What is your favourite FX Portraits lens for D750/D810 ?

[RyanKhoo]

The 58/1.4G is amazing. Its a modern lens with a classic feel.. Want bokeh/character, shoot wide open; want sharpness, stop down a bit.

Good weight, with standard nikon 'weather seal' gives it a slight advantage over the Sigma 50mm ART (Which is sharper, and cheaper, but so heavy)

Just a bit too pricey. (I sold it to fund other stuff that I will use more often)

Wat did you purchase from the sales proceeds of 58mm F1.4 ?

 

[swifty]

What about the AFS 58mm f1.4 N lens? Any user here kind enough to feedback? Seems like a good lens but cost a lot more.

I use it exclusively on my Nikon FX currently and its become my favourite lens. I've even sold the 70-200mm f2.8 VR2 because of lack of use since getting the 58G.
Hard to summarise in a few words but its not an easy lens to work with for a variety of reasons so you have to work hard to learn the nuances but the results are very satisfying when everything comes together.

 

[RyanKhoo]

I use it exclusively on my Nikon FX currently and its become my favourite lens. I've even sold the 70-200mm f2.8 VR2 because of lack of use since getting the 58G.
Hard to summarise in a few words but its not an easy lens to work with for a variety of reasons so you have to work hard to learn the nuances but the results are very satisfying when everything comes together.

Thanks for your tips ... :thumbsup:

 

[diediealsomustdive]

what about the 24-120F4 ? At 120mm F4, should be reasonably good too ?

thanks

Let's not speak too much about bokeh, which is a subjective matter and is not always positively corresponding to aperture and focal length.

Isolation and DOF would be objective measures.

If you stand at a fixed spot and take out your 20mm, 50mm, 85mm, 200mm, without moving from the fixed spot, take a photo each of the same subject (say gf, wife, daughter) at the same setting (aperture fixed, maybe use a tripod to take away camera shake), then you crop the 20mm photo to match the 50mm, to match 85mm, to match 200mm - your resolution will drop like made, so don't worry about resolution for now - you will notice that the DOF and perspective are identical. DOF and perspective are related to the aperture and distance from you subject.

Ok, now fix your subject size and repeat the same exercise, this time due to the fixed subject size, you will be very near your subject with 20mm, further at 50mm, even further at 85mm and furthest at 200mm. Now with the same aperture you will get very much different DOF and perspective - you have changed your distance. And hopefully you are like our brother Light Machinery (I am guessing here but shouldn't be far off), you have 20mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, 200mm f/2, and your subject is your lovely girlfriend (or wife or daughter depending on your stage of life - LM and I are shooting daughters now), you could shoot at f/2 and make that comparison.

You will find that, again not talking about bokeh, isolation is better with the longer focal length lens - this we all know. But if you stop down the lens to f/4, things are very very different here. 200mm at f/4 still has good to very good isolation, but 20mm at f/4 has enormous DOF. That's why we often see portraits taken at 200mm f/4 (like using 70-200mm f/4G VRIII) and get great results. As your focal length reduces, say to 135mm (or in your case 120mm), then isolation at f/4 may not be sufficient, but as internet speak goes, YMMV - your mileage may vary - depending on other factors, such as how beautiful your subject is (gf, wife, daughter?), what kind of lighting, how far your subject is from the background, what kind of background (busy, specular highlight?), and other factors I can't think about right now.

That's why for isolation as focal length reduces it is more and more important to have wider and wider aperture. So 200mm f/4 is sufficient for me (180mm f/2.8 is better!), at 135mm most prefer a f/2 lens, and at 85mm f/1.4 (for poorer man, f/1.8) is preferred, but at 50mm, f/1.2 is well liked (that is another story - spherical aberration gives a special look, and manual focus). And specially designed lenses, like the AFS 58mm f/1.4G, is the rage for those who have tried it and learned how to use it. I am speaking from experience, except I don't have AFS 58/1.4 and I don't have 200/2.

So the short answer to your question - it would be very much more challenging to use the 24-120 as a portrait lens at 120/4. Also speaking from experience, I bought the lens before Nikon lelong it with D750, had I waited I would have gotten it for half the price I paid earlier.

 

[diediealsomustdive]

I use it exclusively on my Nikon FX currently and its become my favourite lens. I've even sold the 70-200mm f2.8 VR2 because of lack of use since getting the 58G.
Hard to summarise in a few words but its not an easy lens to work with for a variety of reasons so you have to work hard to learn the nuances but the results are very satisfying when everything comes together.

Haha, I have salivated over the 58/1.4 for quite a while, but priorities changed - children's Uni fees, and the emergence of 200-500/5.6 - and may have to wait another few years to get this lens. But I really like to try it, heard and seen on FM forum, it is very special.

 

[swifty]

Haha, I have salivated over the 58/1.4 for quite a while, but priorities changed - children's Uni fees, and the emergence of 200-500/5.6 - and may have to wait another few years to get this lens. But I really like to try it, heard and seen on FM forum, it is very special.

Haha, yea I'm just starting to experience first hand the cost of education here in Sg. Hence the scaling back of equipment I own.
Would really like a modern 135mm AF lens but until that materialises, the 58G's holding up alright.
Some of the annoyances have to do with AF accuracy so should you get one, make sure you spend a bit of time AF tuning the thing. Shoot me a PM if you need some tips.
I'd also wait to take a peak at the D5 (and subsequent trickle down models) generation AF. Depending on how its implemented, it may solve most of the AF annoyances.
Finally, have a look on B&S. The lens goes for something like 1/3 off new pricing.
You'll either love the lens or it will frustrate the hell out of you. My only advice is that you'll need to spend some time with it before you make up your mind if its for you. If you don't shoot much with the focal length, I'd probably avoid it. There are much better value lenses in that focal range.
One thing I can't confirm is whether it holds up to scrutiny on higher MP cameras but on the FM thread, it seems so. That thread was a strong catalyst in me buying the lens and I still check back often and contribute every now and then.

 

[alfie]

Haha, I have salivated over the 58/1.4 for quite a while, but priorities changed - children's Uni fees, and the emergence of 200-500/5.6 - and may have to wait another few years to get this lens. But I really like to try it, heard and seen on FM forum, it is very special.

The best lens is the one you have The 200-500/5.6 is nice, but i preferred my 300/4pf for its size/weight and sold off the 200-500/5.6 too. (Perfomance with a TC was a disappointment too)

Haha, yea I'm just starting to experience first hand the cost of education here in Sg. Hence the scaling back of equipment I own.
Would really like a modern 135mm AF lens but until that materialises, the 58G's holding up alright.
Some of the annoyances have to do with AF accuracy so should you get one, make sure you spend a bit of time AF tuning the thing. Shoot me a PM if you need some tips.
I'd also wait to take a peak at the D5 (and subsequent trickle down models) generation AF. Depending on how its implemented, it may solve most of the AF annoyances.
Finally, have a look on B&S. The lens goes for something like 1/3 off new pricing.
You'll either love the lens or it will frustrate the hell out of you. My only advice is that you'll need to spend some time with it before you make up your mind if its for you. If you don't shoot much with the focal length, I'd probably avoid it. There are much better value lenses in that focal range.
One thing I can't confirm is whether it holds up to scrutiny on higher MP cameras but on the FM thread, it seems so. That thread was a strong catalyst in me buying the lens and I still check back often and contribute every now and then.

I shot the 58/1.4G on the D810 with no issues. Stopped down to f/2~/f4, its very sharp.

AF-tuning is something that many ignore. I had a friend with the 35/2afd who used to complain it wasn't a sharp lens till I told him to af-tune it. Having a Spyder LENSCAL helps a lot.

 

[undergrd]

The best lens is the one you have The 200-500/5.6 is nice, but i preferred my 300/4pf for its size/weight and sold off the 200-500/5.6 too. (Perfomance with a TC was a disappointment too)



I shot the 58/1.4G on the D810 with no issues. Stopped down to f/2~/f4, its very sharp.

AF-tuning is something that many ignore. I had a friend with the 35/2afd who used to complain it wasn't a sharp lens till I told him to af-tune it. Having a Spyder LENSCAL helps a lot.

Hi alfie, how do you normally set the distance between your cam and the Spyder Lenscal?

 

[alfie]

Hi alfie, how do you normally set the distance between your cam and the Spyder Lenscal?

I use focal length x2000. So 50mm i calibrate 100cm away. I used to use min focusing distance, but realise some lens are naturally soft at mfd. so i find x2 is just nice.

 

[undergrd]

I use focal length x2000. So 50mm i calibrate 100cm away. I used to use min focusing distance, but realise some lens are naturally soft at mfd. so i find x2 is just nice.

Thanks alfie!

 

[diediealsomustdive]

Sigma ART is so much better.... Nikons 50 1.4 is Rubbish IMO ... Size is the only good point - small.

This is peculiar, I have the AFS 50mm f/1.4G and it is rubbish...

The best lens is the one you have

... and it is the best lens I have??? :dunno:

Sorry I am linking two different thoughts here... I certainly do not enjoy KRW-style writing...

The 200-500/5.6 is nice, but i preferred my 300/4pf for its size/weight and sold off the 200-500/5.6 too. (Perfomance with a TC was a disappointment too)

I shot the 58/1.4G on the D810 with no issues. Stopped down to f/2~/f4, its very sharp.

AF-tuning is something that many ignore. I had a friend with the 35/2afd who used to complain it wasn't a sharp lens till I told him to af-tune it. Having a Spyder LENSCAL helps a lot.

I have the AFS 300mm f/4D, and would not upgrade to the PF version. Too costly. And will not use 200-500/5.6 with TC, maybe try with TC14EII and see how.

AF tune was necessary, as I had found to my horror... for many lenses.

 

[diediealsomustdive]

I use focal length x2000. So 50mm i calibrate 100cm away. I used to use min focusing distance, but realise some lens are naturally soft at mfd. so i find x2 is just nice.

Some say you should af fine tune at the distance you most use it for ...

 

[swifty]

Some say you should af fine tune at the distance you most use it for ...

I use the most used distance method for AF fine tuning the 58G.

Just to alleviate confusion, alfie I think you mean doubling the 10X focal length rule. So 20X as oppose to 2000X?
100cm is 20X 50mm for a 50mm lens.

 

[alfie]

I use the most used distance method for AF fine tuning the 58G.

Just to alleviate confusion, alfie I think you mean doubling the 10X focal length rule. So 20X as oppose to 2000X?
100cm is 20X 50mm for a 50mm lens.

Woops.. my apologies.. 20x.. i keep thinking cm to mm is a 1000x multiplier. (like GB to KB.. hahaha)

As a side note, the Sigma (art) lens have better af-tuning.. just trickier to get it right.. but once u got it, its awesome.

 

[Light Machinery]

Hello DDMD, nice to see you on-board this thread. It has been many months since we cross paths.

Lenses when used wide open for portraiture has minimal DOF. AF accuracy & repeatability is important. When I switched to digital bodies, the focusing screens of digital bodies does not show when critical focus is achieved, especially at f/2 & wider.

Talking about AF issues, I have come across my fair share of bodies (DX & FX) with bad AF adjustment / calibration straight from the box. At one time I went to NSC for a very bad AF issue, they wanted me to bring along the offending lens. I told them all my lenses are effected. Get the drift???

I have since made it a point to check for AF when getting a new / used body. I will check it large aperture prime (usually 85mm or 200mm, even the lowly 50mm will do in a pinch) & lens cal ruler. So far I am keeping a DF & D810 that focuses very well. All my lenses are spot on with zero AF fine tune on these bodies, except a few lenses that I suspected to have bad AF calibration.

As for checking lenses AF accuracy. I have a F5 & F6 with original factory installed split screen. I usually shoot film when I can but I have found a new use for them. I mounted the offending AFD / AFS lens & have it AF on a high contrast black / white cross target. I found out that some AFD / AFS lenses just never get the split screen image to align together ever so slightly, at MFD & out to mid distances on both the F5 & F6 body. These lenses will need to go back to NSC to be calibrated.

The new 58mm lens, well either you love it or hate it. Wide open at f/1.4 its soft with a veil. Quite similar kind of soft / veiling effect as the DC lenses with the DC ring turned past f/2.8. At f/2 & up it is already very sharp for portraiture, can count eye brow hair. Its focus field is also not flat, much like the 28mm f/1.8G, both lenses does not focus well with the side AF points. Bokeh wise the 58mm is buttery.

Well as DDMD mentioned, for portraiture one can use longer lenses for subject / background isolation & shorter lenses with minimal DOF / bokeh. If one is going for a shoot, just bring the lenses & enjoy the shoot.

Anyone want to share portrait shots here?

 

[swifty]

.

The new 58mm lens, well either you love it or hate it. Wide open at f/1.4 its soft with a veil. Quite similar kind of soft / veiling effect as the DC lenses with the DC ring turned past f/2.8. At f/2 & up it is already very sharp for portraiture, can count eye brow hair. Its focus field is also not flat, much like the 28mm f/1.8G, both lenses does not focus well with the side AF points. Bokeh wise the 58mm is buttery.

Anyone want to share portrait shots here?

Actually I don't know what everyone's standards are but to me the 58G is quite acceptably sharp even at 1.4 and focused at close distances but there is that veiling effect that you speak of which is probably a better term. I've been calling it a halo previously haha.
And the DOF is very thin - thinner than the focal length and aperture would suggest.

Here's an example @1.4 ISO400. 100% crops:

Default conversion:

With a crude high pass sharpening:

With smart sharpening:

At 100% view even when facing the camera, not even the entire eye and eyebrows are in focus.

 

[Light Machinery]

Acceptable sharpness & soft veil. Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G

EXIF 1/250 sec, f/1.4, ISO200, Nikon D700.






Sharpness improve & veil minimized by f/2

EXIF 1/125 sec, f/2, ISO400, Nikon D810



Typical bokeh & DOF from the 58mm at f/1.4 with test subject.

 

[RyanKhoo]

Thanks Light Machinery for sharing !

 

[undergrd]

BBB... MTL.

 

[Blur Shadow]

Wow...58mm f/1.4... Haven't tried that yet... But it looks good.