Nikon AF-S 58mm f1.4 G vs AF-S 85mm f1.4 G?

Easy answer. 85/1.4G - by virtue of it being longer in focal length given the type of work you want to do (portraits), it's not only a better focal length IMO but it will give you better bokeh, AND, as a bonus, it will be sharp if you need it to be sharp should you press it into other areas than just people. Not saying the 58 isn't a viable lens, just that out of these two, I'd pick the 85/1.4G each and every time without even thinking about it - it just is a better lens all around from an image quality perspective AND is more versatile. So for the amount of coin you gotta drop to get either, I know (clearly) what line I'm in.

-m

Since you already own the 50mm 1.8G I would say the 85mm would be a better choice for portraits than the 58mm 1.4 because of the longer focal length .

I have the 58mm and the 85 1.8g and I love them both for portraits, but I feel like I need both of them to be happy so I think your 50mm 1.8 and the 85mm 1.4 would be a good combo.

I think you are leaning the right way based on your intended purpose and you can actually answer your last two questions by looking at your history of photos.

You can and probably have shot at 58 with your 24-70. Do the portraits look flattering for the framing you do? A good exercise may be to take head and shoulders shots at 58 and 70 on your 24-70 to see the difference. 70 doesn't quite get you there, but it should be a little better than 58. You could consider using DX mode to get you closer to an 85 equiv.

I think if it comes down to one single lens, the normal will be better and more versatile, but I'm guessing that what you intended to ask is if you could only bring one lens to do portraits and compliment the 24-70. Since you mentioned that you don't think distance will be an issue with the 85, maybe even and advantage, I think you're on the right track.

I went through the same back-and-forth when acquiring the 35/1.4. I wanted the hot new 58, but felt it was more important to fill in the 35 now with an eye towards adding the 58 later based on my shooting style. Both lenses were playing tug of war with my thoughts. One huge plus is I saved $450 buy going used on the 35. That's not an option on the 58, just yet.

Thanks everyone for your responses.

But I'm still not sure which has the better bokeh? Is there someone who has both lenses able to comment?

zq17 said:

Thanks everyone for your responses.

But I'm still not sure which has the better bokeh? Is there someone who has both lenses able to comment?

Click to expand...

you don't need someone who has both to comment, they may very we'll prefer one while another prefers the other, even owning both. I own neither. But, like most photo nuts I look for as many online sources as I can find to see how each of them renders. My guess is that in a clinical sense the 85 might be considered a bit better., rounder, softer diffusion of the out of focus points. But, this isn't a great yardstick for assessment. the 58 has a slight petzeal-i-ness to the out of focus area. If you like that, you're going to like the 58.

For now, I would say save your money and buy an 85 f/1.8g. It's a genuine bargain. Then, after you've used it for some time, if you decide you need to get wider angles or work closer than you do with the 85, then think about the 58. And if you decide that you don't need to open up so much, then think about the 60mm micro.

They're all good, and they all overlap for certain functions, only you can decide.

I haven't posted here in quite a while, but I have to say this: the 58mm 1.4 G is a VERY special lens.
I've owned all of Nikon's 85mm and 50mm F-mount lenses (except the 58 Noct) at some point in time, and I do appreciate the virtues of the 85mm 1.4G.

Yes, 85mm is probably a more appropriate focal length on full frame for "typical" portraiture.

But there is something remarkably pristine, three-dimensional and just plain beautiful about the way the 58mm 1.4G "draws" that no current or recent lens I've owned or used quite matches. It's not just the background bokeh characteristics; it's everything the lens does. Particularly, the 58 G can render subjects and backgrounds with a combination of great subtlety, delicacy and dimensionality, along with excellent clarity, that most modern lenses aren't designed to match. And, the very, very slightly messy veil of visually low level aberrations that is just noticeable on even high quality zooms and, to a lesser but still present extent on very good primes, appears to be visually absent from the 58G. Nano coating also gives the lens enough visual "punch" and saturation to prevent it from becoming too subtle, at least for my taste.

Unfortunately, my sample of the 58 1.4 had some strange focusing characteristics. Some reports of abysmal sharpness wide open might be largely due to this. The slightly out of focus rendering at f/1.4 gives the central part of the imaging field, which can be reasonably sharp when focused exactly right, a foggy "haloed" look.

This may be another aspect of the strong field curvature with "sombrero shape" but, with the extremely narrow depth of field wide open, the lens just doesn't focus at the same point at f/1.4 that it does at all other apertures. It's not just normal focus shift moving incrementally away from the camera as you stop down; the actual point of focus seems to "jump" backward as you stop down from 1.4 to 2, and then move slowly backward as you continue to stop down. I couldn't achieve a satisfactory compromise within acceptable depth of field at both f/1.4 and f/2 through AF Fine Tuning, so the lens went back to the store.

But I still can't get over how beautifully the 58 G can "draw", and I'm going to wait a few months and try another one when, hopefully, production may have settled in more.

I second everything said here. My 58 required a +17 AF fine tune. That helped substantially. I wouldn't really trust this lens without an Af tune. I hope you're right that future copies are a bit more solid. Here are some screenshots, pretty sharp after my tune. These are at 2.8

This was at 2.2, do these look alright on here, just screenshots:

No-brainer.

85/1.4G all the way.

But the 85/1.4D is great too.

ponderosabob said:

No-brainer.

85/1.4G all the way.

But the 85/1.4D is great too.

Click to expand...

I wanted to buy the 85/1.4D (couldn't justify the 85/1.4G) but ended up with the Sigma 85/1.4. New or used, the Sigma represents a lot of value compared to the older Nikon. I miss the old-school feel of the Nikon, but the fast silent AF on the Sigma is really nice to have, too.

I went through three samples before settling on the second one in that row, and fine tuning AF on the body. It's, rendering wise, my favoutite lens by far.

Physics always favours the longer lens. It gives you two things (I simplify a bit as there are a lot of variables)

1. More useful working depth of field for a given aperture and given magnification (say framing head and shoulders. More chance of getting the whole face in focus)

2. More defocussed background for distant objects at a given aperture.

Add to these the fact that longer focal lengths give the face a more natural, less foreshortened look, and you will see why portrait lenses on full frame start at 85mm. Possibly Nikon's most successful portrait lens ever was the 105mm f2.5 (MF, various versions) - sharp where it matters and smooth elsewhere. Unless you are shooting in tight spaces, it is focal length to consider. MF versions are a real bargain, very compact - everyone should have one!

zq17 said:

Thanks everyone for your responses.

But I'm still not sure which has the better bokeh? Is there someone who has both lenses able to comment?

Click to expand...

There's a quick bokeh comparison here for what it's worth:

I have the 58 and have rented the 85 1.4G. The 58 is more special than just bokeh as others have said. Additionally, it's quite sharp. Overall it makes nicer images than the 85 IMHO. With a D800 you have plenty of pixels to crop from for an 85 effect. You could use the 58 in DX mode (87 mm equiv and 15 MP) and compose with the DX lines in the viewfinder. Its also nice to compose when you can see what is just outside the frame. I also have the very inexpensive MF Rokinon 85/1.4 and IMHO its bokeh is as good or better than the 85/1.4G albeit not quite as sharp and no AF. The Rokinon is supposedly copied from the 85/1.4 D and is definitely better image wise than the more expensive 85/1.8G which I had and sold.