You pay for slightly faster speed, which people use for lowlight jazz photos, or concert photos where that 1/2 stop counts. Also, the bokeh of the f/1.4 is smoother than the f/1.8. Finally, the build quality of the f/1.4 is very good, unlike the newer AF lenses. The amount of glass in the f/1.4 also increases the price.
significant difference between 85 f/1.4 vs 85 f/1.8?
- Thread starter puakkui
- Start date
- Status
In most instances, the difference is hardly obvious. The 85mmf1.4 is slightly sharper and more contrasty than the f1.8 version from f1.8-f2.8. By f4, they are almost equal in terms of sharpness.
Even the bokeh rendered in a back ground with no harsh highlights and lightsources is pretty similar, perhaps the f1.4 provides a little more out of focus areas. But the smoothness is similar. Not much difference.
The main, very obvious difference comes when the background is filled with point light sources, like taking a portrait during christmas time at orchard road. The lightsources are rendered as circular blobs in the bokeh area by the f1.4 version, but are rendered as hexagons in the f1.8 version very obviously.
The difference increases when the lenses are stopped down further. This is due to the rounded aperture blades in the f1.4 versus the hexagonal iris in the f1.8 version.
Generally, people prefer circular blobs of lights rather than hexagonal. I believe that this preference is largely based on magazines and articles telling people that circular is better than hexagonal. Who knows... maybe someday, hexagonals may be in vogue. ;p
Even the bokeh rendered in a back ground with no harsh highlights and lightsources is pretty similar, perhaps the f1.4 provides a little more out of focus areas. But the smoothness is similar. Not much difference.
The main, very obvious difference comes when the background is filled with point light sources, like taking a portrait during christmas time at orchard road. The lightsources are rendered as circular blobs in the bokeh area by the f1.4 version, but are rendered as hexagons in the f1.8 version very obviously.
The difference increases when the lenses are stopped down further. This is due to the rounded aperture blades in the f1.4 versus the hexagonal iris in the f1.8 version.
Generally, people prefer circular blobs of lights rather than hexagonal. I believe that this preference is largely based on magazines and articles telling people that circular is better than hexagonal. Who knows... maybe someday, hexagonals may be in vogue. ;p
V
vince123123
Guest
so you're sayig that the 105 dc and 135dc doesn't do as well as the 85 1.4 as far as portrait shots are concerned? I'm kinda in a tossup over which ones to get...
b18 said:
Kho King said:I shot 85mm at 1.4, can't get the face to be in focus, even both eyes can't get in focus, sometimes nose only or one eyes only or eyebrows only...
Too shallow DOF, need to stop down to f2.8 at least.
The 135DC lens is an excellent lens, but too long for digital...
Totally agree with you for the 135DC/2 lens.
For digital, I am thinking of getting a 60/2.8 as potrait lens which provides the same perspective close to 85mm
V
vince123123
Guest
how abt a 105DC vs the 85 1.4? which would be better?
Kho King
Senior Member
vince123123 said:
if I have to choose one (same price), then I will go for the 85mm f1.4. I couldn't afford the AF version, so I go for the Ais
manual focus is nice, give u more satisfaction and excersize to your hands and eyes ;p why 85mm and not 105mm? Again, 105mm might be too long to handhold. You need at least 1/180s in order to get sharp photo with a 105mm lens, but 1/125s with the 85mm lens.
60micro is my favorite all purpose lens, be it on digital or film. Too sharp for portrait? Easy to touch up in PS lah... :bsmilie:
Let me offered another perspective:
The 85 f1.4 cost 2.5 times more than the 85 f1.8, which is about 800 dollars more, unless you always shoot wide open (at 1.4), and cannot live with the bokeh of 1.8 (which is subjective), you may want to spend the 800 dollars on other lenses, e.g. 105 macro, 35 mm f/2...which will allow you to have a wider variety of tools and cater to more situations. Think about it.
Hope this helps.
The 85 f1.4 cost 2.5 times more than the 85 f1.8, which is about 800 dollars more, unless you always shoot wide open (at 1.4), and cannot live with the bokeh of 1.8 (which is subjective), you may want to spend the 800 dollars on other lenses, e.g. 105 macro, 35 mm f/2...which will allow you to have a wider variety of tools and cater to more situations. Think about it.
Hope this helps.
- Status
Similar threads
