[genotypewriter]

Latest greatest top portrait lens head-to-head pixel-peeping action! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



See large version in link:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/5057691550/





Aspects compared:

* Far distance corner sharpness

* Far distance center sharpness

* Bokeh (general and highlights)

* Close distance center sharpness, rear and front bokeh

* Close distance corner sharpness, rear and front bokeh

* Relative illumination between the two lenses and vignetting at close-up and infinity



Enjoy!



GTW

[Brightcolours]

Enjoyable again, as always. Thanks for the effort!



A few remarks though:

* I think it would be a bit more informative to test both at f1.4, to see actual differences in same circumstances.

* Your bokeh tests are not the best for showing how a lens performs... A test with a more busy background will be more conclusive about the quality of bokeh to expect in normal usage.



The lenstip samples and subject matter hint at a much more "busy" bokeh rendering from the new Nikon compared to the Canon.



It has been a while seeing a holden commodore <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1286386779' post='3538']

Enjoyable again, as always. Thanks for the effort!

[/quote]

Glad you liked it Brightcolours. Thanks for the feedback...





[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1286386779' post='3538']

A few remarks though:

* I think it would be a bit more informative to test both at f1.4, to see actual differences in same circumstances.

[/quote]

I gave this a lot of thought before doing the f/1.2 vs. f/1.4 comparison. When I'm comparing sensors, I always opt to resize the one with more MPs down to the size of the smaller one (e.g. similar to DXOMark's "print" SNR) because if someone's considering say a 12MP sensor, they're happy to live with a 12MP image. By resizing the larger (>12MP) one down to the same size, resolution requirements are still met but you can also reduce the noise that troubles sensors with more pixels (per unit area).



In the case of the 85L's image quality, there's nothing really it lacks against the 85G when it's wide open at f/1.2. It's even a bit sharper in the center if you look close enough. The two lenses do have slight differences (at max aperture) but these will most definitely not show up when doing anything other than a scientific shot. In other words, there really is nothing to gain by shooting the 85L @ 1.4 because the f/1.2 effect (DOF, speed) is a lot more prominent in the final shot than any IQ differences. Plus it also means more work for me <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />





[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1286386779' post='3538']

* Your bokeh tests are not the best for showing how a lens performs... A test with a more busy background will be more conclusive about the quality of bokeh to expect in normal usage.



The lenstip samples and subject matter hint at a much more "busy" bokeh rendering from the new Nikon compared to the Canon.

[/quote]

Yes, it would have been interesting to have chosen a scene with an even busier background for the whole frame bokeh test but what I have is still a fairly busy background (although completely blurred) and you can still see how the lenses compare against each other. The focusing distance for that shot was a bit over 1m, which is around the distance you'd be with a 85mm for a head and shoulders portrait. I did mention in that particular test's description that the 85L's bokeh seems a bit smoother and it seems to coincide with what you came across on that site.



Bokeh does change depending on the focusing distance, being in front or behind the focus and where it is on the frame. It's quite difficult to accurately test for all these combinations + the different types of bokeh subject combinations (point lights, low/high contrast, high/low frequency lines, etc.). That's about 144 test combinations right there <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />





[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1286386779' post='3538']

It has been a while seeing a holden commodore <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.

[/quote]

lol... it's an old one too



Thanks again for the comments.



GTW

[Martin_MM]

Genotypewr:



I´ve been searching for such a comparison for a long time! Thanks a lot, indeed!!



Please could you tell me a few more things?



1) Is the depth of field visibly shallower with 1.2 (compared to f1.4) when shooting real life objects? Like lets say the whole person from 10 metres?



2) How about the focus speed - is the Nikon 85G/1.4 faster than Canon 85/1.2 ?



3) I know what this lenses are meant for, but still: How about the tracking capabilities? Can you keep in focus lets say walking person towards you at f1.4 ?



4) How about the manual focus - is the 85G focus ring easier to operate than the strange, "eletric" Canon focus ring?



5) I add my request to the line of the others ;-) - please could you show us the Canon vs. Nikon 85mm comparsion both shot at f1.4 ? I mean just the center a border area, that´s all...

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='Martin_MM' timestamp='1286462501' post='3547']

Genotypewr:



I´ve been searching for such a comparison for a long time! Thanks a lot, indeed!!



Please could you tell me a few more things?



1) Is the depth of field visibly shallower with 1.2 (compared to f1.4) when shooting real life objects? Like lets say the whole person from 10 metres?



2) How about the focus speed - is the Nikon 85G/1.4 faster than Canon 85/1.2 ?



3) I know what this lenses are meant for, but still: How about the tracking capabilities? Can you keep in focus lets say walking person towards you at f1.4 ?



4) How about the manual focus - is the 85G focus ring easier to operate than the strange, "eletric" Canon focus ring?



5) I add my request to the line of the others ;-) - please could you show us the Canon vs. Nikon 85mm comparsion both shot at f1.4 ? I mean just the center a border area, that´s all...

[/quote]





Glad you found it useful <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



To answer your questions...



1. Depends on who's looking. If it's anyone interested in shallow DOF, yes, they will most probably notice it. But to any untraind eye, it wouldn't make a difference between 85 1.2 vs. 1.4 or vs. a 18-55 <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />





2 & 3. AF speed and tracking - While the 85L feels slower than most lenses, it's fast enough for tracking action like I have done here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/tags/capoeira/



I shoot a lot of action and I can't say I have missed a shot because of the 85L's AF.





4. Focus ring - To anyone who uses mostly the standard mechanical type focusing rings, the 85L's focus-by-wire focusing ring needs a bit of getting used to because it's very sensitive to touch. But some manufacturers like Olympus also have a lot of focus-by-wire lenses (e.g. ZD 150 f/2, etc.) and I guess their users won't find it all that odd. At the end of the day, it's not a problem because I enjoy manual focusing with the 85L a lot, but it just needs getting used to.





5. [email protected] vs. 1.4 - If you're wondering about sharpness, it's likely that the 85L will be sharper than the 85G in the corners (it already has less coma in the corners and is sharper in the center), but even with f/1.2 vs. f/1.4, you're not going to notice these differences when doing actual shots. The 85 1.2's special because all other 85s are f/1.4s (e.g. Carl Zeiss ZF/ZE, Nikon G, Nikon D, Sony ZA, Leica R, Contax, Pentax FA*, Sigma, Samyang/Bower/Vivitar). The image that a 85 1.2 creates at f/1.2 is a lot more important and will show on all images than any insignificant differences in IQ (at f/1.4) that you will not see even at 100% when doing photography anyway.



People also don't shoot anything they want sharp at f/1.2-f/1.4 anyway. There are no lenses under 200mm below that you can use below f/2 for frame-wide high-IQ shots.



The reason why I'm reluctant to do that test is because it serves no other purpose than incorrectly satisfying people's egos. Coming from Canon background, I'm tempted to do it too but I when you got a f/1.2 Bugatti, there's no need to race f/1.4 Skylines and Subarus to know your equipment's a winner <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



GTW

[mst]

[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1286589110' post='3557']

There are no lenses under 200mm below that you can use below f/2 for frame-wide high-IQ shots.

[/quote]



I tend to disagree. It seems to me, Sony has two candidates here, the 85/1.4 and the 135/1.8.



-- Markus

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1286610261' post='3558']

I tend to disagree. It seems to me, Sony has two candidates here, the 85/1.4 and the 135/1.8.

[/quote]

"high IQ" isn't only about sharpness. I've used both of those lenses and even the 135 1.8 fringes up etc. when shot at 1.8 during the day. It looks just like a longer version of the 85L almost when it encounters bright bits.



The kind of "high IQ" lenses I'm talking about (under 200) are: 125 f/2.5 APO Lanthar, 60 f/4 UV-VIS-IR APO Macro, etc.

[ozkanozmenphotography]

Hi everyone,just uploaded a video comparing Nikon 85mm f1.4 g vs Canon 85mm f1.2 for those who are interested : www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbWFTVX0OhI&hd=1

[JJ_SO]

Some thougts by just browsing superficially through your test:

 

I think the 85L is a really great lens.

 

I think, too:

 

The Gitzo 2541 is IMO a bit on the weak side for such a test. Series 3 or 4 are more decent. (I have a GK2580TQR, which is the same except the head and a 4542-  for pixel peeping purposes I would use the Humvee instead of a Suzuki  :lol: )

 

Adapting a 85/1.4 Nikon to a Canon means "an adaptor is involved" and adds to a possible set of mechanical tolerances of the lens itself another set. No adaptor is perfect.

 

I use the Nikkor on a D800 and I see in 3 miles distance not only the cross on a mountain but also some electric wires. Okay, that was f/4, but landscapes in wide open?

 

So anyway, if you're happy about it, great. It's just a shame the 5DII doesn't bring all those details... (couldn't resist   )

 

As long as I have to wait for a Sigma 85/1.4 Art, that Nikkor will do.