105VR or 85/1.4

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by mingaun, Mar 26, 2007.

  1. mingaun

    mingaun

    163
    Jun 13, 2006
    Malaysia
    I have looked at some of the threads with similar issue but still cant decide. My main purpose is for children and portraiture, mostly indoors. Is there any noticeable difference between these two lenses? I am tending towards the 105VR as it has got an additional benefit of macro that i occasionally will like to play around. Also it can focus closer thereby higlighting certain features of my baby.

    Problem is i have been having this strong desire to own the 85/1.4 that i am afraid i will regret it if did not get it now. But the specs in the 105VR is very impressive and it is a lot cheaper than the 85/1.4. Is the 85/1.4 that good?

    My other option is to get both but that will mean i have no room to purchase any speedlights.

    So my options are:
    1. 105VR and speedlights
    2. 85/1.4 and speedlights
    3. 105VR and 85/1.4 with no lights :eek:

    I have been up and down on this issue and i need some comments or pictures to sway me would be very helpful. Thanks a million!

    Mark
     
  2. The 85 1.4 is THAT good. Personally, 105 on a D body is a little too long for me, for a full body shot, you have to be a good 15-20 feet away from the child. The lens characteristics, sharpness, contrast, and bokeh are very very pleasing and double as a macro would be nice but 85mm I think would be more suited for your purposes. I am surprised the 50 1.4 does not sufficiently serve that purpose for you?
     
  3. davidzvi

    davidzvi

    Apr 30, 2005
    Massachusetts
    David
    Candid portraits or posed? Candid portraits with the 105 can be difficult, it will hunt in low light (parties for example). When you have enough light it does better. the difference in working distance is noticeable, in both how close you can get and haw far back you need to be based on your subject.

    But I guess a better question: Which is which?

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  4. mingaun

    mingaun

    163
    Jun 13, 2006
    Malaysia
    I will be definitely using the 50/1.4 the most. I just thought a longer lens can give a different perspective thats all. Length wise should not be a problem as the child is still young and i can sort of position him. But and this is a big but ... if the picture quality between those two is not that great then i definitely will forego my 85/1.4 lust and choose on that can serve a dual purpose.

    Thanks for the thought.
     
  5. mingaun

    mingaun

    163
    Jun 13, 2006
    Malaysia
    Candid shots it will be. I have heard that comment before about the hunting bit and that had me a bit worried. Do the others face the same problem? My guess is the first one 85/1.4 and the second 105VR. Both are good shots, though i like the second one better.
     
  6. davidzvi

    davidzvi

    Apr 30, 2005
    Massachusetts
    David
    I'll wait to get a few more guesses before I post the answer. The hunting is more a question of "if it does do you have the time to let it find focus? or will you have missed the shot?"

    Not to make you life more difficult, but......

    Have you thought about the 85 1.8? Yes the out of focus areas are better on the 1.4. But do you see any out focus areas in my shots? No because these are studio portraits. Even these non studio shots by FJG would not have been any better with the 1.4. And you could get a new 85 1.8 and a used 180 2.8 from KEH for the price of the 85 1.4. And why don't I have this combo? When I got the 80-200, 85 1.4, and 105 2.8 VR macro I could afford it, that's just the way it was.

    These links give some of the best comparisons of the 1.4 to 1.8 I've seen. Yes the writter is a big 1.4 fan. But the links display the difference in the aperture blades and the effect they have on images.

    Info #1
    Info #2
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2017
  7. cwilt

    cwilt

    Apr 24, 2005
    Denver, CO
    Focal length does not change perspective. Distance from your subject does.
     
  8. sclamb

    sclamb

    Jan 2, 2007
    London
    David

    The first looks to me like the 105VR as it is more brutal. Both seem to have a bit too much sharpening, especially noticeable in the fine hair.
     
  9. davidzvi

    davidzvi

    Apr 30, 2005
    Massachusetts
    David
    Both were shot as Jpegs and are right out of the camera, No PP. All settings were the same. The aperture was a bit on the high side, but this portrait session is the only one I have that the images and lighting are this close and had all the same settings.

    Sharpening: Med High
    WB: Auto
    Color mode: sRGB
    Tone: Normal
    Sat: normal
    Hue: 0
    ISO: 100
    1/200, f11
     
  10. Ciao Mark

    I think you could have a fourth, cheaper, choice, even if of course the ones mentioned are really great lenses.
    I'd suggest you to evaluate the 85 F1.8 and the Tamron 90 F2.8 SP DI, or the Sigma 105 which are both excellent macro lenses. I guess you should pay both them as the 105 VR, more or less.
    A macro lens is really fun to play with. But I'd keep it for THAT task. Not because it isn't good in portrait, nay, sometimes it's excellent and better than other primes, but just for the fact that indoor and lowlight environment requires always the faster lens you have. You won't have never enough light. If you take snapshots, only a very fast lens (F2 or faster) can give you safe shooting times without raising too much iso and noise.

    All the best and good luck for your choice, though.
     
  11. Mark,

    There definately is a difference between these two lense (besides the obvious f/stop, FL, VR). The 105VR has more contrast and the colors seem punchier with the 85 there seems to be smoother mid-tones and more subtle colors. Classically the 85 is a better portrait lens, but its up to you which you like better. Here is an example that I did for myself to compare the two lens. The WB is identical on both and I used straight metrix metering on both as well. Good luck with your choice.

    75353707.
    The 85

    75353708.
    The 105
     
  12. Nuteshack

    Nuteshack Guest

    that tammy is no slouch for portraits either .....;-))
     
  13. davidzvi

    davidzvi

    Apr 30, 2005
    Massachusetts
    David
    Jeff,

    your subject didn't look overly excited, was this a "dad are we done yet?"
     
  14. Actually she was listening to her mother reading a story. I've found this is a good time for practice shots. :)
     
  15. sclamb

    sclamb

    Jan 2, 2007
    London
    I think the Nano coating on the 105VR is responsible for the contrast and punch to the images. It was what swayed me to get the Nikon over the Tamron 90mm Macro.
     
  16. mingaun

    mingaun

    163
    Jun 13, 2006
    Malaysia
    Thanks David, i think you made a very good point about missing the shot if it hunts too long. Geez, never thought of that. Might prove crucial. Those links are very informative.
     
  17. mingaun

    mingaun

    163
    Jun 13, 2006
    Malaysia
    Do you mean if i took a photo with the subject at 5ft with an 30mm lens and i change it to an 85mm lens, the perspective will not change if i move back up till i reach the same perspective as the 30mm lens. How come i keep hearing comments that tele lenses becasue of their compressive effect gives a nicer portrait look?
     
  18. mingaun

    mingaun

    163
    Jun 13, 2006
    Malaysia
    Thanks for the advice. I guess the key is still indoor lighting where a 1.4 makes a big difference.
     
  19. mingaun

    mingaun

    163
    Jun 13, 2006
    Malaysia
    Thats a nice candid shot. I like that. Maybe i like the first one better :eek: But i am surprised that there really is a perceivable difference between the two. Oh boy .. more doubts and questions now ... just when i thought i will be buying the 105VR this week.
     
  20. gvk

    gvk

    388
    Jun 17, 2005
    Mystic, CT
    Changing focal length of the lens changes the field of view. Moving closer to or farther away from the subject changes the perspective. So in the situation you described, you have moved in order to capture the same field after changing lenses, and the difference in camera position with respect to the subject is what has changed the perspective.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Time to test a pair of lenses - Nikon 105VR vs Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 Lens Lust May 29, 2013
Up in flames with 105VR (color version) Lens Lust Dec 18, 2011
Abstract with the 105VR Lens Lust Dec 16, 2011
Everyone's dumping their NEW 18-105VR! Lens Lust Oct 18, 2010
105VR @ Museum of Art Lens Lust Sep 22, 2010