Nikon 85mm 1.4D Vs. Sigma 85mm 1.4 Vs. Nikon 85mm 1.4G Vs. Nikon 105/135 D.C

S

Soda Farl

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,253
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
I have decided to treat myself to a new toy to have something to show for my continued effort towards stopping smoking.

An 85 seems like a logical choice but struggling to decide on which one to run with.

The Nikon 85 1.4d from the reviews I have read has the nicest bokeh of the 3, commonly known as the cream machine. :D

The Siggy is supposed to be sharper and has quicker a.f.

The 85 1.4G is supposed to be the dogs but I am struggling to justify the extra cost.

Just wondered if anyone has used more than one of these and can give a real world comparison?
 
Last edited:
I've used the Nikon 85 1.4D and the Sigma 85 1.4.
I would say that the Sigma has the more pleasing bokeh and is slightly faster, however for me the Nikon was probably a whisker sharper - I haven't used the G.
I kept the Sigma over the Nikon.
 
Really thats interesting all the reviews I read said the Sigma was sharper but the Nikon D had the nicer bokeh. Could be down to sample variation I guess which does worry me a little on the Siggy. Thanks for the feedback though.
 
I have both the Sigma 85mm 1.4 and the Nikon G. Bought the Sigma first but the Nikon is sharper in the corners wide open, otherwise not a huge amount of difference between them in my opinion. Still will most likely sell the Sigma or swap it for a 35mm 1.4 Sigma.
 
kman said:
I have both the Sigma 85mm 1.4 and the Nikon G. Bought the Sigma first but the Nikon is sharper in the corners wide open, otherwise not a huge amount of difference between them in my opinion. Still will most likely sell the Sigma or swap it for a 35mm 1.4 Sigma.
Click to expand...

I am not so worried about corner sharpness to be honest for what I would use this for. If thats all the 85 1.4G offers better I might rule it out.
 
I've used both of the nikons. The bokeh is pretty much the same. But the g offers less ca wide open, better contrast, better flare control and is better in backlit situations. The d also blows goats in a studio where as the g is pretty useful. If these are important to you the g is much better.
 
Not used the D or sigma but own the G. It is a great lens but is expensive.
I bought it just after launch so the sigma wasnt out. Hadbit been I may have considered it.
Theres plenty of pic's using it on my flickr, 99% wide open.
 
Is the 1.8G out of contention? Impressive performer and nice & light too.
 
I have the 85mm G. Originally went for the Sigma but due to faulty products I ended up with the Nikon and I don't regret it. Very sharp with amazing soft bokeh.

I have tried the D version but being spoiled with my quiet to focus lenses I can't see myself buying a D lens anytime soon
 
Personally I'm going to get the 85mm f1.8g. From everything I've read and seen, there's practically no difference between them in terms of IQ unless you pixel peep to the extreme but the price difference is massive.
 
As you may be aware Tommy, I recently purchased the 85/1.4D from James.

I don't find contrast to be a problem as that can always be added in post... what is horrible is backlit subjects and CA when shooting wide open.

To be honest though, this wouldn't stop me using it - it is such a pleasant lens to use with stupidly nice bokeh and very very sharp when the aperture is fully open.

It's fairly and very good accuracy, even at f1.4 close focus on my D7000.

I can see why it is so popular for portraits, it will throw out even the busiest backgrounds.

AF is actually very well controlled in the noise department, I can't hear it.

So that's it for me - fantastic lens but be watchful of the CA wide open.
 
boyfalldown said:
I've used both of the nikons. The bokeh is pretty much the same. But the g offers less ca wide open, better contrast, better flare control and is better in backlit situations. The d also blows goats in a studio where as the g is pretty useful. If these are important to you the g is much better.
Click to expand...

Thats exactly the sort of feedback I was after, many thanks.

pmac said:
Not used the D or sigma but own the G. It is a great lens but is expensive.
I bought it just after launch so the sigma wasnt out. Hadbit been I may have considered it.
Theres plenty of pic's using it on my flickr, 99% wide open.
Click to expand...

Will have a look. :thumbs:

jpw said:
Is the 1.8G out of contention? Impressive performer and nice & light too.
Click to expand...

Ruled it out early doors. Fine lens that reviews very well but I have already had the 1.8d and they lack the magic of the 1.4's.

Phil Young said:
As you may be aware Tommy, I recently purchased the 85/1.4D from James.

I don't find contrast to be a problem as that can always be added in post... what is horrible is backlit subjects and CA when shooting wide open.

To be honest though, this wouldn't stop me using it - it is such a pleasant lens to use with stupidly nice bokeh and very very sharp when the aperture is fully open.

It's fairly and very good accuracy, even at f1.4 close focus on my D7000.

I can see why it is so popular for portraits, it will throw out even the busiest backgrounds.

AF is actually very well controlled in the noise department, I can't hear it.

So that's it for me - fantastic lens but be watchful of the CA wide open.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware Phil I have been on a forum ban for a week or so :D. Good to see your enjoying the lens though.

I have decided to throw another spanner in the works by also having a look at the Nikon 105 DC and 135 DC. I have always kind of wanted one of these but every time I read a review it kind of puts me off as the reviews always seem to mention that they are difficult to master. How hard can the D.C control be so difficult to use effectively?
 
Last edited:
Can you afford the 1.4G? If so, buy it. If you can't, buy the 1.4D.

I have the 1.4G and almost exclusively shoot wide open in varying degrees of light and cannot fault it at all. Focus is quick and accurate, especially good for those very quick grab shots, contrast is good and as mentioned before in difficult backlit scenes it really shows why it's worth that little bit more.
 
Soda Farl said:
I have decided to throw another spanner in the works by also having a look at the Nikon 105 DC and 135 DC. I have always kind of wanted one of these but every time I read a review it kind of puts me off as the reviews always seem to mention that they are difficult to master. How hard can the D.C control be so difficult to use effectively?
Click to expand...

I used to use my 105dc extensively with my d3s. It was tricky to master, but when you got it right nothing ripped the subject out of the image like this did. I genuinely believe the 105dc is a contender for the best portrait lens Nikon have ever produced.

Having said that though its not great on a d800, and I'd struggle to say one is a good idea on that camera. The d800 shows the flaws in whats now a fairly old design, and also amplifies that difficult to master bit. It does struggle with ca and contrast as well. For a d800 I'd go with one of the 85s instead. I do wish Nikon would update them.
 
There has been talk regarding a new Nikon 135 and also a sigma 135 A lens. Whether either will materialise and when is the question though.

If you want longer than 85mm it may be a better bet to hold out a bit longer and see if they do appear.
 
boyfalldown said:
I used to use my 105dc extensively with my d3s. It was tricky to master, but when you got it right nothing ripped the subject out of the image like this did. I genuinely believe the 105dc is a contender for the best portrait lens Nikon have ever produced.

Having said that though its not great on a d800, and I'd struggle to say one is a good idea on that camera. The d800 shows the flaws in whats now a fairly old design, and also amplifies that difficult to master bit. It does struggle with ca and contrast as well. For a d800 I'd go with one of the 85s instead. I do wish Nikon would update them.
Click to expand...

I still have my old D700 so it might still be an option for me.


pmac said:
There has been talk regarding a new Nikon 135 and also a sigma 135 A lens. Whether either will materialise and when is the question though.

If you want longer than 85mm it may be a better bet to hold out a bit longer and see if they do appear.
Click to expand...

I have a 70-200vr2 for when I need longer, I just fancied the prime for the nicer bokeh not to worried if it's at 85/105/135.
 
I love my wee 1.8G, it's so light and fun to use. It's also only 2nd to the 1.4G on DXO, tested on the D800. With the Siggy 35 in third, which I'm also delighted to see.

If I used 85mm a lot more, I'd consider the 1/4, but as it's more a very casual focal length for me personally, the 1.8 is just fine.

If money isn't an issue, I'd go for the 1.4G over the sigma 1.4G - who knows though, Sigma may well be working on a new 'art' 85mm 1.4, and if they do and it's as good or better than their new 35, I'll be having it.

Congrat's on quiting the cig's btw, off them here since Jan 9th ;)
 
Ended up with the Sigma, came today courtesy of kman on here.

Didn't get to use it much today as I needed the 70-200 nearly all day, but pleased with it so far. No issues with focusing (other than user error, damn the dof is thin) which I was worried about. Seems pretty well built and the a.f is reasonably fast, not VR2 fast but not bad. Pleasantly surprised with how sharp it is at f/1.4.

Did manage to grab a couple of shots, but looking forward to giving a proper run through tomorrow.

Fairly big crop of my oldest.


Megan by Tommy Blake Photography, on Flickr


My youngest



Abbie by Tommy Blake Photography, on Flickr


My oldests wee dog



Dora by Tommy Blake Photography, on Flickr


My Oldest again


Megan by Tommy Blake Photography, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top