the 1.8G is 95% as good as the 1.4, I am definitely gonna be saving up for the 1.4 in the next couple of months, because as I portrait shooter I see way too huge difference between the image quality in this direct comparison. Colors can be corrected yes, but the resolved detail and contrast on the skin cannot be added in post for sure. I also hate the grey halo that the 1.8G produces, and now I can kinda see it on all sample pictures online. This is one of the best review for sure.
Matt I normally after checking you and others reviews I normally go with what you say as gold. But after purchasing 85.1.4 and I only had a Nikon d90 and a a D300s i can't agree with you on this one. That 85 1.4 is something Nikon had help from Heaven, that lens is unbelievable so much so it cause me to buy a new Nikon 800e and if it gets any better than that of my D90 i will truly be a believer of Nikon. But thanks for sharing but I think you miss the boat on this one my 85 1.4 is the BOMB with a capital B. I LOVE IT! Expensive but worth every penny.
iunno. rented the 1.4g, and it just worked. the beautiful skin tones alone just blew me away. creamy stunning backgrounds were icing on the cake. im too broke to buy one to be sure. and my 105 2.5 ai is normally enough to get by with. but i defs will be renting the 85 1.4 every excuse i can dream up...
I bought the Nikkor 85mm 1.8G when I had my D7000 and loved the IQ. I now use the same lens on my D800e and still love the IQ. :)You'll notice a huge difference when compared to kit lenses. The 85mm turns into a telephoto lens (120-something focal length) which is great for photographing people. Plus it blows the background out so you have great subject isolation.
Just found this video and I'm so thankful for it. I have been debating on whether or not to get the 1.4 or the 1.8. You helped make up my mind for me, the subtle differences are not that big a deal. It's like Butter Baby!
I were at the same debate between 1.4g and 1.8g, because of reviews i notice that 1.4g is slower in terms of focusing, and the prices, well 1.8g is cheaper and the performance is just great. I'm sure your choice of 85mm 1.8g is a very good decision.
LONG SHEN I'd double that. Althrough I'm using 50mm 1.8g with my D7100, which I think was the best lens for my budget. I'd love to have 24-70mm 2.8g, but that is just way too expensive for me. And it is just too light, you only carry the body, lens is just feels like a feather compared to 18-105mm :)
Bill Clemens I bought the 85mm f/1.8G and have been very impressed. I needed to calibrate mine as it was back focusing quite a bit out of the box (although it might be my D7100 body which is out). I think I ended up around +14 on AF fine tune, which is pushing it a bit but OK. The lens has noticeable LoCA; but once you've got it calibrated correctly, and especially when stopped down a little, it produces really lovely portraits.My advice to anyone agonising over which to get: if you can afford the 85mm f/1.4G, I'd suggest you look at the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art and the Nikon 85mm f/1.8G combination instead, for about the same money (that's if you need/can justify a 35mm as well!)
Batuhan Genç Consider getting sigma 18-35 f/1.8. It is effectively a f/2.8 35mm-equivalent. It is the closest thing I can have for a 24-70 2.8 in a crop sensor.
It really looks like you didn't have the same exposures and white balance settings between the two lenses, am I right? I mean, the pictures taken with the 1,4G looked warmer and more exposed, now that would be easily corrected and the results would be even closer.
I had the old 1.8 (non-D) for a long time, and enjoyed using it, mostly for landscapes at apertures smaller than f/4. Wide open it was a dog. Replaced it with this 1.8G lens when it came out, and now I can use it all the way to wide open. I never really felt the need for f/1.4, so I'm happy with the 1.8G, it's very good bang for the buck. By the way, your model looked happier when photographed by the 1.8G ;-)
After having the 1.8 for a few years, I decided to get a used 1.4. The difference is very obvious, the 1.4 has better sharpness, colors, skin tones, it shows why it's boss very quickly and the photos take on an almost a 3D effect because they are so beautiful.
Superb review! I really like the "can you guess which lens?" section. I found that incredibly useful, especially as someone on a budget who couldn't always see a huge difference. Thanks again!
if the problem is about warm, why not use a warm filter? I love the letters on the front glass ring on the 1.8 like old ones, instead 1.4 looks like a new plastic generation.
I reached the exact same conclusion! Looking at a price/performance ratio (including the weight factor), it became obvious that the f:1.8G was a better choice for me. I use it mostly on a D800; I bought it a few weeks after its availability; I don't regret my decision. It is very sharp; I suppose I would get smoother bookey with 9 blades but as an "amateur", the price difference was just too significant to justify the f:1.4.
I can see someone reads a certain Mr Rockwell. Nikon don't use the term 'gelded' , however you are correct in meaning it doesn't have an aperture ring.
Thanks a lot for the answer! So, it PHYSICALLY does not have an aperture ring and relies on the camera body, therefore the aperture ring is digital, it means you can not see it open and close, that's just a "concept". And, if I've got that one right, is there a letter that is uses next to the number (instead of "G") to point out that the aperture ring is physical instead of digital? Thanks in advance.
Today I bought f/1.8 and I am really Happy with it. Matt is right, photos from f/1.4 looks better but the price diference is for some too much. You can always use the money for other gear instead if that one is not crucial for you.
I won both the 1.8 and 1.4, we use the 1.8 on a D7100 and the 1.4 on a D810, For travel, you can't beat the 1.8 and an 81B filter will warm things a bit if you like. The 1.4 is better but sometimes its just not worth all the weight & space it takes up. If all you had was the 1.8 you'd never miss the 1.4.
fabulous comparison...great video....how about chromatic aberration issues..i have the 85 1.8 and its awful in terms of purple fringing..wide open..thoughts? bummed this wasn't mentioned,wold love your take...
I've got the 1.8g and had it for some time. I'm quite happy with it on my D850. I certainly could buy the 1.4 but both the weight and the price are negatives. I would much rather put the money towards the 300 2.8.
I could always tell the 1.4 as the photo is closer to the subject every time. Its a tuff choice but I am going to go with the 1.4G But I have to say both are sharp and nice bokeh. Great review Matt!!
thanks for this video. i want the 1.4 now. seeing your video. the 1.4 makes the 1.8 look like a kit lens. if your pro. get the 1.4. i guessed every one in your video side by side. the sharpness and the exposure was the dead give away. mostly exposure then you showed the side by side and that was great. i will try and swing the 1.4. thanks again. been watching you for years. now i will sub from this particular video. in low light situations that 1.4 will pay off if you shoot in low light. and you will.......go nikon! and happy shooting to all no matter what you shoot.
Question please. Were photo's of the model taken at slightly different times because the 1.4 photos look like she had a slightly darker make up on her face.
I think that the test subject could have been much better, it's harder seeing the differences when the foreground is darker than the background. The test image lack contrast and brightness due to the darker foreground.
I shoot with a D4 and a D800. I love my 85mm F1.4 for all my portrait work. It is second choice after the 70-200mm F2.8 VRII. I had a good friend back in Oz who's daughter was going into Fashion Photography and I had a brand new D700, 85mm F1.8, battery chamber, extra batteries and a book on the D700 in the Field. Gave them ALL away to her to get her started. She remarked how sharp the F1.8 was and what a great lens it was coupled with the D700. Seems both 85's get the same endorsement as you, from two different photographers. I shoot dancers in action and portfolios of them for auditions.
Not at the moment +Luis Navarette... lol. I started with a Nikon D60 in the digital world. Before that, I was all Olympus OM-1 and all the accessories with a confinement of 36 shots on a roll of film to get it right. ;-)
+Mark Patten haha, I least I Tried. I'm getting the 85 1.8G today, hopefully I like it. And wow that's crazy haha. I remember in high school we would develop our film in a black room that was pretty fun. I had no idea what any camera setting did tho. composition kinda came naturally, well at least I think I was decent lol
+Mark Patten m.flickr.com/#/photos/131809830@N06/ some of my current pics, I'm just starting out. so not to good, don't think I'm to bad. lol even tho I have no followers... lol
I'm a newbie to photography, so my apologies if this is an annoyingly dumb question, but ... like many who have commented I see an enormous difference in the color quality in the 1.4 to the 1.8. The 1.4 looks just way better on so many levels. But the significantly higher cost is not attractive (obviously). My question is this if colors and skin tones are lacking on a 1.8 lens ... why does that matter at all if one can simply go on Photoshop or any picture editor and enhance colors and what not? I suppose what I'm really asking is why does it matter what kind of lens people use given all of the technology we live amongst with photo editing and how cheap it is often free to do it? I can take any old picture and blur the background with a simple photo editor. Have the advancement of photos editors made photographic talent a moot point?
I shot with 1.4G rented and I can tell you what I observed. First: yes, the colors can be corrected in post. But check the samples properly. It's not just the white balance, it's softer bokeh, it's even surprisingly different distortion, and it has more contrast with brighter shadows. When you get the image out of it, the skin tones are amazing and the detail is just phenomenal. It's sharper than 1.8G. A way sharper actually, but you don't see it until you shoot eyelashes and zoom to 100%. Plus it;s corner to corner, wherehas 1.4G wide open is really soft there. Honestly, looking at the image on TH-cam video is not the same as looking at the RAW at 100% zoom. And there it comes the other advantage: try shooting in less than ideal conditions, and I am not saying just for aperture, but against the sun, with bright source behind the subject. The nano cotaing or whatever that made to the lens will make it dreamy amazing beautiful portrait with just right shadow contrast. 1.8G will bring the details really down and you are loosing shadow areas, which in this case are important details of face as it is all in shadow. The best way to really see it, is rent both and check yourself. And put it in real test, not just even lighting conditions like in video ;-)
1.8D or 1.8G? Only instance I've tried 1.8D the bokeh was a bit 'busy' but I didn't buy it in the end. Contrast wasn't tip top but sharpness was good and CA was minimal with careful framing.
Apart from the nicer colours from the 1.4, I also noticed significantly better light transmission, it looked at least 1/2 a stop brighter than the 1.8 at all the tested apertures.
It's 2019 and I came here because I had this exact question. Thanks for saving me $800 :)
So I just got my 85 f/1.8 and I am loving it! I wasn't sure I would really need it when I have the 50 mm f/1.8 but I do see a huge difference in the compression!
A-muse good to know. I’m here in 2020 about to buy it for my D850 lol.
A-muse same here! I just recently purchased the f1.8G for my D800
I bought the 1.8 many years ago. It’s def my favorite lens.
@@a-muse6567 yeah im gonna get this as well 1.8G. years ago i had both 50mm 1.4 and 50mm 1.8 and what he said it's true, rarely you shoot at 1.4 anyway and even for the 50mm, the 1.8 was just as good!
Rented both. (alone with the 105mm 2.8). The Nikon 1.4G is better, but NOT 3 times better. Its like 5-10% better. Matts right, very much the same above f/2. And traveling with lighter gear is always a good thing.
SaZooCaballero thanks for the info.
I think you meant along instead of alone
iv got 1.4 lenses and seriously never use them below f2 . theres deffinately a colour change it there is hes used two bodies with a lens on each but not had the white ballance the same on each camera .. coatings stop glare not colour
Who buys a f/1.4 to shoot above f/2…c’mon man.
@@harleyrider9166 lol. most
All but one shot comparison, I liked the 1.8 shot over the 1.4. That makes me happy because I just ordered the 1.8g today and saved some serious cash. Thanks, man. You rock for the work you do. :)
Three months ago I was deciding between the Sigma 85 1.4 and the Nikon 85 1.8G, and decided to take the Nikon! It's quite small, and so light you'll barely notice it in your bag, but it's by far one of the sharpest lenses I've ever tested, and bokeh is nicer than you'd expect too. Totally recommend it!
Honestly, I couldn't tell the difference. If you're shooting with Nikon, then you're already a winner :-).
watch it in hd. i shoot everyday for 20 years. i could see it. i love nikon. peace
I can see the difference (granted via video and my computer) but the question is does the difference justify the price difference. I see his point as well, that is, if photography is your living or passion, and you have to have the 1.4G, so be it.
"Honestly, I couldn't tell the difference." Either you are pretty much blind, or you are lying through the teeth. The difference is very much straight in your face, in every photo. Is the difference enough to defend the increase in price? That is individual. I have the 70-200E FL, but if I were to purchase an 85mm prime, it sure would be the f/1.4G.
You will always be a winner when you like the gear you use ;)
50 mm 1.4G
See the thing is, I don't think they are as close as you make out. The 1.4's colour is soooo much nicer, softer, and the breadth of tones seems to be much higher.
The 1.8g is colder and less dynamic, from what I can see. I will of course buy the 1.8g instead, but only because buying the 1.4g would mean sacrificing my testes to a furious wife....
i have a 85 1.8 and a little less color you knot its bcuz nano coating and not have a ed glass . but its not a big deal you can give it more contrast and color in photoshop. and when i take photos with my d3200 when i look at photos its extremely super sharp . and price is so good . you can saw some photos in my 500px.com/behzad_rad acount in big size ( im no t a very good editor but i try to fix my pics ass will )
Behzad Rad ...oh my goodness. Those photos are incredibly beautiful!! All of these are taken with the 85mm 1.8g?! If so, I must get one!
I love this one in particular:
500px.com/photo/166187085/tati-by-behzad-rad?
500px.com/photo/132540159/mohaddse-by-behzad-rad?ctx_page=1&from=user&user_id=11571947
500px.com/photo/106629731/beautiful-farmer-by-behzad-rad?ctx_page=2&from=user&user_id=11571947
Wow, I'm in love with all your photos...too many beautiful images to mention!
Snakebloke thank you so much not all. if you see they have exif . all 85mm focal lenght ts by 85 1.8g. this link you pout in comment fist with 85 1.8g - second with 70-300 ed VR and last with 18-55
thank you
Behzad Rad Well I love your work. It makes me want an 85mm and a 70-300mm especially! The clarity and colours are amazing!
And Iran seems so fascinating...it seems Iran is full of handsome guys and very, very, beautiful women!
your pictures can be described with one word: "SPECTACULAR"
What camera did you use for "Book vs Smartphone"?
Thank you Matt! It's a great comparison presentation and I'd say I just went with the 1.8G one for the exact same reasons you talked about.
In my opinion, these videos from 'thatnikonguy' are the best, and most informative videos on TH-cam. No bull, just plain talking. Thanks for uploading these great resources.
you the best and honesty comparison on youtube.I got me 85mm 1.8Gthanks you Sir.
To my eye, the colors on the 1.4G looked waaaay better, just more pleasing gold tones and looked more contrasty and lively. Also, weirdly the exposure is the same on the background for both lenses but its underexposed on the face for the 1.8G. The thing is, a lens is the only part of the photography gear that can stay for such a long time with you (unlike camera bodies). So if I enjoy this lens much more for the next 20 years, its only like 60 dollars per year. I think its worth it.
Yeah. But is it 3 times better? No way. Also heavy af. And the colors? Seriously, that's a one second correction if at all in Lightroom or capture one. Plus do you really need the speed of 1.4? Lots of talk about bokeh, I know, but if you nail the shot and you are happy with the picture it's not going to matter much. As always it comes down to how good you are, not what lens and stuff you have. Also the real reason to get the 1.4 is a real need, otherwise it's OCD. 1.4 made more sense in the film days, when ISO was way more critical than today. I'd get the 1.8 every time - same with the 35mm - and spend my money on more fun things than a clumsy lens. Check out this comparison:
th-cam.com/video/P17yVyBYc4U/w-d-xo.html
95% against the 1.4G is generous. I'd say more like 80%. The skin tones and blemish capture are worlds apart. I'd use the 1.4G for baby shoots or young children in portraits and the 1.8G with acne teenagers and adults have skin imperfections that need not be clarified in the images plus make it easier in Photoshop to edit them out. The lens on the 1.4G is far superior tech than the 1.8G. Imo, it's well worth the extra money to buy the 1.4G in an 85mm and have a 1.8G 50mm as a general purpose and adult portrait lens in the primes. If you obtained the 18-140mm ED VR as a kit lens, then if your rich in pocket, the 70-200mm ED VR2 is an excellent final edition, all of which will cover most needs. The 85mm 1.4G is a must if you can afford it.
I bought the nikon d7100 and got a 18-140 as kit lens, now for more depth of field, I'm going for 85 1.8g. Would you recommend 85 1.8 or 50 1.4? For portraits? Also I'm not rich!😂 also for landscape when you need light, that low aperture can get you alot of light in a low iso to get that quality aswell as a considerable amount of light.
Purchased the 1.4 as it gives a warmer image, more aesthetically pleasing on camera and nice balance in the hand. It is personal choice as both lens do the job.
Thanks for the review Matt. Hope you are keeping well! I so love my 1.8. By far the best lens in my bag. I used it primarily, during our workshop. Continued success to you, and safe travels.
Actually the 1.8 is considered to be a bit sharper then the 1.4. Other then being slightly brighter it’s a waste of money…just get the 1.8 unless you like burning money 😯
Nikon 85 f/1.4 renders skin tones more naturally than Nikon 85 f/1.8. As Granger says, 1.4 is "warmer." Shooting 1.4 at f/2.0 the image is sharp and background is beautiful, soft blur. Nikon 85 f/1.4 has best image. Nikon 85 f/1.8 has best value.
There is such a huge difference between these 2 lenses, especially when put side by side, I could not belive my eyes.
@@ChillWithMe_musics yeah, it's so much heavier!
@@ChillWithMe_musics OMG! YES! Thanks for the humor, bro :) :)
Thanks for the honest opinion Matt and enjoy the trip !!
slipbyu2 the trip was 2 years ago
+lapourda XD
3 years ago now :D
It depends on your type of photography. For head shots choose 85mm and for full body shots choose 50mm. The depth of field is shallower with 85mm at similar distances. If you shoot head shots with 50mm then there is a likelihood of distortion which is not the case with 85mm.
Hey it's Tina Yong! One of my favorite TH-camrs! Awesome review as well!
I have the nikon 1.4D. Truly an Amazing amazing lens. I did hire both lenses for a day to try them out. Somehow I feel there is a big difference in bokeh and depth of field, even when you shoot 1.8 on the 1.4 and minimum on 1.8. There is a stark difference.
Compared the 1.8G and 1.4G and both lenses performed equally well. With the 1.8g I did get consistently sharper images and less vignetting, the lens was lighter and focused faster. Tones and hues were exactly the same for both lens using a Nikon 780. Technical reviews indicate less lateral CA with the 1.8g and Versus ranked the 1.8g an 89 and the 1.4g a 78. Some minor difference with bokeh that only a trained eye would notice. I bought the 1.8g.
You can see the aperture open and close if you have a camera with a DOF preview button. This will close the aperture down to the setting on the camera.
Thanks Matt. I went and got the 1.8G. Appreciate you taking the time creating this comparative review.
man, your videos are so well thought out. useful info, to the point without being boring or poorly produced. thank you so much. i really do gain a lot from watching your channel.
Thanks a lot, you just solved my confusion, am heading up with 1.8G,
I've got the 85mm 1.8 and the 50mm 1.8. The 85 is beautiful, probably my favorite lens. The 50 works well too, but I have my doubts once in awhile of how it stacks up to the 1.4. Tempted to swap.
Matt, I could easily say which photos belongs to which lens based on the skin tones. Most people in forums say 1.4 represents truer representation of the skin colors as 1.8 produces more saturated colors (not necessarily a bad thing but comprimises the actual skin tones for portraiture).
What is your take on this? Did you notice a discernible difference in this regard and if so which lens provides the true representation in your opinion?
Good one Matt. I first took note of the f1.8 in a review by Darren Miles. It's great to hear my favourite reviewers agree on the most important points and make the same overall conclusions very clearly.
I was struggling to pick the difference in the comparison images you share in this review.
I will add that those hair splitting differences will be eclipsed by the skill and artfulness of the person taking the shots.
The 1.8 would be more vulnerable to damage, if that's a consideration. But in careful hands, there's no reason why it shouldn't outlive it's owner.
I'm getting the 1.8 for use on an D300 and an F100.
85mm is a great focal length. I use a 90mm f2 Summicron on Leica M cameras, and mostly wide open. I don't suffer anything from it not being faster.
Thanks again for this review.
I have done the exact same thing, sold my 5100 to d600 and only have the 85 1.8 great combo. I can see why some only use prime lens, its great for just about everything.
Something's odd about the 1.8 exposures. I think they're a bit dark. Maybe bump iso then compare. The backgrounds are exposed the same but the face seems not just colder but darker.
It’s 2020 and I came here because I had this exact question. I’ll be using this on my recent purchase of Nikon D800 which only cost $800 used! Thanks for saving me tons of $$$.
Thanks for this review Matt! Eventho you say that the 1.8G is 95% as good as the 1.4, I am definitely gonna be saving up for the 1.4 in the next couple of months, because as I portrait shooter I see way too huge difference between the image quality in this direct comparison.
Colors can be corrected yes, but the resolved detail and contrast on the skin cannot be added in post for sure. I also hate the grey halo that the 1.8G produces, and now I can kinda see it on all sample pictures online.
This is one of the best review for sure.
Great review -- I like your presentation style as well as your factual presentation.
well, if you don't nail focus in your test shots it's quite easy to make the 1.4 look bad...
Matt I normally after checking you and others reviews I normally go with what you say as gold. But after purchasing 85.1.4 and I only had a Nikon d90 and a a D300s i can't agree with you on this one. That 85 1.4 is something Nikon had help from Heaven, that lens is unbelievable so much so it cause me to buy a new Nikon 800e and if it gets any better than that of my D90 i will truly be a believer of Nikon. But thanks for sharing but I think you miss the boat on this one my 85 1.4 is the BOMB with a capital B. I LOVE IT! Expensive but worth every penny.
did you ever use the 1.8? if you didn't then this is kind of biased.
I notice the 1.4 was warmer. I actually like it. I'm looking for a good portrait lens and I think the 1.4 would b worth the money for what I shoot.
I have the 1.8g and absolutely love it, it's my favorite lens and I rarely take it off.
iunno. rented the 1.4g, and it just worked. the beautiful skin tones alone just blew me away. creamy stunning backgrounds were icing on the cake. im too broke to buy one to be sure. and my 105 2.5 ai is normally enough to get by with. but i defs will be renting the 85 1.4 every excuse i can dream up...
I bought the Nikkor 85mm 1.8G when I had my D7000 and loved the IQ. I now use the same lens on my D800e and still love the IQ. :)You'll notice a huge difference when compared to kit lenses. The 85mm turns into a telephoto lens (120-something focal length) which is great for photographing people. Plus it blows the background out so you have great subject isolation.
85mm on full frame 35mm sensor is 85mm..
Apsc sensor is x1.5 = 127mm
Just found this video and I'm so thankful for it. I have been debating on whether or not to get the 1.4 or the 1.8. You helped make up my mind for me, the subtle differences are not that big a deal. It's like Butter Baby!
I were at the same debate between 1.4g and 1.8g, because of reviews i notice that 1.4g is slower in terms of focusing, and the prices, well 1.8g is cheaper and the performance is just great. I'm sure your choice of 85mm 1.8g is a very good decision.
LONG SHEN I'd double that. Althrough I'm using 50mm 1.8g with my D7100, which I think was the best lens for my budget. I'd love to have 24-70mm 2.8g, but that is just way too expensive for me. And it is just too light, you only carry the body, lens is just feels like a feather compared to 18-105mm :)
Bill Clemens I bought the 85mm f/1.8G and have been very impressed. I needed to calibrate mine as it was back focusing quite a bit out of the box (although it might be my D7100 body which is out). I think I ended up around +14 on AF fine tune, which is pushing it a bit but OK. The lens has noticeable LoCA; but once you've got it calibrated correctly, and especially when stopped down a little, it produces really lovely portraits.My advice to anyone agonising over which to get: if you can afford the 85mm f/1.4G, I'd suggest you look at the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art and the Nikon 85mm f/1.8G combination instead, for about the same money (that's if you need/can justify a 35mm as well!)
Batuhan Genç Consider getting sigma 18-35 f/1.8. It is effectively a f/2.8 35mm-equivalent. It is the closest thing I can have for a 24-70 2.8 in a crop sensor.
Thanks for this guide Matt. I will definitely be getting the 85mm 1.8 when the budget can tolerate it. Very useful information as always.
It really looks like you didn't have the same exposures and white balance settings between the two lenses, am I right?
I mean, the pictures taken with the 1,4G looked warmer and more exposed, now that would be easily corrected and the results would be even closer.
Danijel L exactly.. those photos didn't at all compare, one has blue tint. lol
The skin colors do look nicer on the Nikon 85mm f/1.4.
simple lightroom adjustments can fix that easily
DonJZA I don't get it either. Everyone edits pictures. The tiny difference between one and the other in terms of colour rendition is negligible imho
wont fix the sharpness. peace
i dont edit mine.
Did you take your shots and compared with both of the lenses?
where can I get a jacket like that?
KevinConley
I'm with you on that, the jacket is awesome.
Great review. There is an obvious third alternative that I opted: buy the f/1.4 second hand. No regrets!
Tom Coyner lo..l you are right man
Tom Coyner I got the Nikon 85mm f1.4D used ....and it is a DREAM
I had the old 1.8 (non-D) for a long time, and enjoyed using it, mostly for landscapes at apertures smaller than f/4. Wide open it was a dog. Replaced it with this 1.8G lens when it came out, and now I can use it all the way to wide open. I never really felt the need for f/1.4, so I'm happy with the 1.8G, it's very good bang for the buck. By the way, your model looked happier when photographed by the 1.8G ;-)
I'd love to see how these two compared to the 1.4D!
After having the 1.8 for a few years, I decided to get a used 1.4. The difference is very obvious, the 1.4 has better sharpness, colors, skin tones, it shows why it's boss very quickly and the photos take on an almost a 3D effect because they are so beautiful.
Superb review! I really like the "can you guess which lens?" section. I found that incredibly useful, especially as someone on a budget who couldn't always see a huge difference. Thanks again!
Thanks, Matt! This made my decision easier!
And what did you decide? lol.
Mike205 1.8G 😊
I actually Liked the 1.8 better. But great comparison!
if the problem is about warm, why not use a warm filter? I love the letters on the front glass ring on the 1.8 like old ones, instead 1.4 looks like a new plastic generation.
You're not the first photographer I've seen say this. I'm glad I knew this before purchasing an 85 mm.
I have two of them and I can say 1.4 is amazing.
Totally agree. The 1.8G is superb. Great videos!
I reached the exact same conclusion! Looking at a price/performance ratio (including the weight factor), it became obvious that the f:1.8G was a better choice for me.
I use it mostly on a D800; I bought it a few weeks after its availability; I don't regret my decision.
It is very sharp; I suppose I would get smoother bookey with 9 blades but as an "amateur", the price difference was just too significant to justify the f:1.4.
This video is nearly a decade old but it still helped me make a decision. Thanks!
Saved me money! Thank you!! I'm just learning and this will be a much better choice for me.
Matt, it appears that the images from the 1.4 are a bit warmer. Is that true to the lens, or did the lighting change a little?
great to hear. thanks
I can see someone reads a certain Mr Rockwell. Nikon don't use the term 'gelded' , however you are correct in meaning it doesn't have an aperture ring.
The 1.4 pictures look better at every aperture, I'm surprised by the difference.
Thanks a lot for the answer!
So, it PHYSICALLY does not have an aperture ring and relies on the camera body, therefore the aperture ring is digital, it means you can not see it open and close, that's just a "concept".
And, if I've got that one right, is there a letter that is uses next to the number (instead of "G") to point out that the aperture ring is physical instead of digital?
Thanks in advance.
Today I bought f/1.8 and I am really Happy with it. Matt is right, photos from f/1.4 looks better but the price diference is for some too much. You can always use the money for other gear instead if that one is not crucial for you.
That is a fair comment which is supported by the DxO Mark scores too. I would buy the 85mm f/1.8 which is the best according to DxO mark. Thank you.
Great review; wish you could have included the Sigma 85mm F1.4 as comparison.
Sigma seems significantly better: www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikkor-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-f14G-on-Nikon-D800E-versus-Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-F18G-on-Nikon-D800E-versus-Sigma-85mm-F14-DG-HSM-A-Nikon-on-Nikon-D800E__388_814_823_814_1777_814
I won both the 1.8 and 1.4, we use the 1.8 on a D7100 and the 1.4 on a D810, For travel, you can't beat the 1.8 and an 81B filter will warm things a bit if you like. The 1.4 is better but sometimes its just not worth all the weight & space it takes up. If all you had was the 1.8 you'd never miss the 1.4.
Ana Akin Which One Would be better for portraits... I am An Ameture Photographer...I know 1.4 will be Better ThaN 1.8 but..is 1.8 really okay?
Bilal Shaik if you want a cheap portrait lens try the 50mm 1.8
I watch your videos because you are honest and up front, thanks. Great Video!
Thanks again Matt for another great unbiased video.
This was the best info I have seen on the web about these lenses. Thank you.
fabulous comparison...great video....how about chromatic aberration issues..i have the 85 1.8 and its awful in terms of purple fringing..wide open..thoughts? bummed this wasn't mentioned,wold love your take...
I've got the 1.8g and had it for some time. I'm quite happy with it on my D850. I certainly could buy the 1.4 but both the weight and the price are negatives. I would much rather put the money towards the 300 2.8.
I could always tell the 1.4 as the photo is closer to the subject every time. Its a tuff choice but I am going to go with the 1.4G But I have to say both are sharp and nice bokeh. Great review Matt!!
I have Google'd the difference between these 2 lenses so many times, but your video has been the most helpful. Thank you!
thanks for this video. i want the 1.4 now. seeing your video. the 1.4 makes the 1.8 look like a kit lens. if your pro. get the 1.4. i guessed every one in your video side by side. the sharpness and the exposure was the dead give away. mostly exposure then you showed the side by side and that was great. i will try and swing the 1.4. thanks again. been watching you for years. now i will sub from this particular video. in low light situations that 1.4 will pay off if you shoot in low light. and you will.......go nikon! and happy shooting to all no matter what you shoot.
What camera and lens did you shoot this video with? Looks stunning. Thx
Question please. Were photo's of the model taken at slightly different times because the 1.4 photos look like she had a slightly darker make up on her face.
The light was quite different between both shoots...
I don't own a Nikon but it's good to see these comparisons, as a learning exercise as much as anything else. Subbed.
Thank you very much! Excellent evaluation. I appreciate the fair commentary.
I think that the test subject could have been much better, it's harder seeing the differences when the foreground is darker than the background. The test image lack contrast and brightness due to the darker foreground.
Please, say me what is the camera that you use for film your videos!
great vid. i bought the 50 1.8 based on your recommendation from your vid and never looked back, thanks.
The 1.4 and the 1.8 has different colors. So it's easy to tell, which picture was made with, wich lens,
Great video as usual. Keep doing what you do!
I own the nikon 85 f 1.8 and it does take wonderful pictures ...
Hi Matt, you are right about the weight factor. I have some mighty big lenses, so when I get a chance to attach a smaller lens, I appreciate it more.
Thanks for the info they got that 1.8 on sale now in the USA
Nice review!
Well covered with photos!
Skin tones are the biggest difference for my eyes...
1.4 is silk...
I shoot with a D4 and a D800. I love my 85mm F1.4 for all my portrait work. It is second choice after the 70-200mm F2.8 VRII.
I had a good friend back in Oz who's daughter was going into Fashion Photography and I had a brand new D700, 85mm F1.8, battery chamber, extra batteries and a book on the D700 in the Field. Gave them ALL away to her to get her started. She remarked how sharp the F1.8 was and what a great lens it was coupled with the D700.
Seems both 85's get the same endorsement as you, from two different photographers. I shoot dancers in action and portfolios of them for auditions.
have any cameras you trying to give me? Lol I'm shooting on a d3100 for the last two years, I need a upgrade. :D
Not at the moment +Luis Navarette... lol.
I started with a Nikon D60 in the digital world. Before that, I was all Olympus OM-1 and all the accessories with a confinement of 36 shots on a roll of film to get it right. ;-)
+Mark Patten haha, I least I Tried. I'm getting the 85 1.8G today, hopefully I like it. And wow that's crazy haha. I remember in high school we would develop our film in a black room that was pretty fun. I had no idea what any camera setting did tho. composition kinda came naturally, well at least I think I was decent lol
+Mark Patten m.flickr.com/#/photos/131809830@N06/ some of my current pics, I'm just starting out. so not to good, don't think I'm to bad. lol even tho I have no followers... lol
I'm a newbie to photography, so my apologies if this is an annoyingly dumb question, but ... like many who have commented I see an enormous difference in the color quality in the 1.4 to the 1.8. The 1.4 looks just way better on so many levels. But the significantly higher cost is not attractive (obviously).
My question is this if colors and skin tones are lacking on a 1.8 lens ... why does that matter at all if one can simply go on Photoshop or any picture editor and enhance colors and what not?
I suppose what I'm really asking is why does it matter what kind of lens people use given all of the technology we live amongst with photo editing and how cheap it is often free to do it? I can take any old picture and blur the background with a simple photo editor. Have the advancement of photos editors made photographic talent a moot point?
I shot with 1.4G rented and I can tell you what I observed. First: yes, the colors can be corrected in post. But check the samples properly. It's not just the white balance, it's softer bokeh, it's even surprisingly different distortion, and it has more contrast with brighter shadows. When you get the image out of it, the skin tones are amazing and the detail is just phenomenal. It's sharper than 1.8G. A way sharper actually, but you don't see it until you shoot eyelashes and zoom to 100%. Plus it;s corner to corner, wherehas 1.4G wide open is really soft there.
Honestly, looking at the image on TH-cam video is not the same as looking at the RAW at 100% zoom.
And there it comes the other advantage: try shooting in less than ideal conditions, and I am not saying just for aperture, but against the sun, with bright source behind the subject. The nano cotaing or whatever that made to the lens will make it dreamy amazing beautiful portrait with just right shadow contrast. 1.8G will bring the details really down and you are loosing shadow areas, which in this case are important details of face as it is all in shadow.
The best way to really see it, is rent both and check yourself. And put it in real test, not just even lighting conditions like in video ;-)
Super helpful! Great video. Definitely will be following you're channel
Excellent review and your presentation answered the very question I was searching for. On my way to purchase once i finish this comment.
I'm ordering the 1.8 today, I'm super excited !
Yeah I got all of the comparisons. Would love a 1.4.
Thank you Matt for a succinct and reasonable comparison. That was helpful.
all the 1.4 shots look warmer....did some variable other than the lens change?
1.8D or 1.8G? Only instance I've tried 1.8D the bokeh was a bit 'busy' but I didn't buy it in the end. Contrast wasn't tip top but sharpness was good and CA was minimal with careful framing.
There are quite a few versions of the Nikkor 85mm and the best to me is the 85mm 1.8 G. It is a joy to carry around all day on my D600.
i think i am decided on the 1.8G! thanks for the review!