PDA

View Full Version : AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G



chrisbevan4
19-08-2010, 10:07pm
New version AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G

I wanted the old version AF 85mm f1.4D IF and this new one looks like it'll be twice the price

Saw a estimated UK price 1600 Pounds :eek:

Can only hope the Nikon AF 85mm f1.4D IF version - $1200 at the moment grey market gets cheaper?

Also a AF-S 55-300 f/4.5-5.6G ED VR less than $1000 I hope

Wayne
19-08-2010, 11:16pm
I can't imagine that the new 85 will be double that of the old, and if it is I think it will be tough to sell them because it probably is the same lens, just gelded and with AF-S motor.

It would be hard to improve the optical formula over the current one, and AF-S is really a gimmick because it is probably the most popular portrait lens not an often used sports lens that doesn't require lightning fast AF, and on top level bodies it will AF quite quick anyway. The only benefit is for poverty model bodies that have no inbuilt screw motor to drive the current AF model.

I have seen alot of people dumping for sale the old model in the past 1-2 weeks, with what is perhaps an attempt to sell before the new is released to avoid the re-sale hit. If the new is priced not too far from the old, expect the price on the old to drop as it will of course be a discontinued model, and of course the market will flood with sellers looking to update.

campo
20-08-2010, 8:18am
I wanted the old version AF 85mm f1.4D IF and this new one looks like it'll be twice the price


I have the now "old one" and let me tell you there's no chance I'll be upgrading just for nano coating, a new optical design and AFS. Nobody could really flaw the old one, it's title of "cream machine" and one of Nikon's best was well deserved. Unless Nikon plan on removing the focus motors from their prosumer -> pro bodies I can't see the point of this upgrade.




I have seen alot of people dumping for sale the old model in the past 1-2 weeks, with what is perhaps an attempt to sell before the new is released to avoid the re-sale hit.

It will be interesting to see just how many people update now that they find out there's no VR. Of course we'll get the "if i get the latest lens my pictures will be instantaneously better" upgraders, but those of us who use the old lens every weekend are going to find it hard to justify an update of an almost flawless lens.

The only "issue" I have with the old lens is the lack of VR. The 16-35 gets VR and the 85 doesn't? last time i checked VR is more useful on long lenses, not wide ones...What is nikon thinking?

I @ M
20-08-2010, 9:03am
The only "issue" I have with the old lens is the lack of VR. The 16-35 gets VR and the 85 doesn't? last time i checked VR is more useful on long lenses, not wide ones...What is nikon thinking?

The only explanation that I have heard is summed up at http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showpost.php?p=657233&postcount=8

campo
20-08-2010, 9:09am
The only explanation that I have heard is summed up at http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showpost.php?p=657233&postcount=8

very interesting

And in another post here at AP - another reason to upgrade would be for the bayonet hood rather then the old lenses screw-in hood...one of it's more annoying features when you're in a hurry!

Wayne
20-08-2010, 11:05am
Well, announced today by B&H = USD$1699 which is not too much more than the retail of the old lens, and that is pre-order price. I think a few people will be trying to sell their old one for what they were selling at yesterday, but they may have to drop their prices a bit now.

I don't own one, and would consider one (old because I agree with Campo) if the used price dropped a bit.

TEITZY
25-08-2010, 11:31pm
Here's some samples with the new lenses including the 85 1.4. Gotta say I don't like the bokeh on a couple of those 85 samples. Looks pretty rough to me.

http://www.moosepeterson.com/blog/?p=16729

Cheers
Leigh

arthurking83
26-08-2010, 12:07am
That sample image from Moose Peterson(of the painters easel) is reason enough not to update to this lens.

not particularly inspiring bokeh in that image!

..... maybe VR was accidentally left ON! :p

LOL!.... you can always turn VR off when not required... if it was a feature of the lens.

kaiser
30-08-2010, 6:22pm
$2141 for the new lens! When the D version is still available for HALF THE PRICE - there is no way I'd go for the new version. The samples posted do not impress me at all.

TOM
30-08-2010, 6:29pm
buy the old one secondhand, and you'll get good optics, and better handling - it's got an aperture ring

I @ M
30-08-2010, 6:38pm
and better handling - it's got an aperture ring

Tom, could you ( or anyone for that matter ) please tell me why an aperture ring is such a valuable addition / deletion from a lens.

I rather like being able to simply dial in aperture adjustment ( in 1/3 stops ) via a convenient dial on the camera body.

Am I missing the point of something? :confused013

Lance B
30-08-2010, 6:43pm
Tom, could you ( or anyone for that matter ) please tell me why an aperture ring is such a valuable addition / deletion from a lens.

I rather like being able to simply dial in aperture adjustment ( in 1/3 stops ) via a convenient dial on the camera body.

Am I missing the point of something? :confused013

You got me, too. I see no real advantage in an aperture ring. :confused013

TOM
30-08-2010, 6:59pm
canon glass is arguably better (more variety and faster glass) than nikon, but the thing that nikon fans have always held their hat on is their backwards compatibility with their mount. as we know, canon changed their mount in the 80's, meaning that older lenses were no longer compatible. but try mounting a g mount lens on an f4. okay, so you may not want to shoot with an f4, but maybe you want to use some your g lens with some of the new mirrorless cameras....no can't do that. if nikon were going to make the backwards compatibility of their lenses obsolete, then they should have just changed the mount like canon did.....then they would have a more versatile mount. the only reason they don't include the ring, is to cut costs. hey i've bought a couple of g lenses, the 24-70, and the 70-200, and they work fine on new cameras, but i prefer the more tactile feel of a ring, I find it quicker to use, and i wouldn't have thought that it would cost nikon alot to implement. give me a physical dial on camera over a command wheel any day.

I @ M
30-08-2010, 7:24pm
Dunno about that theory Tom, the 'g' lenses work fine on all of the new DSLRs as well as the F6 and my F65.
Coincidentally, the 'd' lenses and some of the ai / ais lenses work equally as well, if that isn't backwards compatibility I'm not sure what is. OK, so a couple of bodies missed out on the dual usage capability along the way but I guess Nikon figured that by delivering optical refinement at a lesser cost by the deletion of an aperture ring that they would only be inconveniencing a very minor part of their customer base.

They are after all a company that requires profit to stay in operation and not a philanthropic organisation beholden to photographers that want to keep old gear going rather than spend $$ on new equipment.

And I still can't see why a command dial doesn't offer a much more user friendly and accurate metering method at a finger tip control than the 'old' lens barrel ring way.

JM Tran
30-08-2010, 7:28pm
And I still can't see why a command dial doesn't offer a much more user friendly and accurate metering method at a finger tip control than the 'old' lens barrel ring way.

damn straight:)

TOM
30-08-2010, 7:31pm
optical refinement at a lesser cost by the deletion of an aperture ring that they would only be inconveniencing a very minor part of their customer base.

that'd be great if they actually charged less for their lenses, and it's more than a few bodies that miss out. it's every body before the f5/f100. sure they work well without the ring, i just find them slower to use, less intuitive. but that is true of the shutter dial aswell. i'm not really that disturbed by it, and i can fully appreciate why nikon have done it, just given the choice, i'd have the ring.

campo
30-08-2010, 7:33pm
damn straight:)

same here...i have full aperture control under one finger and full shutter control under the another...not sure how that's a disability

TOM
30-08-2010, 7:38pm
and I'm certainly enjoying using all of my lenses from my different camera systems on my Oly EP1 for hi res video and images.

i guess what i'm trying to say is, if it doesn't cost more, what is the advantage of NOT having the ring?

I @ M
30-08-2010, 8:38pm
that'd be great if they actually charged less for their lenses, and it's more than a few bodies that miss out. it's every body before the f5/f100.

I suppose in real terms one must have to wonder how much MORE we would be paying for their latest offerings if they had left the aperture rings on the lenses. Nobody ever said that Nikon lenses were ever cheap / affordable or even the ultimate in value but it is purely a simple economic decision to suit their business model. Once again, it may be any film body before the F5/F100 that can't use a 'g' lens but looking at it from a business perspective (Nikon's) how many people are still using F5/F100 bodies? The ones that are using them are probably quite happy with the glass they already own and not likely to update lenses without buying a new body anyway so they rank on the minus scale in Nikon's business decision making process when it comes to the retention of an aperture ring.




i guess what i'm trying to say is, if it doesn't cost more, what is the advantage of NOT having the ring?

The advantage of not having an aperture ring is that one only has to move a finger 10mm or so from the shutter button to change apertures by 1/3 stops instead of having to reach further and be only able to change apertures by 1/2 stops as I see it.

TOM
30-08-2010, 9:00pm
The advantage of not having an aperture ring is that one only has to move a finger 10mm or so from the shutter button to change apertures by 1/3 stops instead of having to reach further and be only able to change apertures by 1/2 stops as I see it.

yeah sure, but I have used my 17-35 on my d3 alot, and have the choice between the ring, and the finger dials. choice is good, and there's no harm in having it there if you are one who wants to use the finger dials. i still have stepless exposures with some older lenses put into Ap priority.

anyway, it really doesn't effect the final image, i'm just a little disappointed that canon/nikon are going this way. given the choice between the two lenses new, even if they were the same price, the versatility of the older lens would win everytime.

arthurking83
30-08-2010, 10:13pm
.... the only reason they don't include the ring, is to cut costs. ....

I would have thought weather sealing and a more reliable mechanism and manufacturing process would have been foremost in their minds, rather than saving a few dollars on a multi thousand dollar lens.

Where there is direct access from an external moving part of an item, to operate the inner workings of that item, would require a complicated sealing mechanism to inhibit the ingress of external 'elements'(dust/moisture/etc) into the inner casing. If the part is a moving, then there is also the chance for that part to wear out(highly unlikely, but not impossible). Aperture rings have been known to go stiff on various models of lenses, so problems with mechanical components such as these have been known to cause problems, as such.
AFAIK, I cannot remember any of the non G lenses to be fully weather sealed, as the G lenses can be(I'm sure someone will correct me on that one tho.. I just don't know of any)

I have both types as well, and find it annoying, like Andrew, that I can't access 1/3 stop aperture increments on my Ais lenses.

There are advantages in having an aperture ring tho ... these reasons are too few and a bit too technical to worry about(IMO).
For every G type lens that doesn't work on older film bodies, there are a zillion more Nikon or other types of lenses with aperture rings to mount onto legacy camera bodies such as F4's and suchlike, so I can't really see it as a problem personally.

FWIW, for the case where the lens won't work on a F4, it'd probably be prudent to seek out an F100 for the purpose of using these G lenses more effectively on an old film body(or F90/x, or F5.. or whatever).

TOM
30-08-2010, 10:23pm
Some good points there re. weather sealing AK. I guess that could be an advantage to some.

arthurking83
30-08-2010, 10:50pm
OK.. but in having said that, there are the advantages of having the aperture ring too.

Lens reversal. without an aperture ring, you need to jimmy the aperture prong open(not a dangerous proposition, but this can;t be an 'ideal' solution either.

Using a non coupled bellows(do aperture coupled bellowses even exist??)
Mount a new uber sharp g lens onto a bellows for that real magnfication factor and once again, you get the situation of a black vf, or a jimmied aperture prong(again) with no dof in the image.

my fave, and one reason I sometimes like to use particular lenses.
Real time DOF when using live view...... at least on the D300.
From my understanding, I think the D3 series has DOFP when using liveview, whereas the D300(that I know of, at least) doesn't. Mount any CPU coupled lens, and use liveview and you can't operate the DOFP feature. It just doesn't do anything. Sometimes I use lv mode and want to see the actual DOF or to increase contrast in the image with stopping down, and I need to use a non cpu and non G lens.
I dare say that this issue is due to the CPU rather than the G type lens design, but the two go hand in hand. You can tape up the CPU contacts, but then you lose the ability to communicate with the lens(via the sub command wheel), so aperture will not adjust.

Why is this important? Sometimes when i shoot a subject that's very bright against a very dark surrounding environ, using liveview(best method to get perfect focus every time!!), you need to stop the lens down. Doing this then gives you more detail in the bright subject against a dark background.
Specifically the moon!. Because of the dark surrounding sky when shooting the moon at certain focal lengths, the sensor compensates for the darkness by increasing sensitivity in the review screen. This makes the moon a whited out blob, with the lens wide open(as all lenses are when mounted to the camera) Normally you'd want to use DOFP to stop the lens down, but of course it doesn't work in lv mode. What I do with my Tammy 300/2.8 with or without any of the TC's mounted is to stoip down to as far as f/29 or smaller, and this gives me back the detail in the moons surface. Where the moon is a bright ball of fire with zero detail, I can now see the surface much more clearly and can make out detail easily.
Is this really important!?

Yes! I have two kids that love to look through telescopes.
With the 2 tc's mounted, the 300/2.8 becomes a 800+ mm lens, using lv my kids see the moon through the telescope on the review screen, instead of having to squint through the harder to see vf :th3:

saves me on having to get a telescope for my kids, as my pop bought us kids when we were younger.. keeps them amused for the right price!... free :D

Lance B
01-09-2010, 3:37pm
canon glass is arguably better (more variety and faster glass) than nikon, but the thing that nikon fans have always held their hat on is their backwards compatibility with their mount.

I hope you are implying that Canon glass is better because they have more variety than Nikon glass? I know you added it into brackets, but it is still not 100% clear of your intent. I agree they have more variety, but this does not mean that their indivivdual lenses are better IQwise etc.


as we know, canon changed their mount in the 80's, meaning that older lenses were no longer compatible. but try mounting a g mount lens on an f4. okay, so you may not want to shoot with an f4, but maybe you want to use some your g lens with some of the new mirrorless cameras....no can't do that. if nikon were going to make the backwards compatibility of their lenses obsolete, then they should have just changed the mount like canon did.....then they would have a more versatile mount. the only reason they don't include the ring, is to cut costs. hey i've bought a couple of g lenses, the 24-70, and the 70-200, and they work fine on new cameras, but i prefer the more tactile feel of a ring, I find it quicker to use, and i wouldn't have thought that it would cost nikon alot to implement. give me a physical dial on camera over a command wheel any day.

The command dial works for me, but everyone is different. :)

ving
01-09-2010, 3:49pm
if anyone is getting the new one and they no longer want the old version, feel free to give it to me ;)

N*A*M
01-09-2010, 4:02pm
you can have my old one for a bargain price of $1999 :P

i will pass on the AF-S 85 for now, but a new 35/1.4 might pique my interest

campo
01-09-2010, 5:22pm
you can have my old one for a bargain price of $1999 :P

i will pass on the AF-S 85 for now, but a new 35/1.4 might pique my interest

same here, not willing to part with the old just yet...a new 35/1.4 is at the top of my wishlist

zollo
01-09-2010, 5:54pm
[QUOTE=TOM;665782]yeah sure, but I have used my 17-35 on my d3 alot, and have the choice between the ring, and the finger dials. choice is good, and there's no harm in having it there if you are one who wants to use the finger dials. i still have stepless exposures with some older lenses put into Ap priority.
QUOTE]

you have to lock the aperture ring on d-type lenses to control aperture in camera, so its not really a "choice" if anything, a PITA remembering to lock it

Sar NOP
01-09-2010, 8:04pm
I went to pick up mine yesterday and today I spent 3 hours shooting with this new baby : 900 photos, all @f/1.4 !!! :eek::eek:



#1
http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/3262/cb48616resize2.jpg



Crop 100%
http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/7654/cb48616crop100.jpg





#2
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/6531/cb49132resize2.jpg


Crop 100%
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/940/cb49132crop100.jpg

Lance B
02-09-2010, 3:15pm
Wow, that swamp hen shot is amazing! :th3:

TEITZY
04-09-2010, 9:35am
Some more sample images. The bokeh on these looks much better than some of the early samples.

http://www.wretch.cc/blog/wingmanzero/10131272

Cheers
Leigh

N*A*M
05-09-2010, 1:01am
those shots are great sar

also, the new samples teitzy posted... if you're a guy and you're just looking at bokeh in pics like that, you must really love photography! hubba hubba

I @ M
05-09-2010, 7:04am
the new samples teitzy posted... if you're a guy and you're just looking at bokeh in pics like that, you must really love photography! hubba hubba

Yeah, I know what you mean, I'm a fan of bright green motorcycles too. :rolleyes:

kaiser
05-09-2010, 11:42am
A wedding with the 85/1.4G ( not mine )

http://brianblog.net/2010/09/kathy-mark-new-nikon-85mm-1-4g-wedding-renaissance-westchester-hotel/

TEITZY
08-09-2010, 12:01am
Here's another review. It has some serious vignetting on full frame wide open. CA is not too flash either. Looks like these guys think the Samyang is better all round value than the new Nikkor :D

http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=264

Cheers
Leigh

Sar NOP
08-09-2010, 9:01pm
Here's another review. It has some serious vignetting on full frame wide open. CA is not too flash either. Looks like these guys think the Samyang is better all round value than the new Nikkor :D

http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=264

Cheers
Leigh
Looks like they love joking on cheapy stuffs...especially when they say at the end that the new Nikon is the best 85mm they have ever tested, better than the Zeiss and the Canon 85/1.2L ! :D

arthurking83
08-09-2010, 9:25pm
well that settles it then.... I'm getting the Samyang! :p

according to Dxo as well the level of CA is insane!

even taking into account the ability of many pp software to counter this problem, you'd think that one of Nikon's main priorities would have been to minimise ugly CA's?(and not rely on PP to do so).

LoCA's are the ugliest problem with wide open photography.

NatB
09-09-2010, 1:07am
so i'm guessing it's not worth selling the old 85/1.4 to get the new one then?

Sar NOP
09-09-2010, 7:06am
so i'm guessing it's not worth selling the old 85/1.4 to get the new one then?
Optically, the 85/1.4 AF-D is already a very good lens and if you want to improve it further you need considerable financial outlays. That's why the new 85/1.4 AF-S is much more expensive.

It's the same story between the 50/1.4 AF-D and the AF-S 50/1.4 G : you pay a lot more for sharpness on the edges of the frame at f/1.4 !!!

swifty
13-09-2010, 6:20pm
so i'm guessing it's not worth selling the old 85/1.4 to get the new one then?

But if u do, sell it to me :P