Image quality FE 85 1.8 vs 55 1.8 ??

Chiemsee

Member
Messages
28
Reaction score
1
Location
Traunstein, DE
Hello, I'm looking for a good lens mainly for headshot portfolio videos (at the moment with Sony A6500).

Thinking about the new FE 85mm 1.8 because I prefer 135mm on FF for portraits.

But my mind is haunted by one thought: Everywhere on the net the FE 55mm 1.8 is praised into heaven... Is it optically really soooo good (and superior to the 85 1.8)?

What would you do? Anybody who knows both lenses? Thanks for any help!

BTW: Another option would be the FE 85mm 1.4 GM:

+ 1.4 instead of 1.8

+ optically great probably

- BUT:

- I would lose the option for gimbal work due to weight...

- AF is said to be louder and slower (moving a lot of glass) than the two lenses above... No idea whether this is true?!? :-O
 
Last edited:
It is true that the 55mm is optically better than the 1.8/85. It is also true that the 55mm isn't massively better than the 1.8/85. The 1.8/85 is a damned good lens.

Another consideration for portraiture is background compression. The 85mm will always provide greater compression than the 55mm, just as a 135mm will provide more background compression than the 85mm. It's physics at work.

While this video is comparing different lenses than at question here it does show the impact of background compression.

 
If I wanted 135mm on APSC, I would get the lens that would give me that focal length. Easy.
 
Honestly, as an owner of both, there's really not a huge difference between the two.

I shoot both regularly and can tell you that even pixelpeeping on the A7RII, you have a hard time finding a real difference in sharpness between the two in equal conditions.

Here are 2 examples, one of each:

 FE 85 f1.8

FE 85 f1.8



 FE 55 f1.8

FE 55 f1.8



--
--=== https://www.andre-meyer.lu ===--
 
Honestly, as an owner of both, there's really not a huge difference between the two.
I shoot both regularly and can tell you that even pixelpeeping on the A7RII, you have a hard time finding a real difference in sharpness between the two in equal conditions.

Here are 2 examples, one of each:
Thanks a lot!
 
Thinking about the new FE 85mm 1.8 because I prefer 135mm on FF for portraits.

But my mind is haunted by one thought: Everywhere on the net the FE 55mm 1.8 is praised into heaven... Is it optically really soooo good (and superior to the 85 1.8)?
If you want ultimate image quality, you should also consider the FE 90/2.8.

The FE 55/1.8 is incredibly sharp but suffers from a lot of LoCA and some onion ring bokeh. When doing head shots this LoCA could be distracting and is very hard to correct in a video.

The Batis 85 is a bit better in this regard and should be another lens to consider if you worry about the FE 85/1.8 not being good enough. The Batis 85 or the FE 90/2.8.
 
It is true that the 55mm is optically better than the 1.8/85. It is also true that the 55mm isn't massively better than the 1.8/85. The 1.8/85 is a damned good lens.

Another consideration for portraiture is background compression. The 85mm will always provide greater compression than the 55mm, just as a 135mm will provide more background compression than the 85mm. It's physics at work.

While this video is comparing different lenses than at question here it does show the impact of background compression.

 
I'd say the Batis is much better, if not one of the best FE lenses from a resistance to CA and flare standpoint - better than both the GM 85 and Sony FE 85 f1.8
 
The FE 55/1.8 is incredibly sharp but suffers from a lot of LoCA and some onion ring bokeh. When doing head shots this LoCA could be distracting and is very hard to correct in a video.

The Batis 85 is a bit better in this regard and should be another lens to consider if you worry about the FE 85/1.8 not being good enough. The Batis 85 or the FE 90/2.8.
Thanks a lot! My clients like the shallow depth of field look, so f/2.8 is a bit slow. But you are right, I should consider the Batis 85 over the new FE 85 1.8....

I was told, AF of the Batis 85 would be considerably slower than the new FE 85 1.8 (though not as slow as the GM 85 1.4). Don't know whether this is a reliable info!?

You probably don't have any personal experience of the FE 85 1.8 (especially in comparison to the Batis 85)?

Advantage of the new FE 85 1.8 would be it's low weight (for Gimbal work every gram less is welcomed....). *sigh* It's a hard life deciding for lenses! ;-) ^^
 
That is completely incorrect.

The Batis is one of the fastest focusing lenses you can get for FE mount
 
AF speed sel85f18

test sel85f18 AF for track and field

example pictures from volleyball game and review of Batis85

Batis seems to have fast AF, try whatever lenses you are interested in at the store if possible :-)
 
Hello, I'm looking for a good lens mainly for headshot portfolio videos (at the moment with Sony A6500).

Thinking about the new FE 85mm 1.8 because I prefer 135mm on FF for portraits.

But my mind is haunted by one thought: Everywhere on the net the FE 55mm 1.8 is praised into heaven... Is it optically really soooo good (and superior to the 85 1.8)?

What would you do? Anybody who knows both lenses? Thanks for any help!

BTW: Another option would be the FE 85mm 1.4 GM:

+ 1.4 instead of 1.8

+ optically great probably

- BUT:

- I would lose the option for gimbal work due to weight...

- AF is said to be louder and slower (moving a lot of glass) than the two lenses above... No idea whether this is true?!? :-O
I own both lenses and the FE 55 F1.8 isn't better in any obvious way. Get the focal length that best suits the way you work.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top