I have to chime in here. First of all, I must say this is the best video out right now on the Z 85 1.2 in terms of actual substance and what people are interested to know regarding if they should upgrade from the 1.8. Love the fact you actually explained and showed us examples of each lens side by side. We even got a Noct sample which was awesome and very valuable info to know. I like this video because there is no sugar coating or fluff. Big Kudos to you for keeping it real and delivering on an insightful preview. This video is getting allot of praise from comments on my videos as well from viewers. Good job Ricci. I did something similar when I photographed Rolls Royce comparing both 50mm Z lenses side by side on my channel. Anyway man. good job on this and Nikon Sessions. Keep on rockin.
I think while the 1.2 S version is impressive, this also shows just how good the 85 1.8 S is as well. Yes the bokeh isn't perhaps as smooth and perhaps the light gathering is about 2/3 of a stop slower but those things on the 1.2 also come at a pretty hefty price (about $2000 more) so in some respects, you have to really want that shallow DOF and smooth bokeh for $2,000 to justify it. Me personally I'll stick with my 1.8 since protraiture / people photography amounts to less than half the work I do (if I was shooting professionally, I might consider the 1.2 more as I could recoup the cost over time), but if you cannot afford the 1.2, the 1.8 is still an excellent lens for the money (and it's size/weight)
On your comparisons - I miss a comparison to the Nikkor 105/1.4. For me, this is still the best available Nikon portrait lens and the main "internal competitor" (albeit with an FTZ). Neither the Nikkor Z 85/1.8 nor any Z 50mm focal-length is really a potential substitute for somebody looking for this good portrait look. Yes the 105 is a bit longer, but the picture-look it enables is to me up until now unmatched
I can confirm. Superb lens. I don't understand how the much bigger and heavier Sigma 105/1.4 version get's the Bokeh King name. While the Nikon version is not much bigger than the 85 F1.4G. Weight and size are important too me. I'm not old, but on a wedding day of 12+ hrs, it makes a significant difference.
Great video, Ricci. It's complimentary to a video by Australian professional photographer, yToober, and Nikonian, Matt Irwin. Apparently he built trust with Nikon Australia in recent years, and has been shooting with a pre-production model too - in his case, the focus is of a walkabout, city-nightlife, and people point of view. Wow. YourTube and HisTube
Nice of you to drop in a couple of shots of your daily drive :) Just watched Matt Irwins vid on this lens and you comment about it making everyday things look amazing rings very true. he had a shot of an abandoned shopping trolley that looked like a work of art!! Amazing bit of kit.
Honestly, it is disappointing. Even at 1,8 the 1.2 is visibly less sharp. The 50 1.2 is generally sharper than my 50.18 and th eeonly annoyance is that balls are not round till 2.8 while with the 1.8 they are always round.
I think it was pretty clear the 85 1.8 was sharper at 1.8 than the 85 1.2 was at 1.8. It was hardly close. 1.2 renders in lovely way though so agreed, sharpness isn't everything. Addition: I just reminded myself this was a pre production lens so of course need to take that into account.
7:52 And yes, sharpness is overrated, but for nearly €3500, you'd expect it to be very sharp wide open. I was surprised to see so much glow with a tad of softness - something the F1.8 lacks entirely. It can't just be me. Another piece of evidence that shows a F1.4 is the sweet spot for 85mm's, considering price, weight, size and compromises in image quality.
Not gonna lie. I was expecting the 1.2 to be sharper wide open, and at 1.8. Seems to me that the 1.8 is a bit sharper at 1.8. Though indeed, the bokeh is better on the 1.2. Thinking it might be sample variation though. I kind of find that likely given how people like Manny Ortiz are raving about this lens.
Great stuff Ricci, thanks for sharing this👍😀. I wonder, probably like many people, if there is any talk on the grapevine of the forthcoming long Z/S zoom that’s featured many times on Nikon’s lens road map, I know we have the 100-400 but am very curious of the 200-600 that’s been mentioned before, I appreciate you’re not always in a position to be able to share everything you know 😉😀 Happy shooting 👏👍
Thanks for the objective video. Pretty surprised at the lack of sharpness, to be honest. Even at 1.8, I thought the 1.8S looked sharper. And made in China? That probably doesn't matter much, but it is a turnoff for such an expensive lens. I had already preordered the lens, assuming it would be a stunner, but rethinking it now. You may have helped saved me $3K. Haha.
The 85mm is a super nice lens im going to get it to do events and please can you give the link to where you can get all the other lenses that you show in this video I would really appreciate thank you.
@michael what's your reasoning? I bought the 50 f/1.8 and was disappointed- saw someone doing side by side of 50 f/1.8 and f/1.2 and it looked like the 1.2 was more of what i was expecting. Almost purchased until i heard this was coming. I expected it to be cheaper though, so investigating before pre order.
Hello Ricci, This is the lens I have been after for so long. As soon as I can I will be ordering one. Thank you for all your TH-cam video and I love your chats with the Pro series. Keep well, keep safe and find time for some fun.
Ricci, I’m really looking forward to seeing the 135 F1.8 review. I’d like to get a native fast portrait prime and it’s down to one of these two. 105 would have been the ideal compromise though.
My first impression is disappointing So if you want that bookeh you take the 50 1.2 or the noct or even the AFs 105 1.4 But all of them are sharper and don't have the chromatic aberrations. And honesty the focus breathing is the worst of all my Z Glasses.
The 50 doesn’t have the same bokeh and compression. Nikons own MTFs show this lens is sharper at 1.2 than the 105 1.4E is at 1.4, and for that matter similar sharpness to the 85 1.8 at the thirds area where you’ll likely be composing. I think if there was an issue with sharpness the Fro’s and Manny’s of TH-cam would be chirping away. I wouldn’t pass judgment on one copy of a preproduction lens.
I would love this lens, but to be honest, for wedding photography, the weight of the 1.8s makes it worth keeping in the bag over the 1.2. If I were exclusively shooting portraits, I would probably cave for the upgrade.
Good points and also the wedding couple don’t have a clue whats a 1.8 and 1.2..its about how the moment was captured, clients don’t pixel peep if the bokeh balls is round or oval..🙂the thing i learned from this age is be content on what you got and develop the skill of how to capture the dramatic moment and the story behind it.
wish you could have compared with actual portraits side by side . . i love my 85mm1.8 and am really wanting to see if it is better . but anything will be blown out for micro photography . but what about a full body portait will be the real test . . i think i want it but still dont know yet
Thank you Ricci, now i can sleep soundly not having to wake up and having this itchiness urge to pre order..ill stick with the 85 1.8 and also be happy and be content with my 50 1.2s and sleep better😂
Great video. So awesome to see you back! Is it even possible for any manufacturer to fix wide-open sharpness without a redesign? You can’t fix sharpness with firmware, right? What could be done before this lens is released that would improve wide-open sharpness?
I have the Z 400mm 4.5 S and AF-S 105mm 1.4E ED which are made in China. They're easily the best Nikkors I've had. Nothing to complain about manufacturing quality or accuracy of things.
Can this be sample variation? Both Jared and Manny commented that the Nikon 1.2 is as sharp as Canon's 1.2, which is the sharpest 85mm lens tested by Christopher Frost!
I would love to know how the f1.2 controls chromatic aberrations, especially with a backlit subject. I’m using the adapted f mount 85/1.8 and it’s quite noticeable in many situations. Can you say if and how much better the f1.2 is than the z mount 85/1.8?
Again, another lens not for me, but I still very much enjoy watching your videos of new Nikon kit, so keep these videos coming as new kit comes out. :-)
Ps re lens hoods, it always baffles be why some people are reluctant to use lens hoods, they never have a negative impact on image quality, usually the total opposite in fact! They give lots of protection to the front of the lens besides the optical advantages. Even in a studio where lenses are put down, moved around etc the protection is a bonus! 😀
Hoods can give negative impact on the size and usability of the lens. If the same thing can be done in a smaller package, why not do it? That's why. For a more serious shoots I would use the hood.
Equally good as the 85/1.8S at f/1.8 or f/2.8? No. Let me explain. For full transparency, I have that 85/1.8S and was convinced I don't need the 85/1.2S. The 1.8S is about the sharpest lens ever tested by DxO Mark. But the difference between f/1.8 and f/1.2 is a bit more than 1 EV (it's 2.25 as a factor: ISO 100 at 1.2 requires ISO 225 at 1.8 ceteris paribus) and the difference in Depth of Field, plus the rendition is different. It is clear to me that at 1.8 and 2.8, this 1.2S has a hair less contour sharpness (as per these lossy compressed 4K video images). But the 1.2S's rendition - a feeling I cannot describe in a crystal clear way - is different and now I am not so sure I will never need it. It's a beautiful lens - so far.
👍🏾🙏🏾 Before I pass judgement and open my wallet , I shall wait for you to put a production model through its paces because I am not positively convinced with its performance wide open which is where I need it to perform for my particular needs with a lens of this type and price!😉
Thanks Ricci for another great video. I was hoping that the 85/1.2 would be on par in terms of sharpness against the 85/1.8 when both are wide open. The 50/1.2 is just as sharp as the 50/1.8 both wide open and is sharper when stopped down. I think I'll hang onto my 105/1.4E for now until the final production model of the 85/1.2 to see if it's worth the upgrade. Thanks and keep up the great work.
Im on the same boat as you, i also have the 50 1.2s.. having a 1.2 and tends to be softer not like the 50 1.2, is like going back at my sigma F-mount 105 1.4😂.. ill hold on to my lighter 85 1.8 for now.
As to the lens being bulky, we can point to its 85/1.2 spec in the first place. This means that it has an entry pupil of 85/1.2 = 70.8mm. Add a tube around that with a wall thickness of 5.6mm and you are at filter size 82mm. Then add some electronics - AF motors, aperture motors - around that.
Jesus. the stabilization has got to be amazing in the z9 that you can take 1/50th of a second with an 85 mm focal length. My general rule of thumb is having the shutter speed higher than the focal length to avoid blur.
Thanks for the video Ricci! In your in depth video, could you also include a comparison with the F-mount AF-S 105mm f/1.4E in terms of size (with the FTZ attached), handling and rendering as well? Thanks!!
I have almost all the pro Z lenses from wide angel to the 400 2.8 and I have been waiting (dreaming) for this. Will buy it as soon as it's possible. PS: I also love my 50 1.2.
My biggest complaint with Z lenses has been NIKON not giving a decent case with it. My F-mount 14-24 2.8 came with a beautiful carrying/storage case...when I got the Z 100-400 S, for that price & all it came with was this thin, black cloth pouch (not even a thick, padded drawstring bag), I was confused & then disappointed. Doesn't come with an arca-swiss compatibility lens foot either. My Sigma Art comes with one. It makes no sense. So I hope, considering this caliber of lens, Nikon would see fit to remedy that. That gripe aside, I've been waiting for this lens, particularly for Astrophotography ✨️ I know you shoot Astro, so I'd love to see some results/reviews once a production lens gets in hand.
Unfortunately to lens cases the vast majority just don’t use them, most prefer to put the lens in their own bags and keep the case in the box so seems a waste for something never used by the majority. I do appreciate though that for the few that do the f-mount cases were great
@@RicciTalks Exactly, I almost never took out the lens case from the box even, and I've owned 10+ pro F lenses. Totally a reasonable cost cutting for me.
@Andrea Tagliabue Clearly, it's s personal preference. It should atleast be a (free) option one could choose to get included or say "no, dont need it". I never bought the carrying/storage case, it came with the lens. My assumption is bc of the price & quality of it, Nikon thought it'd be a nice touch & it WAS. So there's no real "cost cutting". Now I'm paying $3k for a lens & getting a useless pouch. What's even the point of the thin cloth pouch being included instead? It's just something else that will be discarded. Seems more wasteful. But agreed to disagree. I think premium quality lenses should absolutely come included with a nice carrying case...not just the super telephotos (in Z currently that do come with cases).
I have about a dozen Nikon lens cases, they are nice cases. But they are holding: sharpening stones, fragile woodworking gadgets like stud finder and moisture meter, various Smallrig nato rails and clamps, wireless lavs, NPF batteries and more. None of them are holding a lens.
Hello Ricci, how is centre sharpness compared to the Z 50mm f1.2 S? I think I remember the 50 1.2 being close to the 50 1.8 in sharpness wide open, so I’m assuming that the 50 1.2 is sharper than the 85 1.2 wide open?
The f1.2 lenses seem to be the sweet spot spot in the Z series between the optical pinnacle of the Noct and the f1.8 lenses. I want this for my Z9. Cheers!
3D tracking is a hit or miss on this lens. I would suggest to use auto area focus for portraits. Shot 1round 1300 portraits with it. I’m happy of the outcome. Now waiting for the 35 1.2. Then I’ll be happy.
The thing that really caught my eyes is at 10:00 mark, you compared the Bokeh between the 85 1.2 vs 85 1.8s, both lens wide open, the F1.2 shows much better Bokeh than the F1.8 lens, that's expected, no surprise there, every 85mm lens I have/had in my last 25 years of photo life, the F1.2/F1.4 version always produce much smoother bokeh than the F1.8 counter part, Canon, Sony, Nikon, no exception, then you stopped down the big brother to F1.8 and compare that to the 85 F1.8S, the new 85 1.2 lens still produced so much better Bokeh, it's like day and night better, background rendering from the 85 1.8s appears to be so distracting in comparison. Another nice thing I saw from this review is when stop down to the equivalent aperture, the new 85 1.2 is as sharp as the 85 F1.8, that's also new to me, from experience, the F1.2/F1.4 version normally never caught up in the sharpness of the F1.8 lens, a recent example is the Sony 85GM vs 85 1.8 , Canon 85L vs 85 1.8, that's why I own so many of those 85/105 lens for different applications. so in this case this 85 1.2S can work as both a great portrait lens and a great landscape lens, it produce much better Bokeh than the 85 1.8 for portrait, at the same time produce as sharp of an image as the 85 1.8 in landscape application, best of both world. However, i do see something I really don't like about this lens, at about 7:30 to 7:40 mark, the lens produced pretty ugly Cats Eye bokeh effect, something I really hate to see from my old Canon 85 1.2 Mk i and MK II and as well as the Sony 85GM I have, not as horrible as the Zeiss Batis 85 but still look pretty distractive to my own eyes, so this new Nikon 85 1.2 is not any better in this specific category, a little bit of disappointment for a brand new lens I am planning to keep for long time.
Objection, your honour! At f/1.8 the 85/1.8S is fully open and there are no aperture blades in the optical way. I hasten to add that I believe the difference is there, along these lines, though.
the 85 for portraits in 2023 is old school bokeh american pie lovers. it’s better for full body in studio but in studio we work af f8 f11 so 1.2 is not useful. 85 and 105 for portaits are died ten years ago. I prefer 135 wide open for good compression full body portraits in sport but we need a fast af lens but at that point the 200 f2 is better… I will not invest in 85 or prime lens with that similar focal lenghts.
And thinking that one of the reasons I switched to mirrorless was the inferior size and weight. This is ridiculous. I just want the 70-180 precisely because of the smaller size and weight. Will it be ever released?
People on the Z camera Facebook group have been saying that they can't wait for the 1.2 85 and I have continued to say the 1.8 was just fine. I'm glad I was right and the goofballs that have been waiting, will fall over when they see the price and wish they had already gotten the 1.8 85!!
Exciting announcement for the Z lineup today, thanks Ricci! Curious about the sharpness at 1.2, wondering if the final production copy will show different results. Looking forward to seeing more! 🤓
I was surprised to be directed by Nikon UK to (pre-)order mine from another seller this morning rather than directly with them. Seems fine now (so we will shall see who can supply it first- the race to get my money is on 😂😂😂)
I take it the 1.2 version is as good as 1.8 for art reproduction purposes? i e. little geometric distortions and sharp corner to corner at f/5.6 and smaller? Thanks Ricci!
9:49 The f/1.2 is getting a full stop over the f/1.8, which makes me think the latter is really an f/2 in terms of transmission. And again at 10:51, the former has a 1/3 stop advantage despite both being at f/1.8.
To even suggest that the background looks very very different when they are both at f1.8 is crazy. Yes zoomed in it does look at little different but that's about it and to a client with little photographic experience they would look pretty much equally as good. Great video on the hole though keep up the good work 👍🏾
I personally thought the 1.2 was sharper than the 1.8 at matching apertures. Not by much, but it looked like the texture of the color checker's edge was more defined and a richer black. Anyone else agree or disagree?
Pretty surprised by the lack of contrast and sharpness... I usually can't tell much difference through a youtube video but this was pretty significant! I still want the lens and I do think that a slightly softer lens with less contrast may benefit portrait work but for the price I'm not sure I'd be 100% stoked on it.
That's interesting because that's the opposite of what we're seeing in other preview vids today - more contrast and sharpness reported. Wondering if Ricci's pre-production copy is "off"? (this could be why Nikon asks to not show 100% in pre-production copies)
It could be distance to test chart. 50 1.2 is soft up close and gets super sharp at normal portrait distances. Or it could be pre-production weirdness. Nikons MTF show it should be close to 85 1.8S when at 1.2.
I have to say that this new 85 is rather nice, there is some spectacular falloff as the focus goes away from the point of focus but this also works against it occasionally, the way that the cygnet at 6:17 is shot it almost looks as though it has been pasted on to a blurred background image, so defined is the bird's head it seems almost false to the background. But a brilliant brilliant lens from the images shown.
Thanks man... A great first look... Even though this is the 1.2's first look I have an observation... I shoot with the Z9 and 85 1.8... when shooting from a distance... the 1.8 even though the focus is on the eye backfocuses significantly... I saw Jared Polin's first look at the 1.2... He confirmed it as well... And said its NOT a problem with the 1.2... Which is wonderful to see... Working with Nikon I hope you can bring this point to them and solve the issue with the 1.8 as well...
Yeah just watched that video too, but also understand this is pre production. And if Nikon know something is to produce insanely accurate Nikkor glass.
@@makatron Nikon does make wonderful glass... One of the reasons I LOVE Nikon... The problem is with the older 1.8 lens and NOT the 1.2...And if the new pre production 1.2 doesn't have the problem... Nikon should fix the problem with the older 1.8 as well in a firmware update...
@@mzeeshanch agreed, also even though I'd love to buy this lens, I already sold all my 1.4 glass and replaced it with 1.8 just for weight savings since after searching in my lightroom couldn't find more than handful pictures taken wide open.
@@makatron sold my 85 1.4 f for the 85 1.8 z. But that was because I wanted to shift completely to Z glass... Will definitely get this for event coverage (my professional work) and will keep the 1.8 for travelling (when I want to go light)...
![[Full Episode] The Restaurant War Thailand ศึกพ่อค้าซ่าแม่ค้าแซ่บ Episode 2 | 29 ก.ย. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/r3lfLNH6Ke4/mqdefault.jpg)
I have to chime in here. First of all, I must say this is the best video out right now on the Z 85 1.2 in terms of actual substance and what people are interested to know regarding if they should upgrade from the 1.8. Love the fact you actually explained and showed us examples of each lens side by side. We even got a Noct sample which was awesome and very valuable info to know. I like this video because there is no sugar coating or fluff. Big Kudos to you for keeping it real and delivering on an insightful preview. This video is getting allot of praise from comments on my videos as well from viewers. Good job Ricci. I did something similar when I photographed Rolls Royce comparing both 50mm Z lenses side by side on my channel. Anyway man. good job on this and Nikon Sessions. Keep on rockin.
Agreed. Based on this, I think my 85mm 1.8 S is good enough.
@@intrinsicimagery I honestly think my f-mount 85mm 1.8 is good enough. Works beautifully on the Z9 IMO.
I think while the 1.2 S version is impressive, this also shows just how good the 85 1.8 S is as well. Yes the bokeh isn't perhaps as smooth and perhaps the light gathering is about 2/3 of a stop slower but those things on the 1.2 also come at a pretty hefty price (about $2000 more) so in some respects, you have to really want that shallow DOF and smooth bokeh for $2,000 to justify it. Me personally I'll stick with my 1.8 since protraiture / people photography amounts to less than half the work I do (if I was shooting professionally, I might consider the 1.2 more as I could recoup the cost over time), but if you cannot afford the 1.2, the 1.8 is still an excellent lens for the money (and it's size/weight)
How does it compare to the F-mount (Nikkor or Sigma Art) 105mm f1.4?
Nice review!
On your comparisons - I miss a comparison to the Nikkor 105/1.4. For me, this is still the best available Nikon portrait lens and the main "internal competitor" (albeit with an FTZ). Neither the Nikkor Z 85/1.8 nor any Z 50mm focal-length is really a potential substitute for somebody looking for this good portrait look. Yes the 105 is a bit longer, but the picture-look it enables is to me up until now unmatched
I can confirm. Superb lens. I don't understand how the much bigger and heavier Sigma 105/1.4 version get's the Bokeh King name. While the Nikon version is not much bigger than the 85 F1.4G. Weight and size are important too me. I'm not old, but on a wedding day of 12+ hrs, it makes a significant difference.
Great video, Ricci. It's complimentary to a video by Australian professional photographer, yToober, and Nikonian, Matt Irwin. Apparently he built trust with Nikon Australia in recent years, and has been shooting with a pre-production model too - in his case, the focus is of a walkabout, city-nightlife, and people point of view.
Wow. YourTube and HisTube
Cheers for the review Ricci. Perhaps you might be able to redo the sharpness test vs the 1.8 when you get a production version in?
Nice of you to drop in a couple of shots of your daily drive :)
Just watched Matt Irwins vid on this lens and you comment about it making everyday things look amazing rings very true. he had a shot of an abandoned shopping trolley that looked like a work of art!!
Amazing bit of kit.
105 1.4 - The Real comparison test needed.. Interesting review though as always, thanks
To me this video shows how good the 85mm 1.8S is. For regular use I don't think the 1.2 worth it, unless you are professional.
Wow, look at that super shallow depth of field @7:38 . Great shots Ricci.
Well done Ricci, looking forward to your next video with this lens. I appreciate you and Nikon!
Honestly, it is disappointing. Even at 1,8 the 1.2 is visibly less sharp. The 50 1.2 is generally sharper than my 50.18 and th eeonly annoyance is that balls are not round till 2.8 while with the 1.8 they are always round.
Many thanks for your information Ricci.
I think it was pretty clear the 85 1.8 was sharper at 1.8 than the 85 1.2 was at 1.8. It was hardly close. 1.2 renders in lovely way though so agreed, sharpness isn't everything.
Addition: I just reminded myself this was a pre production lens so of course need to take that into account.
7:52 And yes, sharpness is overrated, but for nearly €3500, you'd expect it to be very sharp wide open. I was surprised to see so much glow with a tad of softness - something the F1.8 lacks entirely. It can't just be me. Another piece of evidence that shows a F1.4 is the sweet spot for 85mm's, considering price, weight, size and compromises in image quality.
That was a lot of Focus breathing actually !
I've already placed an order. Can't wait for it! Thanks for the video, Ricci!
Oh, come on man! I was expecting your video of the 200-600mm. I am so tired of waiting for that lens 😭
Not gonna lie. I was expecting the 1.2 to be sharper wide open, and at 1.8. Seems to me that the 1.8 is a bit sharper at 1.8. Though indeed, the bokeh is better on the 1.2.
Thinking it might be sample variation though. I kind of find that likely given how people like Manny Ortiz are raving about this lens.
Great stuff Ricci, thanks for sharing this👍😀. I wonder, probably like many people, if there is any talk on the grapevine of the forthcoming long Z/S zoom that’s featured many times on Nikon’s lens road map, I know we have the 100-400 but am very curious of the 200-600 that’s been mentioned before, I appreciate you’re not always in a position to be able to share everything you know 😉😀 Happy shooting 👏👍
Thanks for the objective video. Pretty surprised at the lack of sharpness, to be honest. Even at 1.8, I thought the 1.8S looked sharper. And made in China? That probably doesn't matter much, but it is a turnoff for such an expensive lens. I had already preordered the lens, assuming it would be a stunner, but rethinking it now. You may have helped saved me $3K. Haha.
Remember, it's preproduction. Hopefully some of the issues will be fixed once they start shipping.
Comes from someone who doesn’t have the money 🎉🎉🎉🎉
The 85mm is a super nice lens im going to get it to do events
and please can you give the link to where you can get all the other lenses that you show in this video I would really appreciate thank you.
Feeling an intense urge to put in a pre-order for this lens just based on the joy of shooting the 50 f/1.2. Trying very hard not to do so just yet.
@michael what's your reasoning? I bought the 50 f/1.8 and was disappointed- saw someone doing side by side of 50 f/1.8 and f/1.2 and it looked like the 1.2 was more of what i was expecting. Almost purchased until i heard this was coming. I expected it to be cheaper though, so investigating before pre order.
That didn't work out so well. I just had to get one. Liking it a lot, but it's not getting as much use as the 50 f/1.2.
I always use lens hoods. The only time I may not use one is when I’m shooting a long telephoto (like the 100-400mm) at night on a windy evening.
Thanks as always, Ricci, for your excellent look at this new beauty. It's sooooooo tempting! :)
Hello Ricci, This is the lens I have been after for so long. As soon as I can I will be ordering one. Thank you for all your TH-cam video and I love your chats with the Pro series. Keep well, keep safe and find time for some fun.
For $3K tag I was expecting Made In Japan!
Ricci, I’m really looking forward to seeing the 135 F1.8 review. I’d like to get a native fast portrait prime and it’s down to one of these two. 105 would have been the ideal compromise though.
Welcome back buddy! This lens is awesome after trying it I’m all in.
i like how this lens produces images.
My first impression is disappointing
So if you want that bookeh you take the 50 1.2 or the noct or even the AFs 105 1.4
But all of them are sharper and don't have the chromatic aberrations. And honesty the focus breathing is the worst of all my Z Glasses.
The 50 doesn’t have the same bokeh and compression. Nikons own MTFs show this lens is sharper at 1.2 than the 105 1.4E is at 1.4, and for that matter similar sharpness to the 85 1.8 at the thirds area where you’ll likely be composing. I think if there was an issue with sharpness the Fro’s and Manny’s of TH-cam would be chirping away. I wouldn’t pass judgment on one copy of a preproduction lens.
I would love this lens, but to be honest, for wedding photography, the weight of the 1.8s makes it worth keeping in the bag over the 1.2. If I were exclusively shooting portraits, I would probably cave for the upgrade.
Good points and also the wedding couple don’t have a clue whats a 1.8 and 1.2..its about how the moment was captured, clients don’t pixel peep if the bokeh balls is round or oval..🙂the thing i learned from this age is be content on what you got and develop the skill of how to capture the dramatic moment and the story behind it.
wish you could have compared with actual portraits side by side . . i love my 85mm1.8 and am really wanting to see if it is better . but anything will be blown out for micro photography . but what about a full body portait will be the real test . . i think i want it but still dont know yet
As I get older I'm gravitating to smaller. Carrying equipment slows you down.
Thank you Ricci, now i can sleep soundly not having to wake up and having this itchiness urge to pre order..ill stick with the 85 1.8 and also be happy and be content with my 50 1.2s and sleep better😂
2:17 Am I correct, that Nikon produces their top of the line glass in China?
Great video. So awesome to see you back! Is it even possible for any manufacturer to fix wide-open sharpness without a redesign? You can’t fix sharpness with firmware, right? What could be done before this lens is released that would improve wide-open sharpness?
this thing is actually made in china? what the fuck. hard pass unless nikon shifts manufacturing somewhere else.
did I see correctly? made in china? 3000 euro for a made in china lens?!?!?!? stop offshoring top of the line lenses in china...
Yes, you did. I am not happy about this either. I will not buy made in China.
Nearly $5k Aussie for Chinese made. F… that!
I have the Z 400mm 4.5 S and AF-S 105mm 1.4E ED which are made in China. They're easily the best Nikkors I've had. Nothing to complain about manufacturing quality or accuracy of things.
Hi Ricci. 👍 Thanks for the video. The focus breathing examples are from Wich 85mm lens? Thank you in advance.
Thanks Ricci! Great first look. Looking forward to more video results.
At 2:17 that giant Made in China is a eye sore for a $2,700 lens but it is what it is.
Thanks for the review. Compare to sharpness I'll stick to my Z 85 f/1.8 for now.
Z 85 f/1.8 is a killer lens that will be hard to beat.
Can this be sample variation? Both Jared and Manny commented that the Nikon 1.2 is as sharp as Canon's 1.2, which is the sharpest 85mm lens tested by Christopher Frost!
It's a portrait lens and there's no samples including portraits?
When you do the production model review, compare it to the GRAPEFRUIT (F Mount 105 1.4G)
Could you name me 4 exquisite z lens for filmmaking.
I would love to know how the f1.2 controls chromatic aberrations, especially with a backlit subject. I’m using the adapted f mount 85/1.8 and it’s quite noticeable in many situations. Can you say if and how much better the f1.2 is than the z mount 85/1.8?
Thank you for not showing predictable studio portrait shots
Again, another lens not for me, but I still very much enjoy watching your videos of new Nikon kit, so keep these videos coming as new kit comes out. :-)
Ps re lens hoods, it always baffles be why some people are reluctant to use lens hoods, they never have a negative impact on image quality, usually the total opposite in fact! They give lots of protection to the front of the lens besides the optical advantages. Even in a studio where lenses are put down, moved around etc the protection is a bonus! 😀
Hoods can give negative impact on the size and usability of the lens. If the same thing can be done in a smaller package, why not do it? That's why.
For a more serious shoots I would use the hood.
Great first look. Thanks. Can't wait for mine to arrive. Love R&M too. ;)
Hey Hudson
Great to see you here !
Thanks for the comment 😊
Been a R&M fan for a long time 🤣
Equally good as the 85/1.8S at f/1.8 or f/2.8? No. Let me explain. For full transparency, I have that 85/1.8S and was convinced I don't need the 85/1.2S. The 1.8S is about the sharpest lens ever tested by DxO Mark. But the difference between f/1.8 and f/1.2 is a bit more than 1 EV (it's 2.25 as a factor: ISO 100 at 1.2 requires ISO 225 at 1.8 ceteris paribus) and the difference in Depth of Field, plus the rendition is different.
It is clear to me that at 1.8 and 2.8, this 1.2S has a hair less contour sharpness (as per these lossy compressed 4K video images).
But the 1.2S's rendition - a feeling I cannot describe in a crystal clear way - is different and now I am not so sure I will never need it.
It's a beautiful lens - so far.
Another simple way to get the same or even smoother DOF/Bokeh is to shoot with a 105mm 1.4 (sigma or Nikon)
Good video. Thanks. I’m curious what your keeper rate was. That razor thin depth of field demands super accurate autofocus.
👍🏾🙏🏾 Before I pass judgement and open my wallet , I shall wait for you to put a production model through its paces because I am not positively convinced with its performance wide open which is where I need it to perform for my particular needs with a lens of this type and price!😉
Fantastic photos - loved how you used the 85 for shots I would never think of using this focal length with
Thanks Ricci for another great video. I was hoping that the 85/1.2 would be on par in terms of sharpness against the 85/1.8 when both are wide open. The 50/1.2 is just as sharp as the 50/1.8 both wide open and is sharper when stopped down. I think I'll hang onto my 105/1.4E for now until the final production model of the 85/1.2 to see if it's worth the upgrade. Thanks and keep up the great work.
Im on the same boat as you, i also have the 50 1.2s.. having a 1.2 and tends to be softer not like the 50 1.2, is like going back at my sigma F-mount 105 1.4😂.. ill hold on to my lighter 85 1.8 for now.
As to the lens being bulky, we can point to its 85/1.2 spec in the first place. This means that it has an entry pupil of 85/1.2 = 70.8mm. Add a tube around that with a wall thickness of 5.6mm and you are at filter size 82mm. Then add some electronics - AF motors, aperture motors - around that.
Jesus. the stabilization has got to be amazing in the z9 that you can take 1/50th of a second with an 85 mm focal length. My general rule of thumb is having the shutter speed higher than the focal length to avoid blur.
Thanks for the video Ricci! In your in depth video, could you also include a comparison with the F-mount AF-S 105mm f/1.4E in terms of size (with the FTZ attached), handling and rendering as well? Thanks!!
I have almost all the pro Z lenses from wide angel to the 400 2.8 and I have been waiting (dreaming) for this. Will buy it as soon as it's possible. PS: I also love my 50 1.2.
Lucky you 😁
I use this as a walk around lens in safe streets
This shoud be a testament to Nikon's 1.8 lineup.... wow
Do you prefer this lens over the 50mm 1.2?
Can u make a comparison video with 70-200?
How does 85 f1.4 compare to Nikon 105mm f1.4 ?
These exorbitant prices are the reason why many want 1.4 lenses
Thank you for going through the details on this lens!
Looking forward to your next video about lens 😊 Thanks for this vlog, Sir!!
The lack of sharpness at f/1.2 is quite disappointing, considering how much this lens costs.
My biggest complaint with Z lenses has been NIKON not giving a decent case with it. My F-mount 14-24 2.8 came with a beautiful carrying/storage case...when I got the Z 100-400 S, for that price & all it came with was this thin, black cloth pouch (not even a thick, padded drawstring bag), I was confused & then disappointed. Doesn't come with an arca-swiss compatibility lens foot either. My Sigma Art comes with one. It makes no sense.
So I hope, considering this caliber of lens, Nikon would see fit to remedy that.
That gripe aside, I've been waiting for this lens, particularly for Astrophotography ✨️ I know you shoot Astro, so I'd love to see some results/reviews once a production lens gets in hand.
Unfortunately to lens cases the vast majority just don’t use them, most prefer to put the lens in their own bags and keep the case in the box so seems a waste for something never used by the majority. I do appreciate though that for the few that do the f-mount cases were great
@@RicciTalks Exactly, I almost never took out the lens case from the box even, and I've owned 10+ pro F lenses. Totally a reasonable cost cutting for me.
@Andrea Tagliabue Clearly, it's s personal preference. It should atleast be a (free) option one could choose to get included or say "no, dont need it".
I never bought the carrying/storage case, it came with the lens. My assumption is bc of the price & quality of it, Nikon thought it'd be a nice touch & it WAS. So there's no real "cost cutting". Now I'm paying $3k for a lens & getting a useless pouch.
What's even the point of the thin cloth pouch being included instead? It's just something else that will be discarded. Seems more wasteful.
But agreed to disagree. I think premium quality lenses should absolutely come included with a nice carrying case...not just the super telephotos (in Z currently that do come with cases).
I have about a dozen Nikon lens cases, they are nice cases.
But they are holding: sharpening stones, fragile woodworking gadgets like stud finder and moisture meter, various Smallrig nato rails and clamps, wireless lavs, NPF batteries and more.
None of them are holding a lens.
Hello Ricci, how is centre sharpness compared to the Z 50mm f1.2 S? I think I remember the 50 1.2 being close to the 50 1.8 in sharpness wide open, so I’m assuming that the 50 1.2 is sharper than the 85 1.2 wide open?
the 1.8 looked noticeably sharper @1.8, don't see it or don't want to?
Why shutter speeds are kept different in all the tests, i dont think it is a good comparison video.
The f1.2 lenses seem to be the sweet spot spot in the Z series between the optical pinnacle of the Noct and the f1.8 lenses. I want this for my Z9. Cheers!
3D tracking is a hit or miss on this lens. I would suggest to use auto area focus for portraits. Shot 1round 1300 portraits with it. I’m happy of the outcome. Now waiting for the 35 1.2. Then I’ll be happy.
The thing that really caught my eyes is at 10:00 mark, you compared the Bokeh between the 85 1.2 vs 85 1.8s, both lens wide open, the F1.2 shows much better Bokeh than the F1.8 lens, that's expected, no surprise there, every 85mm lens I have/had in my last 25 years of photo life, the F1.2/F1.4 version always produce much smoother bokeh than the F1.8 counter part, Canon, Sony, Nikon, no exception, then you stopped down the big brother to F1.8 and compare that to the 85 F1.8S, the new 85 1.2 lens still produced so much better Bokeh, it's like day and night better, background rendering from the 85 1.8s appears to be so distracting in comparison.
Another nice thing I saw from this review is when stop down to the equivalent aperture, the new 85 1.2 is as sharp as the 85 F1.8, that's also new to me, from experience, the F1.2/F1.4 version normally never caught up in the sharpness of the F1.8 lens, a recent example is the Sony 85GM vs 85 1.8 , Canon 85L vs 85 1.8, that's why I own so many of those 85/105 lens for different applications. so in this case this 85 1.2S can work as both a great portrait lens and a great landscape lens, it produce much better Bokeh than the 85 1.8 for portrait, at the same time produce as sharp of an image as the 85 1.8 in landscape application, best of both world.
However, i do see something I really don't like about this lens, at about 7:30 to 7:40 mark, the lens produced pretty ugly Cats Eye bokeh effect, something I really hate to see from my old Canon 85 1.2 Mk i and MK II and as well as the Sony 85GM I have, not as horrible as the Zeiss Batis 85 but still look pretty distractive to my own eyes, so this new Nikon 85 1.2 is not any better in this specific category, a little bit of disappointment for a brand new lens I am planning to keep for long time.
Great video Ricci ! Placed my order!
Objection, your honour! At f/1.8 the 85/1.8S is fully open and there are no aperture blades in the optical way. I hasten to add that I believe the difference is there, along these lines, though.
the 85 for portraits in 2023 is old school bokeh american pie lovers. it’s better for full body in studio but in studio we work af f8 f11 so 1.2 is not useful. 85 and 105 for portaits are died ten years ago. I prefer 135 wide open for good compression full body portraits in sport but we need a fast af lens but at that point the 200 f2 is better… I will not invest in 85 or prime lens with that similar focal lenghts.
And thinking that one of the reasons I switched to mirrorless was the inferior size and weight. This is ridiculous. I just want the 70-180 precisely because of the smaller size and weight. Will it be ever released?
People on the Z camera Facebook group have been saying that they can't wait for the 1.2 85 and I have continued to say the 1.8 was just fine. I'm glad I was right and the goofballs that have been waiting, will fall over when they see the price and wish they had already gotten the 1.8 85!!
Exciting announcement for the Z lineup today, thanks Ricci! Curious about the sharpness at 1.2, wondering if the final production copy will show different results. Looking forward to seeing more! 🤓
I was surprised to be directed by Nikon UK to (pre-)order mine from another seller this morning rather than directly with them. Seems fine now (so we will shall see who can supply it first- the race to get my money is on 😂😂😂)
I take it the 1.2 version is as good as 1.8 for art reproduction purposes? i e. little geometric distortions and sharp corner to corner at f/5.6 and smaller? Thanks Ricci!
Thanks.
9:49 The f/1.2 is getting a full stop over the f/1.8, which makes me think the latter is really an f/2 in terms of transmission. And again at 10:51, the former has a 1/3 stop advantage despite both being at f/1.8.
To even suggest that the background looks very very different when they are both at f1.8 is crazy. Yes zoomed in it does look at little different but that's about it and to a client with little photographic experience they would look pretty much equally as good.
Great video on the hole though keep up the good work 👍🏾
I personally thought the 1.2 was sharper than the 1.8 at matching apertures. Not by much, but it looked like the texture of the color checker's edge was more defined and a richer black. Anyone else agree or disagree?
Pretty surprised by the lack of contrast and sharpness... I usually can't tell much difference through a youtube video but this was pretty significant! I still want the lens and I do think that a slightly softer lens with less contrast may benefit portrait work but for the price I'm not sure I'd be 100% stoked on it.
That's interesting because that's the opposite of what we're seeing in other preview vids today - more contrast and sharpness reported. Wondering if Ricci's pre-production copy is "off"? (this could be why Nikon asks to not show 100% in pre-production copies)
It could be distance to test chart. 50 1.2 is soft up close and gets super sharp at normal portrait distances. Or it could be pre-production weirdness. Nikons MTF show it should be close to 85 1.8S when at 1.2.
THANK YOU! Ah, finally... Could you say how heavy it is? Any idea about the price?
I have to say that this new 85 is rather nice, there is some spectacular falloff as the focus goes away from the point of focus but this also works against it occasionally, the way that the cygnet at 6:17 is shot it almost looks as though it has been pasted on to a blurred background image, so defined is the bird's head it seems almost false to the background. But a brilliant brilliant lens from the images shown.
The 50 is already so huge confronted to the Sony 😂
Another good review Ricci, If thats your car Nikon are paying you way to much😀👍
Thanks man... A great first look... Even though this is the 1.2's first look I have an observation...
I shoot with the Z9 and 85 1.8... when shooting from a distance... the 1.8 even though the focus is on the eye backfocuses significantly...
I saw Jared Polin's first look at the 1.2... He confirmed it as well... And said its NOT a problem with the 1.2... Which is wonderful to see...
Working with Nikon I hope you can bring this point to them and solve the issue with the 1.8 as well...
Yeah just watched that video too, but also understand this is pre production. And if Nikon know something is to produce insanely accurate Nikkor glass.
@@makatron Nikon does make wonderful glass... One of the reasons I LOVE Nikon...
The problem is with the older 1.8 lens and NOT the 1.2...And if the new pre production 1.2 doesn't have the problem... Nikon should fix the problem with the older 1.8 as well in a firmware update...
@@mzeeshanch agreed, also even though I'd love to buy this lens, I already sold all my 1.4 glass and replaced it with 1.8 just for weight savings since after searching in my lightroom couldn't find more than handful pictures taken wide open.
@@makatron sold my 85 1.4 f for the 85 1.8 z. But that was because I wanted to shift completely to Z glass... Will definitely get this for event coverage (my professional work) and will keep the 1.8 for travelling (when I want to go light)...
@@mzeeshanch guess what, I do event coverage too! Let's see if I can get it this year but for 2800 dollars I ain't sure.
Forget that display. I wish my 50mm did not have it.
lol it's worse than the older 85
So where are example imgs???
That was quite a bit of focus breathing
I agree with you, but maybe that was from minimum focus to infinity, which is not something I do often.
Yeap, not extreme, but still quite substantial.
Very nice review Ricci! Thank you for this one!
This lens is more or less pointless.