85mm for Nikon

Hi,
I currently have a 85mm 1.4D.

Im wondering if to upgrade to the new 1.4G or to a zeiss 85 1.4, or just to keep this one.

mmmm I think its pretty good but I would not mind getting better contrasts wide open

I used a 85mm f1.4 on my DX camera (D200) and borrowed a Zeiss 85mm for one day only, so I'm not an expert. However, my brief impression is I preferred the Nikon for portrait as I liked the way is rendered skin tone and the bokeh was lovely. The Zeiss did have a bit more micro contrast and even gave the impresssion of being sharper wide open but I decided I preferred the Nikon overall. The Zeiss might be what you are looking for.

It is MF of course; that has advantages as well as disadvantages depending on what you shoot. It is heavily damped so it is slow to focus, but it is also easy to focus with great accuracy. If you plan to use the lens wide open and you want good contrast and sharpness with very accurate focus I would say the Zeiss is definately the better lens.

--
http://www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

THe Nikon 85 1.4G and the Zeiss 85 are likely to be nice choices. If you will see much difference from your current lens is hard to tell. A definitive step towards higher contrast would be the Zeiss 100/2 or the Nikon 105/2 DC in my opinion. They will hold their ground in FX cameras.
Erik

thats actually not a bad idea. Im looking at the zeiss 100 f2 since a long time. And I need a Macro lens too...
I heard the 100 f2 is nice for portraits too.

abracadabenhotmailfr said:

Hi,
I currently have a 85mm 1.4D.

Im wondering if to upgrade to the new 1.4G or to a zeiss 85 1.4, or just to keep this one.

mmmm I think its pretty good but I would not mind getting better contrasts wide open

Click to expand...

Facing the same quandary, I recently rented a 1.4 G and did some similar image testing. I forgot to do wide open.

For my purposes, I don't see a pressing need to "upgrade."
--
'Nice pen, bet you write good stories with it.'

You probably won't see a huge contrast difference between the Nikkor D and G unless you are shooting into light or towards light (light behind your subject but just out of frame). The G probably has just a touch more contrast naturally, but it's very close to the D. But the D does suffer severely from veiling flare that washes out contrast, and the G is much better in this regard.

abracadabenhotmailfr said:

thats actually not a bad idea. Im looking at the zeiss 100 f2 since a long time. And I need a Macro lens too...

Click to expand...

Bear in mind it is only 2:1, not 1:1 macro. That has held me back from buying it as it is an expensive lens but I think it is currently top of my shopping list next time I feel like a treat. I already own the 50mm f2 makro and it is superb (but also 2:1).

--
http://www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk