85mm f/1.8 for the Z - Native or Adapted?

[acnomad]

The 85mm focal length has been my go-to lens for portraiture. My 85mm f/1.8G has been a workhorse on the D750 and for the last year, it has also been an excellent performer mounted via FTZ to a Z body. This week, with no particular reason to upgrade, I decided to spring for a Nikkor Z 85mm f/1.8 S and experience it firsthand.

The two most tangible comparisons:

1. Cost New: $427; $797 (S costs about double)
2. Size: 485g (with FTZ); 470g (S is just slightly lighter)

My first two test shots, using a key light in a soft box camera left and a round head light splashing some light on the gray background, shot wide open with both lenses:

1. G

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

2. S

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Needless to say, this is not much to go on, but I can immediately see that the S is better in a couple subtle ways:

1. Less vignetting
2. Slightly sharper
3. Slightly more contrasty

 

[Palouse]

Andy, you are not making life easy for the rest of us!

Congrats on the new toy!

 

[acnomad]

Andy, you are not making life easy for the rest of us!

Congrats on the new toy!

Not a "toy" - a tool. Much more defensible terminology. Help me out here, Nick!

 

[Mike Buckley]

Less vignetting

If you like subtle vignettes as much as I do, that's a flaw.

 

[MNglass]

If you like subtle vignettes as much as I do, that's a flaw.

When I was in software engineering, we used to tell marketing "That's not a bug. It's a FEATURE!"

 

[ijm5012]

Andy,

I would suggest doing a similar type of shoot, but outdoors. One of the biggest things I notice with both F-mount 85's (I had the 1.8, and sold it for the 1.4) is the amount of CA, particularly green fringing. It would be great to see how much of an improvement Nikon has made on that front with the new S lens.

 

[BillM]

Andy,

The S is better but sometimes the flaws of earlier versions are desirable

I admit to being addicted to 85mm f/1.8 (2) lenses and have owned pre-AI, AI, AIS, AF-D, AF-G and S versions of them. The new S is the best of them all. I still have the G version and plan on keeping it.

 

[acnomad]

I would suggest doing a similar type of shoot, but outdoors.

Definitely looking forward to doing that, and I will post the results in this thread.

 

[acnomad]

I still have the G version and plan on keeping it.

So will I, in all likelihood.

 

[Allan]

The S versions of overlapping lenses are rated better but if I already had the G I would not spend the money for the S.

 

[MNglass]

Truth be told, the S version may very well be better, but the G version (which I too have) is really very good.

 

[acnomad]

Today, outdoors with a human subject.

1. G - full body

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

2. S - full body

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

3. G - headshot

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

4. S - headshot

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

There is a subtle difference in the way colors are rendered, especially the mid- and dark tones. And the S might offer a little better detail in the shadows.

One operational difference was that the Eye-AF seemed to be much faster to acquire a target with the S. I'll have to do a lot more shooting to be certain, but the difference was quite noticeable between the two lenses when capturing the headshots.

 

[acnomad]

Now I am not so sure that the eye-AF is faster with the native 85. Smoother, perhaps, but not necessarily faster. Also, for portraiture, the improvement in corner sharpness and elimination of fringing is not apparent.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[BillM]

Andy,

Wide open, the f/1.8S is sharper and more contrasty across the entire frame to my eye. Stopping down, they even out with the edge still going to the newer f/1.8S.

The difference is subtle and the f/1.8G is a very good lens indeed.

 

[acnomad]

I have no doubt that is true. However, in my images I will seldom see it. The most recent image I posted is a particularly obtuse example, but you get the idea...

I guess I was really hoping for better AF performance, which I thought I was getting at first, and now I’m less certain. What are your thoughts in that regard?

 

[BillM]

I have not used the G on my Z6 since getting the S. The G does AF ok on the Z6, but not as well as the S.

Now if someone asks whether it is worth buying the S when you already have the G.... The G is a very good lens and the S is only slightly better wide open. There are a lot of better ways to spend your money

 

[acnomad]

Now if someone asks whether it is worth buying the S when you already have the G....

I should have talked to you before I did exactly that.

 

[acnomad]

It would be great to see how much of an improvement Nikon has made on that front with the new S lens.

Still haven’t gotten around to shooting in a way that shows the improvements in CA. However, online reviews seem to unanimously agree that the S is essentially free of fringing.

 

[MMRadman]

When was this renamed from Lens Lust to Buyers Remorse?

As sensible reviewers have stated, if you already have G or E version it is difficult to justify buying Z as pre-Z lenses are already good (understated praise).

If you are going to run F and Z mount systems in parallel you need F mount lens but if only running Z it is time to move to native lenses only.

 

[acnomad]

When was this renamed from Lens Lust to Buyers Remorse?

I suppose I do have some remorse for treating myself to this lens with full knowledge that my G was and is still excellent. Nevertheless I bought the S. If that’s not an example of lens lust, I don’t know what is. I thought posting my findings would be of interest to others.