Z 50 1.8 vs Z 85 1.8

[Yavor Nikolov]

Hi! For the moment my setup consists of Z6 + 14-30 f4 + 24-70 f4 + AF-P 70-300 4.5-5.6 E. I'm mainly a landscape shooter but would like to add one prime lens for low-light situations, street photos with bokeh effect and some people shots. I need an advice whether to go for the 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 Z-s. I think the 50mm lenght will be more universal but I'm afraid I'll lose some of the bokeh effect with the less mm-s. Do you think the bokeh at f1.8 or 2 will differ lot between the two?Thanks in advance!

 

[Sandy27000]

Yes, it will differ due to the compression. I prefer 85mm or even 105mm for portrait, have the 85mm f1.8S and love it. Before bokeh even comes into play, what would matter is how much working distance you would have between the camera and your subjects. 50mm scores better in that department for indoor shots. I do not have the 50mm f1.8S, but have the 50mm f1.2S, which is more useful to me indoor vs the 85mm purely in terms of focal length.

Do look at the photo galleries of these lenses, that may help you decide as well.

 

[jjz2]

Hi! For the moment my setup consists of Z6 + 14-30 f4 + 24-70 f4 + AF-P 70-300 4.5-5.6 E. I'm mainly a landscape shooter but would like to add one prime lens for low-light situations, street photos with bokeh effect and some people shots. I need an advice whether to go for the 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 Z-s. I think the 50mm lenght will be more universal but I'm afraid I'll lose some of the bokeh effect with the less mm-s. Do you think the bokeh at f1.8 or 2 will differ lot between the two?Thanks in advance!

You'll gain some bg compression, but you'll lose versatility with an 85 focal length. If you're only adding one prime lens..something like the 50, or even the upcoming 40mm f2 makes way more sense.

Also for me, when using 50mm as the main... I like going to at least 28mm wide and 105mm long, then just skip 35/85... 35/85 to me work better as a pair... so if you go for the 85 now, adding the 35mm later will make a nice 2 lens set.

 

[CliveTJ]

I think the 50mm 1.8 is the most versatile...it's also the best value and possibly (from reports) the best or equal best lens. The 85mm seems good, the 35mm whilst good doesn't sound like it's quite as good. I'm sure all the primes are great in reality.

 

[z2122]

I have the 35 and 85 S lens . In F mount I had the 28, 50 and 85 G lenses, but never used the 50 , so therefore I didn't bought it now. 50mm is dor me too boring ... not wide , not close ...

 

[NCB]

I have the 35 and 85 S lens . In F mount I had the 28, 50 and 85 G lenses, but never used the 50 , so therefore I didn't bought it now. 50mm is dor me too boring ... not wide , not close ...

One person' boring is another person's sweet spot

I like 50; it gives a tighter composition than a 35 but less restrictive FOV than an 85. And the Nikon 50 1.8 is stellar.

 

[CliveTJ]

I have the 35 and 85 S lens . In F mount I had the 28, 50 and 85 G lenses, but never used the 50 , so therefore I didn't bought it now. 50mm is dor me too boring ... not wide , not close ...

One person' boring is another person's sweet spot

I like 50; it gives a tighter composition than a 35 but less restrictive FOV than an 85. And the Nikon 50 1.8 is stellar.

Indeed...most times I've used a 35 I wished I had a 28 with me. We just get used to the certain FLs...it's all personal preference.

 

[jjz2]

I have the 35 and 85 S lens . In F mount I had the 28, 50 and 85 G lenses, but never used the 50 , so therefore I didn't bought it now. 50mm is dor me too boring ... not wide , not close ...

One person' boring is another person's sweet spot

I like 50; it gives a tighter composition than a 35 but less restrictive FOV than an 85. And the Nikon 50 1.8 is stellar.

Yes, I used to be a 35 shooter over 50mm... But after analyzing my photos more, I found them to be too loose in composition. I also started to be more interested in shooting people. ... so 50mm just worked out better as a one lens solution to leave the house with. With the 35... I always wanted that 85 (or a 75 equiv on DX) with me, too.

Given the option though, I prefer 40mm over either.

 

[KR Photo]

If getting just one, as others have said, then the 50mm will be more versatile. I'd get the 50mm 1.8 S and see how you like it, and if you get more specifically into portraits/headshots, then you always have the option of the Viltrox 85mm for half the cost of the Nikon. That's what I did, since I use that focal length infrequently but do appreciate having the option.

 

[kenw]

Before bokeh even comes into play, what would matter is how much working distance you would have between the camera and your subjects. 50mm scores better in that department for indoor shots.

This advice is key. Using 85 indoors means fairly tight compositions. That works great in many cases but not always. Shooting an 85 indoors means often you lose any context of where the subject is being taken. Of course sometimes you want to cut out distracting elements and that's when standing back and using a longer focal length helps.

The 50 prime has been a workhorse because it is quite flexible handling many different situations. The criticism is sometimes that it is a jack of all trades and a master of none. As another poster mentioned I actually prefer a 35 and 85 combo as the 35 works great for environmental portraiture where I want the surroundings in the photo and the 85 is great for narrowing the field of view to eliminate the surroundings. So you certainly could get the 85 with the idea of potentially adding something wider later.

Lastly, just as a technical note, it is useful to know that as far as bokeh goes that if you frame a subject the same with a 50/1.8 or an 85/1.8 (meaning lets say the person that is your subject fills the frame, so you had to shoot the 85 from further away for them to fit) that objects in the background will actually have the same "relative" blur in both images. By relative I mean that say there is a stop sign in the background you will be able to read the word "stop" just as easily in the 50/1.8 shot as in the 85/1.8 shot. What happens is the 85/1.8 blur circle is larger but the stop sign is magnified just the same amount so it is just as easy to read. This can counterintuitively sometimes make it more distracting in the 85/1.8 shot just because it is bigger. The benefit of the 85 is that you can change your position just a bit to likely get the stop sign entirely out of the image. All this assuming you can stand back far enough with the 85 to begin with! I only point this out because sometimes people assume longer focal lengths will blur backgrounds more at equal apertures to shorter focal lengths but in the practical sense of making the background less distracting that's not actually the case. The bigger benefit of the longer focal length is that with the tighter field of view you can just cut out more of the background to begin with.

Anyway, sorry to blather on as I don't have a specific recommendation as it really depends on what you expect to shoot. A common and good recommendation is to fix one of your zooms at a particular focal length and try some compositions where you intended to shoot to see how it works field of view wise.

 

[pthomsen]

Hi! For the moment my setup consists of Z6 + 14-30 f4 + 24-70 f4 + AF-P 70-300 4.5-5.6 E. I'm mainly a landscape shooter but would like to add one prime lens for low-light situations, street photos with bokeh effect and some people shots. I need an advice whether to go for the 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 Z-s. I think the 50mm lenght will be more universal but I'm afraid I'll lose some of the bokeh effect with the less mm-s. Do you think the bokeh at f1.8 or 2 will differ lot between the two?Thanks in advance!

Obviously the Bokeh will be creamier with the 85, but if you're going to do both Street and Portraits, your best compromise (IMO) is the 50.

If you can afford it, I'd pick the 35 (for street), and the 85 (for portraits).

 

[xtm]

Don't worry about "losing the bokeh", worry more about the focal length working for your view of the world.

 

[jjz2]

If getting just one, as others have said, then the 50mm will be more versatile. I'd get the 50mm 1.8 S and see how you like it, and if you get more specifically into portraits/headshots, then you always have the option of the Viltrox 85mm for half the cost of the Nikon. That's what I did, since I use that focal length infrequently but do appreciate having the option.

Interesting, didn't even know Viltrox had a Z mount. I've used that 85 Viltrox on Fuji before and it's actually a really good lens... I think technically a 1.6 lens... There is a Sony firmware or something that can unlock it so it can open to 1.6.

I think this was their way to over engineer the performance a bit, and why it's kind of chunky.

 

[jjz2]

Hi! For the moment my setup consists of Z6 + 14-30 f4 + 24-70 f4 + AF-P 70-300 4.5-5.6 E. I'm mainly a landscape shooter but would like to add one prime lens for low-light situations, street photos with bokeh effect and some people shots. I need an advice whether to go for the 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 Z-s. I think the 50mm lenght will be more universal but I'm afraid I'll lose some of the bokeh effect with the less mm-s. Do you think the bokeh at f1.8 or 2 will differ lot between the two?Thanks in advance!

Obviously the Bokeh will be creamier with the 85, but if you're going to do both Street and Portraits, your best compromise (IMO) is the 50.

If you can afford it, I'd pick the 35 (for street), and the 85 (for portraits).

35/85 is how I used to roll, but I like to leave the house with just one lens... so moved to 50mm. I suppose it can be boring, but, you can still use it for street (albeit sometimes tight), and it's definitely more flattering for people shots (albeit sometimes short) and able to isolate people better than the 35mm.

 

[BasilG]

Hi! For the moment my setup consists of Z6 + 14-30 f4 + 24-70 f4 + AF-P 70-300 4.5-5.6 E. I'm mainly a landscape shooter but would like to add one prime lens for low-light situations, street photos with bokeh effect and some people shots. I need an advice whether to go for the 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 Z-s. I think the 50mm lenght will be more universal but I'm afraid I'll lose some of the bokeh effect with the less mm-s. Do you think the bokeh at f1.8 or 2 will differ lot between the two?Thanks in advance!

Both are excellent, bokeh is fine on both. It's all about a focal length that suits the type of image you want to take, which are not very clearly defined in your post.

 

[aarongarybrooks]

85mm is probably my favourite focal length for street but it's certainly not the most flexible or conventional FL.

It really depends on what you want to shoot. 50mm and 85mm are very different lenses for street photography.

I use 85mm because I like to capture details, such as hand gestures, and prefer somewhat minimal shots over busy compositions. You're not going to use this for environmental captures but it'll be the perfect portrait lens, if that's what you're looking for.

Where you shoot also matters: 85mm can be limiting in cities with narrow streets.

50mm is my walkaround lens - far more flexible than 85mm. You can still compress details to an extent and get a bit more context into shots of you have some space to work with.

The 50mm will be capable enough for portraits, too. You'll just have to be mindful of background distance behind the subject of you want to blur beyond recognition.

 

[pthomsen]

I use 85mm because I like to capture details, such as hand gestures, and prefer somewhat minimal shots over busy compositions. You're not going to use this for environmental captures but it'll be the perfect portrait lens, if that's what you're looking for.

Where you shoot also matters: 85mm can be limiting in cities with narrow streets.

Super-interesting! I never thought of using an 85mm for street, but it makes sense when you explain.

Cool idea!

 

[jthomas39]

I posted in an old thread:

Extremely happy with 24-70 f4; what will a 50mm f1.8 add?

I did two sessions with my 24-70 set to 35mm and 50mm, locked in with masking tape. I liked the 50mm sense of depth. You could try a session at 70mm to see if 85mm is reasonable. I've never tried 85mm, I think it's more of a great portrait lens.

 

[aarongarybrooks]

I use 85mm because I like to capture details, such as hand gestures, and prefer somewhat minimal shots over busy compositions. You're not going to use this for environmental captures but it'll be the perfect portrait lens, if that's what you're looking for.

Where you shoot also matters: 85mm can be limiting in cities with narrow streets.

Super-interesting! I never thought of using an 85mm for street, but it makes sense when you explain.

Cool idea!

It's a lot fun. I don't find 85mm any more limiting than the other FLs I shoot with (mainly 28mm, 50mm and 85mm) and I don't really take portraits so it's not like that's the reason I use it.

I also enjoy shooting street at 20mm from time to time but that's another challenge entirely.

 

[Karl-FR]

Hello!
French speaker, excuse my English.

I have both of them Z 50 f1. 8 and Z 85mm f1.8.
I really enjoy them.
If I need a one solution lens I take the 50mm f1.8.
If I can carry two lenses, I go for 35/85mm f1.8 combo.

The 50mm it's my one lens solution when I want just one lens.
I use it of everything but I tend to use it less because I really enjoy the 35/85 combo.

I use the 85 f1. 8 mostly for portrait. Sometime landscape.
The IQ of those lenses is so good. AF really quick and precise.

The 35mm moslty for indoor portrait and life moment with my children.
The 35mm is always on my Z6 ready to capture my kids.

Here are my gallery but moslty with kids so it's not really interresting :

Z 35mm f1.8 : https://flic.kr/s/aHsmSeoCM2
Z 50mm f1.8 : https://flic.kr/s/aHsmJZiGWV
Z 85mm f1.8 : https://flic.kr/s/aHsmPho6kW