Nikon slayed it . And yes the Nikon skin looked more natural “most” of the time in your shots . Canon seemed to have a little more microcontrast. I just got the 85mm f/1.8 and the Z9 . I’ll probably get the 85mm f/1.2 someday. Pushing for a 135 so that’ll be setting me back after the Z9 and 85 f/1.8 S are paid off
Yes they did. I would not dare, though, comment on skin tone being more natural - because the images are "raw processed" with Adobe Camera Raw and I don;t know what profile was applied. And. And. Microcontrast - don't understand what you mean with that. Contour sharpness? Looking at DxO Mark for 1.2L glass they seemed not very sharp and with a T-stop of 1.5 at f/1.2 they were as "fast" as another vendor's f/1.4G that also tested at T-1.5. Or detail? That depends on the quality of raw processing and some detail related slider settings. The Z 85/1.8S is the sharpest lens in DxO Mark with the Z 50/.8S second, IIRC. I have all these 1.8S primes and they're great. Yes, AF has its moments of hunting that I need to solve with MF (that's manual focus, not mother f... - even when that's what I think occasionally). The Nikon shots to me were extremely easy to identify with a perfect score. It's not in the skin tone but in the blue in the model's sweater. Nikon is really better at that colour. The Z 85/1.2S? I had said I would not need such a lens in the past. I shot medium and large format - who needs a lens faster than f/2.8 ;) ? Only SLR shooters who get a dark viewfinder when daylight disappears, but at medium format we did not need that even. Well, after Matt Irwin's video on the Z 85/1.2S I went from "never" to "on the fence". In the meantime, I also bought the Z 105/2.8S macro lens for its 1:1 ability and being a great lens. Well, its rendition is beautiful. You have to test that! I don't need a 135 next to that. If you have a Z 70-200/2.8S accidentally (I never shot zoom lenses) then note that at 200/2.8 that lens has a depth of field comparable to the 85/1.2 . (I am well aware of the Circle of Confusion in the Depth of Field formula (*).) (*) Next to distance, focal length, aperture, Depth of Field depend on a parameter that is a composite of a few things: film/sensor resolution, lens resolution, processing, print/display size, viewing distance to print/display.
The rendering of the Nikon 85mm f1.2 is superb - the new cream machine. You can tell they really paid attention to the background blur and the transitioning across the frame. They also didn't make it too sharp which can actually be a problem with portrait lenses - see the Nikon 105mm f1.4 vs the Sigma version for an example of this. The section where the presenter asks for guesses on Nikon or Canon, the overall image and particularly bokeh balls definitely stand out in Nikon's favour.
Love the tip about which eye to focus on. I have so many pics of my kids and sometimes I accidentally have it on the wrong eye and it looks off, softer maybe. Sometimes it turns out great but you nailed it thank you I'll keep that in mind more often!
Thank you for this. I just got the 1.8 right before the 1.2 was announced. This video showcased the difference in quality perfectly. Overall the 1.8 is still fantastic for portraits, but I definitely wanna get this lens at some point. You earned a subscriber sir.
I had similar result with 85 1.8s and I was so confused as everyone talks great about it. Glad I have returned it. Surprisingly, Sigms 135mm was doing a great job which I ended up buying it instead.
i used to really want 1.2 but after years of run n gun work i live for lenses that are perfect at f4. 1.2 is great, this lens looks amazing but i'll take a 1.8. currently have the 85mm 1.8 tamron F mount for my DSLRs and have never felt the need to go to 1.2
Very informative video! Love your sample images and comparisons. And good cathch on the 1.8 not nailing the face on full lengths.. That's highly important in my book!
If you are want to stay compact and don’t shoot above 3200 iso I would strongly advice to invest in either a Fuji apsc camera or a M43 body and to buy the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (85mm or 112mm équivalent). The IQ and bokeh are amazing for a fraction of the price. If you want to shoot 35mm, the Nikon or Sigma 105mm 1.4 are great alternatives too.
Nice preview! BTW, it has also happened to me that the 85/1.8 has backfocused in some circumstances. I hope that Nikon solves this issue in a firmware upgrade.
Great review - thanks! One thing that stood out to me is the lens compression differences which I thought was odd - both being 85mm, you would the compression would be the same, but the Nikon looked flatter (@13:05 and @5:30) is it just me?
I think the camera is in the same place due to the fov of the background, but I think the model is 1/2 a step further back in the Nikon shot, hence the slightly flatter look. I like the color rendition on the Nikon more than the canon.
So much faster, lighter and quieter as the Canon one. And it feels good on a z9. The rf feels to heavy on a Canon. And the Skin Color in the Face is so Nice with the Nikon. And smoother from light to shadow
looks great. if I where making money with my system and had a z9.. I would order it on the spot. though also I love using older vintage goey MF lenses as well.. but each is a tool. in the modern paying shots... sharpens, hit focusing, and the extras better glass coatings for the boots as you showed. money well spent. I have my Lensbaby and probably pick up a Meyer-Optik Gorlitz Biotar 58mm f/1.5 II for emotional gooeyness.. But most paying gigs, sharpness and contrast is what pays the bills. That's the advantage of moving from older DSLR's to modern Mirrorless with top end glass. Just my thoughts.
#1 - She looks like Scarlett Johansson #2 - That 85 1.2 in ridiculous in a good way. I tested that and the noct out all in the same day after the b&h conference - I must say, that lens and the transition is amazing... like the level of smooth it is is outrageous.
I have avoided f1.2s in the past because I used to think they were too slow at focusing for fast events/sports. With these new motors, would you be comfortable using this lens for faster run-and-gun photography? Great video btw, thanks for continuing to put out the best content.
I would wait for the finished version and the running-toward-camera reviews to come out first. Jared said this pre-release model was great (I think) in the walking-toward-camera test, so that's a good sign. Running is altogether another beast. And, this one's an f/1.2 lens (very shallow depth of field), so the margin to misfocus increases over, let's say, the physically smaller-size aperture of an f/1.8 85mm lens. But, who knows - mirrorless focus technology has come a long way, so I'd rather just wait for the official final retail version and take it from there. 👍
@pianofinger The best qualifier to me is nervous. You can feel that it has a lot of work and that there is reason why Canon used their big boy USM motor. The AF performance considering the amount of glass is impressive.
I had the exact same focusing problem with the 35mm 1.8 on the Nikon Z7ii. I shot it at F4 for some wedding party shots and every single photo was out of focus, up close it was razor sharp even at f2
Awesome Comparison... I shoot with the 85 1.8 and the Z9... I have noticed this focus not on the spot when shooting at a distance... And it being spot on close up... To overcome this, I use single point autofocus... I always thought its the Nikon bodies/their algorithm (as you have mentioned as well)... But if the 1.2 focuses just fine... then I am confused... Did you get Nikon to comment on it... You do an EXCELLENT job for us Nikon shooters to bring forward the weaknesses so they can be fixed...
I had the same problem with 85 f/1.8 on Nikon Z9, today I have the same problem on Nikon Z8. If I close the aperture down to f/2.2 the problem goes away. But that's not what I want to do with this lens. Haven't found another solution yet. Maybe the solution would be to buy 85 f / 1.2
I use film cameras as well as digital still and have lenses that are 1.2-1.8 and i am able to manually focus those all the time its just tough sometimes because focus is really finicky and easy to knock the focus out of where it needs to be.
10 years ago a got my self a D90 I started photography. A few years later I discovered a guy sniffing lenses on CZcams. so many good advice, so many great videos. Thnx you Jared. I wish one day will meet so I can tel you this in person. Thnx again for all of this. Stay fro, shoot RAW ❤️🫡
The 85 1.2 looks interesting, but out of my budget (I'll keep shooting with my 85 1.8 Z). The 26mm is a bit of a head-scratcher. IN some respects, I can see why they released it (it's a pancake, whereas the 28mm 2.8 Z is not so much, but would have liked to maybe see a 24mm pancake instead as I feel that might be more appropriate, and on a DX (APS-C) camera that means a 35mm equivalent too. I guess Nikon IS planning a 24mm DX lens though, so there is still hope... Now I'm just waiting for the release of a 200-600 or some other 200-500 F-mount replacement, but for Z bodies.
Even with the shitty price of it had been a 24mm 2.8 or lower it would be an auto buy for me. That would be 35mm equivalent on aps-c and then 24mm on full frame? That would own.
I've been waiting (not so) patiently for this Z 85/1.2 ~~ not for portraits or events/weddings, but for Outdoor Lifestyle, Landscape, ASTRO/Night + Product photography. Particularly for Astro tho.
@@johndavolta3124 Some people might want to get creative or express themselves in different styles. This includes landscapes where everything isn't pinsharp corner to corner.
Jared, was wondering if you have done a video of the Nikon Z MC 105mm as a portrait lens. I know you can’t possibly do everything. But…thank you for your time.
@U.S. Grant Yes, correct. Most of us already know that technical aspect. My comment was aimed at the obvious difference in appearance of the images taken at the exact same settings and ambient conditions. I didn't want to get technical in my initial post as most are only interested in the visual result of the image. Nonetheless, thanks for your input as it is helpful for those who may still not be aware of such facts. 👌
@@Joseph-iu6ip LOL. You are assuming too much. T-stop is not a secret to anybody and variations are usually quite insignificant, as the coatings and the number of elements are broadly comparable. You can see the difference in pictures of at least 1/3 stop, it's clearly the result of camera ISO.
In the blind comparison I picked right for softer bokeh (and better tones). The left had a bit of onion ring and highlight/aberration around the bokeh balls.
It was the cat's eye shape that killed me. It was SO pronounced! But the truth is that no client looks at the bokeh and complains about it. Only professionals ever really complain about it.
@@swistedfilms cats eye didn’t seem too bad, was slightly better than the canon in my opinion. But I own the canon RF 85 1.2 and it’s cat eye bokeh never bothered me.
@@swistedfilms yes, I think "bokeh balls" is the wrong test of a lens's out-of-focus characteristic, except in front of a Christmas tree, which is what Jared has to use. For me, it's all about the 'near out-of-focus' characteristic: is that part of the image discernible while soft to keep the viewer's eye returning to what is in focus. [5:52]
Why is the quality of the images much sharper in the viewfinder (or LCD) (6:59) than the actual image captured (7:17)? This issue seemed to be the same on my 50mm 1.2 s.
Mann I was thinking ok my 1.8 will still do the trick but even the compression on her face and body looked better with that 1.2 in the side by side. Now I'm torn if I want to go for this or wait to see if the 135 does come out this year.
For this test, a higher shutterspeed is preferred vs iso performance, since the higher shutterspeed will "eliminate" any chance of camerashake. But dont know if this is the reason behind this, in his test, or just a coincidence.
Jared had a video where he answered this question, but I couldn't find it with a quick search of his channel. He locks in a fast shutter speed to avoid any issue with the subject moving (sensor stabilization should handle camera shake). With cameras like the Z9 and R5, having the ISO float as high as ISO 1600 has little image quality effect.
2025. Hopefully the Z7III comes out this summer, along with the Z6III, both getting the Expeed7 processor. If the Z8 comes out this year, the Z7 series is over, and Nikon is dropping the $3000 price point, one they've one great with since the D700 in 2008.
Gotta appreciate the settings you can use while at F1.2. Here I am with my 200-600mm F6.3 shooting 1/125sec just to get ISO 6400 because it's overcast.
On Z6II it works great. On Z8 or Z9, there is such a problem both in full-length portraits and in facial ones. The only solution I found is to close it to f/2.2
Could you please do a nighttime star test when you get the production model, maybe a milky way comparison with Canon? Star shapes, the ultimate test of sharpness. You can try also Orion Nebula. I have my suspicion that canon lets more near infrared (Hydrogen Alpha wavelength) in and that is why the Canon skin colors. I think most of the people interested in these lenses will be astrophotographers. Can you AUTOFOCUS ON STARS? How about video of milky way or shooting stars?
105 1.4 - Is the real test. I don't feel it'll match the look of a longer focal length? Also z glass has cooler tones compared to f mount. But interesting review, thanks
@@CabbitCast right below them are the 28mm f/2.8 and 40mm f/2 on the same line. We are also counting on the 35mm f/1.2S, which I do hope happens, though it could be a 35mm f/1.4. You're probably right that it will be a 135mm f/1.8. I do think the size savings with f/2 may be worth it.
I'm really looking forward to getting this lens, but what I don't quite get is the cost compared to the Z 50mm f/1.2 S. The 50mm not only has more glass, but more specialty glass as well, along with more specialized coatings, such ARNEO. Both lenses are otherwise constructed similarly with respect to materials, are about the same size, weight and both have dual stepping motors -- and the 50mm even has an OLED panel, which I would imagine adds to the cost of construction. Why, then, is Nikon launching the 85mm f/1.2 at $700 US more than the 50mm f/1.2? I wonder if their answer is simply: "Because we can."
Because they can, and it helps their bottom line as they compete with the larger business (Canon is about 5x and Sony about 25x). I think very few photographers will say, "I would have bought it for $2300, but I refuse to for $2800." It also lets them discount it from time to time and still keep it over $2000.
Can you clarify the segment where you are talking about the 85 1.8 is back focusing at 1.8 but then it sounds like a different lens at 1.8 is tack sharp though you seem to be talking about the same lens. I watched that segment twice to make sure I didn’t miss something, maybe I did… and still missed it
Would be interesting to compare it with teh Sigma 85mm f 1,4.... Have the F mount 85 f 1,8 and the older 85, Af-D 1,4 and the Sigma Art 85mm f1,4... The last one is nearla a bit to sharp, but i love it... And jes, its heavy and bulky....
Never tried the Sigma, I have the other two, and several more recent lenses. I still consider the 85 1.4D my best portrait lens. Not the sharpest, but beautiful rendering, unique. Never going to sell it.
@@ilmatanela1816 I had the AF 1,4D, but it got a problem with the aperture, so i brought it to the service, it took more than two months to get parts from japan... So i bought the AFS 1,8, and got short after a good deal for the Sigma... As i take pics from bands and now theatre, i like the low light and fast focus possibilities. But for "normal" portraits, its too sharp.... Need only the AFS 1,4 to make a compair, and then choose which stays....
Only you know the scale you would use for "much better". For what I do, the 105 f/1.4G is still great. If I got hired to photograph a wedding later this year, I would reserve a 85 f/1.2S rental immediately, especially if the 35mm f/1.2S is also released this year.
The extra size, just like the 50mm 1.2, might be because of designing it for minimal focus breathing. How does it compare in that regard against the Canon and others?
Big and heavy lenses look pro. People don't want small 50mm f/1.2 like the Sony GM. Cameras need to be big and heavy like the Z9, and the lenses need to be heavy and long like the Nikkor.
I do not think Jared Polin has been very fair to Nikon. The reason I keep watching his videos is that he is a great photographer. There are so many CZcamsrs who cannot take a good photograph if it could save their life. So if Polin likes this lens, I guess he really liked it
I had the same problem with 85 f/1.8 on Nikon Z9, today I have the same problem on Nikon Z8. If I close the aperture down to f/2.2 the problem goes away. But that's not what I want to do with this lens. Haven't found another solution yet. Interesting that on Z6II it works fine.
The most crazy honest photographer on youtube , when you become 50 years old you think you will be still in youtube ? and what is the future for your channel ?
I'm already going to have to finance this camera..... was really hoping it came with a lens. That's gonna be an additional $800 to get a lens for this beast.... 🙃
What will 10-20% improvement do for you? Better images for your clients? Yes, upgrade. More satisfaction of taking the best image you can, and feeling challenged to match your abilities with the camera/lens? Yes, upgrade. Anything else, probably stick with the 85mm f/1.4G.
@@UnconventionalReasoning the f1.4 from the F mount is indeed a wonderful lens, and I think most of us that shoot with it are gonna think long and hard 0:14 before making the switch. But at the end of the day, if you shoot portraits in studio - this may be the most important focal length in the camera bag, and probably worth getting the bear in class lens if we can manage it.
@@johnpeterson7264 Yes, that's what I meant by "better images for your clients". Though studio portraits may minimize the advantages of the 85mm f/1.2S over the 85mm f/1.4G. Environmental portraits may be where the new lens separates itself.
Can't wait to get it! Looks amazing. Thanks for this review!!
Nikon slayed it . And yes the Nikon skin looked more natural “most” of the time in your shots . Canon seemed to have a little more microcontrast.
I just got the 85mm f/1.8 and the Z9 . I’ll probably get the 85mm f/1.2 someday. Pushing for a 135 so that’ll be setting me back after the Z9 and 85 f/1.8 S are paid off
The differences are so damn small these days but damn Nikon always have absolute superb files. Comming from a lifetime Canon guy
Yes they did. I would not dare, though, comment on skin tone being more natural - because the images are "raw processed" with Adobe Camera Raw and I don;t know what profile was applied. And. And.
Microcontrast - don't understand what you mean with that. Contour sharpness? Looking at DxO Mark for 1.2L glass they seemed not very sharp and with a T-stop of 1.5 at f/1.2 they were as "fast" as another vendor's f/1.4G that also tested at T-1.5.
Or detail? That depends on the quality of raw processing and some detail related slider settings.
The Z 85/1.8S is the sharpest lens in DxO Mark with the Z 50/.8S second, IIRC. I have all these 1.8S primes and they're great.
Yes, AF has its moments of hunting that I need to solve with MF (that's manual focus, not mother f... - even when that's what I think occasionally).
The Nikon shots to me were extremely easy to identify with a perfect score. It's not in the skin tone but in the blue in the model's sweater. Nikon is really better at that colour.
The Z 85/1.2S? I had said I would not need such a lens in the past. I shot medium and large format - who needs a lens faster than f/2.8 ;) ? Only SLR shooters who get a dark viewfinder when daylight disappears, but at medium format we did not need that even.
Well, after Matt Irwin's video on the Z 85/1.2S I went from "never" to "on the fence".
In the meantime, I also bought the Z 105/2.8S macro lens for its 1:1 ability and being a great lens. Well, its rendition is beautiful. You have to test that! I don't need a 135 next to that.
If you have a Z 70-200/2.8S accidentally (I never shot zoom lenses) then note that at 200/2.8 that lens has a depth of field comparable to the 85/1.2 . (I am well aware of the Circle of Confusion in the Depth of Field formula (*).)
(*) Next to distance, focal length, aperture, Depth of Field depend on a parameter that is a composite of a few things: film/sensor resolution, lens resolution, processing, print/display size, viewing distance to print/display.
The rendering of the Nikon 85mm f1.2 is superb - the new cream machine. You can tell they really paid attention to the background blur and the transitioning across the frame. They also didn't make it too sharp which can actually be a problem with portrait lenses - see the Nikon 105mm f1.4 vs the Sigma version for an example of this. The section where the presenter asks for guesses on Nikon or Canon, the overall image and particularly bokeh balls definitely stand out in Nikon's favour.
Wow...Nikon image looks stunning 🎉🎉
Love the tip about which eye to focus on. I have so many pics of my kids and sometimes I accidentally have it on the wrong eye and it looks off, softer maybe. Sometimes it turns out great but you nailed it thank you I'll keep that in mind more often!
Makes me want to take up portrait photography.
Thank you for this. I just got the 1.8 right before the 1.2 was announced. This video showcased the difference in quality perfectly. Overall the 1.8 is still fantastic for portraits, but I definitely wanna get this lens at some point. You earned a subscriber sir.
The only bad thing about this is that I don't already have one. ☺️
Besides the excellent lens, Sydney is the most beautiful model you ever had for those tests :)
I had similar result with 85 1.8s and I was so confused as everyone talks great about it. Glad I have returned it. Surprisingly, Sigms 135mm was doing a great job which I ended up buying it instead.
Thanks for not bashing my z9 and I am ordering today been waiting on 1.2 as I shot Sony and Nikon my closest lens to it now is the sigma 105 1.4
I want this lens!
Fair, thorough, well thought out review. Thanks!
I'm definitely going to get this lens.....i'm very happy to see not a bunch of unnecessary crap on the side of the lens, very basic.
I advise that the sniff test goes before the wind test. Because of possible influence from breakfast or lunch.
i used to really want 1.2 but after years of run n gun work i live for lenses that are perfect at f4. 1.2 is great, this lens looks amazing but i'll take a 1.8. currently have the 85mm 1.8 tamron F mount for my DSLRs and have never felt the need to go to 1.2
Very informative video! Love your sample images and comparisons. And good cathch on the 1.8 not nailing the face on full lengths.. That's highly important in my book!
Have we gotten too picky about the microscopic in/out of focus?
cant wait for the 35
Great job Nikon, thanks. Now please release 85mm f/1.4 for most of us.
I put my pre order once I woke up this morning. So I'll be sure to get it shipped to me.
Thanks! For my budget, I think the 1.8 would work fine for me. I was thinking about the 85mm or the 105mm, I am not sure which would be option.
Ordered. Should be in my hands in a couple of days. Thanks for the comprehensive review.
Is it Worth buying bro I shoot weddings and alot of portraits
Nice test JP
It's great you can mount all those lenses on the Z mount, including the canon one.
If you are want to stay compact and don’t shoot above 3200 iso I would strongly advice to invest in either a Fuji apsc camera or a M43 body and to buy the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (85mm or 112mm équivalent). The IQ and bokeh are amazing for a fraction of the price. If you want to shoot 35mm, the Nikon or Sigma 105mm 1.4 are great alternatives too.
Nice review, now I'm having lens lust 😛
Moon Dust, I. Am. Sold. lol
I'm really excited for it! Thanks for the comparison pics!
Have it; love it!
Nikon somehow looks brighter at F1.2
Did you calibrate the 85 1.8 lens? That might be why it was back focusing.
Nice preview! BTW, it has also happened to me that the 85/1.8 has backfocused in some circumstances. I hope that Nikon solves this issue in a firmware upgrade.
Yes as demonstrated close ups focus perfectly but full body portraits tend to be an issue
I'd love to try this lens out with some astrophotography just like the 50mm f/1.2. Pre-order has been submitted.
Great review - thanks! One thing that stood out to me is the lens compression differences which I thought was odd - both being 85mm, you would the compression would be the same, but the Nikon looked flatter (@13:05 and @5:30) is it just me?
I think the camera is in the same place due to the fov of the background, but I think the model is 1/2 a step further back in the Nikon shot, hence the slightly flatter look. I like the color rendition on the Nikon more than the canon.
thanks Manny Ortiz for comming 1st :) I'm here for the wind tunnel test.
So much faster, lighter and quieter as the Canon one. And it feels good on a z9. The rf feels to heavy on a Canon. And the Skin Color in the Face is so Nice with the Nikon. And smoother from light to shadow
Any chance you compare the Nikon 85 1.2 to the Sigma Art 85 1.4? That could come out interesting
looks great. if I where making money with my system and had a z9.. I would order it on the spot. though also I love using older vintage goey MF lenses as well.. but each is a tool. in the modern paying shots... sharpens, hit focusing, and the extras better glass coatings for the boots as you showed. money well spent. I have my Lensbaby and probably pick up a Meyer-Optik Gorlitz Biotar 58mm f/1.5 II for emotional gooeyness.. But most paying gigs, sharpness and contrast is what pays the bills. That's the advantage of moving from older DSLR's to modern Mirrorless with top end glass. Just my thoughts.
#1 - She looks like Scarlett Johansson
#2 - That 85 1.2 in ridiculous in a good way. I tested that and the noct out all in the same day after the b&h conference
- I must say, that lens and the transition is amazing... like the level of smooth it is is outrageous.
it is about both camera. since both top line camera body's for both brand
I have avoided f1.2s in the past because I used to think they were too slow at focusing for fast events/sports. With these new motors, would you be comfortable using this lens for faster run-and-gun photography? Great video btw, thanks for continuing to put out the best content.
I would wait for the finished version and the running-toward-camera reviews to come out first.
Jared said this pre-release model was great (I think) in the walking-toward-camera test, so that's a good sign.
Running is altogether another beast.
And, this one's an f/1.2 lens (very shallow depth of field), so the margin to misfocus increases over, let's say, the physically smaller-size aperture of an f/1.8 85mm lens.
But, who knows - mirrorless focus technology has come a long way, so I'd rather just wait for the official final retail version and take it from there. 👍
I have the RF 85 1.2 and its really snappy. I can’t account for other brands however.
You just have to look at Sony with their ultra fast linear motors to know what is possible. Time will tell if Nikon does as good a job.
Manny did comment how fast it was in his review. But, as said above I would def wait to see how the final production performs before the dive in.
@pianofinger The best qualifier to me is nervous. You can feel that it has a lot of work and that there is reason why Canon used their big boy USM motor. The AF performance considering the amount of glass is impressive.
I had the exact same focusing problem with the 35mm 1.8 on the Nikon Z7ii. I shot it at F4 for some wedding party shots and every single photo was out of focus, up close it was razor sharp even at f2
Awesome Comparison... I shoot with the 85 1.8 and the Z9... I have noticed this focus not on the spot when shooting at a distance... And it being spot on close up... To overcome this, I use single point autofocus... I always thought its the Nikon bodies/their algorithm (as you have mentioned as well)... But if the 1.2 focuses just fine... then I am confused...
Did you get Nikon to comment on it... You do an EXCELLENT job for us Nikon shooters to bring forward the weaknesses so they can be fixed...
I had the same problem with 85 f/1.8 on Nikon Z9, today I have the same problem on Nikon Z8. If I close the aperture down to f/2.2 the problem goes away. But that's not what I want to do with this lens. Haven't found another solution yet. Maybe the solution would be to buy 85 f / 1.2
@@KGMSSMGK I have this slightly problem with my 14-30 f4 as well... Jared showed this on the Z8 review as well...
I use film cameras as well as digital still and have lenses that are 1.2-1.8 and i am able to manually focus those all the time its just tough sometimes because focus is really finicky and easy to knock the focus out of where it needs to be.
The difference between both Nikon at f1.8 is the vignette of the f1.8 S version is pretty noticable.
Wow, those lenses (Sidney’s eyes)!
This lens show class..
What is that product from Atomos, on top of the camera? Thanks! :)
10 years ago a got my self a D90
I started photography. A few years later I discovered a guy sniffing lenses on CZcams. so many good advice, so many great videos.
Thnx you Jared. I wish one day will meet so I can tel you this in person. Thnx again for all of this.
Stay fro, shoot RAW ❤️🫡
The 85 1.2 looks interesting, but out of my budget (I'll keep shooting with my 85 1.8 Z). The 26mm is a bit of a head-scratcher. IN some respects, I can see why they released it (it's a pancake, whereas the 28mm 2.8 Z is not so much, but would have liked to maybe see a 24mm pancake instead as I feel that might be more appropriate, and on a DX (APS-C) camera that means a 35mm equivalent too. I guess Nikon IS planning a 24mm DX lens though, so there is still hope... Now I'm just waiting for the release of a 200-600 or some other 200-500 F-mount replacement, but for Z bodies.
Even with the shitty price of it had been a 24mm 2.8 or lower it would be an auto buy for me. That would be 35mm equivalent on aps-c and then 24mm on full frame? That would own.
Any lens over like 300-400 is more than im willing to invest in.
Both images at 9:23 are shot at 1.8? Strange that the background blur amount differs so much at the same aperture...
I spotted the Nikon over the Canon right away but it wasnt due to the bokeh. It was the Nikon had better color to the images shown.
I've been waiting (not so) patiently for this Z 85/1.2 ~~ not for portraits or events/weddings, but for Outdoor Lifestyle, Landscape, ASTRO/Night + Product photography. Particularly for Astro tho.
Landscape?
@@johndavolta3124 Some people might want to get creative or express themselves in different styles. This includes landscapes where everything isn't pinsharp corner to corner.
@@TheDeltaMoo good point
Will you have a video like this for 26/2.8 ?
Are you going to be doing another comparison video with the Nikon 85 1.2?
Now that the 135 P
lena is out, which one do you think is better?
Hey can we get a nikon 26mm f2.8 lens review as well
Wow fantastic. Looks great! I'm jealous..
I'm talking about the model!! LOL!!!
Outstanding Video Sir .....
Jared, was wondering if you have done a video of the Nikon Z MC 105mm as a portrait lens. I know you can’t possibly do everything. But…thank you for your time.
Sounds like the Nikon Money Truck came home to deliver this lens lol.... Thank you for a solid review!!
Skittles does kick ass though.
Waited years for this lens..
Same here. Now I can be a *real* photographer!
The Nikon 85mm f/1.2 is brighter than the Canon version and also has rounder bokeh balls at f/1.2.
ISOs are not the same on different cameras. It has nothing to do with the lenses.
@U.S. Grant
Yes, correct.
Most of us already know that technical aspect.
My comment was aimed at the obvious difference in appearance of the images taken at the exact same settings and ambient conditions.
I didn't want to get technical in my initial post as most are only interested in the visual result of the image.
Nonetheless, thanks for your input as it is helpful for those who may still not be aware of such facts. 👌
@@USGrant21st you should research t-stop (Light Transmittance in a Lens).
@@Joseph-iu6ip LOL. You are assuming too much. T-stop is not a secret to anybody and variations are usually quite insignificant, as the coatings and the number of elements are broadly comparable. You can see the difference in pictures of at least 1/3 stop, it's clearly the result of camera ISO.
@@USGrant21st good I see you’ve done some research.
In the blind comparison I picked right for softer bokeh (and better tones). The left had a bit of onion ring and highlight/aberration around the bokeh balls.
It was the cat's eye shape that killed me. It was SO pronounced! But the truth is that no client looks at the bokeh and complains about it. Only professionals ever really complain about it.
@@swistedfilms cats eye didn’t seem too bad, was slightly better than the canon in my opinion. But I own the canon RF 85 1.2 and it’s cat eye bokeh never bothered me.
@@swistedfilms yes, I think "bokeh balls" is the wrong test of a lens's out-of-focus characteristic, except in front of a Christmas tree, which is what Jared has to use. For me, it's all about the 'near out-of-focus' characteristic: is that part of the image discernible while soft to keep the viewer's eye returning to what is in focus. [5:52]
Not the exact same framing between Canon and Nikon in the side to side studio photos. Is it due to the lenses ?
Alright brother!! A doubt does the Z9 or Z8 have the option to crop the zoom like Sony?
Why is the quality of the images much sharper in the viewfinder (or LCD) (6:59) than the actual image captured (7:17)? This issue seemed to be the same on my 50mm 1.2 s.
Love those round balls!
Mann I was thinking ok my 1.8 will still do the trick but even the compression on her face and body looked better with that 1.2 in the side by side. Now I'm torn if I want to go for this or wait to see if the 135 does come out this year.
Nice! Q. Sony ZV-E10, will Sony update the sensor & stabilization anytime soon, should I wait to buy? what's your thoughts? thx
Nice 👌 what you udjng to screen record ?
Hi might be a noob question but wanted to ask why Jared was shooting at ISO250 instead of ISO100? Any reason to bump the ISO in bright day light?
For this test, a higher shutterspeed is preferred vs iso performance, since the higher shutterspeed will "eliminate" any chance of camerashake. But dont know if this is the reason behind this, in his test, or just a coincidence.
It's Pennsylvania. You need all the ISO you can get.
I'm a native of the Keystone State, BTW.
Jared had a video where he answered this question, but I couldn't find it with a quick search of his channel. He locks in a fast shutter speed to avoid any issue with the subject moving (sensor stabilization should handle camera shake). With cameras like the Z9 and R5, having the ISO float as high as ISO 1600 has little image quality effect.
Compared to the 1.8 the 1.2 had creamier background too, um was that because of the back focus or something else?
The creamier background was the exact intent of the lens design. I noticed the same thing, especially with the tree in the mural behind Sydney. [9:30]
9:34 GREAT side by side. This is a pretty critical chunk of data!
Wowow fast update. When will the z8 launch btw??
2025.
Hopefully the Z7III comes out this summer, along with the Z6III, both getting the Expeed7 processor.
If the Z8 comes out this year, the Z7 series is over, and Nikon is dropping the $3000 price point, one they've one great with since the D700 in 2008.
Gotta appreciate the settings you can use while at F1.2. Here I am with my 200-600mm F6.3 shooting 1/125sec just to get ISO 6400 because it's overcast.
That 200 - 600 is in b&h cart right now and after using it in Xmas I'm in love.
So, you're saying that the 85mm 1.8 misses focus when you are further back, but when you get in closer, it nails the focus?
On Z6II it works great. On Z8 or Z9, there is such a problem both in full-length portraits and in facial ones. The only solution I found is to close it to f/2.2
Could you please do a nighttime star test when you get the production model, maybe a milky way comparison with Canon? Star shapes, the ultimate test of sharpness. You can try also Orion Nebula. I have my suspicion that canon lets more near infrared (Hydrogen Alpha wavelength) in and that is why the Canon skin colors. I think most of the people interested in these lenses will be astrophotographers. Can you AUTOFOCUS ON STARS? How about video of milky way or shooting stars?
105 1.4 - Is the real test. I don't feel it'll match the look of a longer focal length? Also z glass has cooler tones compared to f mount. But interesting review, thanks
@@CabbitCast 135 f/2 or f/1.8, it is unclear which.
@@CabbitCast right below them are the 28mm f/2.8 and 40mm f/2 on the same line. We are also counting on the 35mm f/1.2S, which I do hope happens, though it could be a 35mm f/1.4. You're probably right that it will be a 135mm f/1.8. I do think the size savings with f/2 may be worth it.
I'm really looking forward to getting this lens, but what I don't quite get is the cost compared to the Z 50mm f/1.2 S. The 50mm not only has more glass, but more specialty glass as well, along with more specialized coatings, such ARNEO. Both lenses are otherwise constructed similarly with respect to materials, are about the same size, weight and both have dual stepping motors -- and the 50mm even has an OLED panel, which I would imagine adds to the cost of construction. Why, then, is Nikon launching the 85mm f/1.2 at $700 US more than the 50mm f/1.2? I wonder if their answer is simply: "Because we can."
Because they can, and it helps their bottom line as they compete with the larger business (Canon is about 5x and Sony about 25x). I think very few photographers will say, "I would have bought it for $2300, but I refuse to for $2800." It also lets them discount it from time to time and still keep it over $2000.
Marketing must have upped Fro’s fee. Just kidding, Fro. 😃
Can you clarify the segment where you are talking about the 85 1.8 is back focusing at 1.8 but then it sounds like a different lens at 1.8 is tack sharp though you seem to be talking about the same lens. I watched that segment twice to make sure I didn’t miss something, maybe I did… and still missed it
Would be interesting to compare it with teh Sigma 85mm f 1,4....
Have the F mount 85 f 1,8 and the older 85, Af-D 1,4 and the Sigma Art 85mm f1,4...
The last one is nearla a bit to sharp, but i love it...
And jes, its heavy and bulky....
me too, sigma 85mm 1.4 is sharp, and price good.
Never tried the Sigma, I have the other two, and several more recent lenses. I still consider the 85 1.4D my best portrait lens. Not the sharpest, but beautiful rendering, unique. Never going to sell it.
@@ilmatanela1816 I had the AF 1,4D, but it got a problem with the aperture, so i brought it to the service, it took more than two months to get parts from japan... So i bought the AFS 1,8, and got short after a good deal for the Sigma... As i take pics from bands and now theatre, i like the low light and fast focus possibilities.
But for "normal" portraits, its too sharp.... Need only the AFS 1,4 to make a compair, and then choose which stays....
S5II review?
Canon Red Ring is King! 💪
Nikon should've kept the Gold Ring!
If I own the 85 1.4 f mount, should I buy it? Is it much better?
Only you know the scale you would use for "much better". For what I do, the 105 f/1.4G is still great. If I got hired to photograph a wedding later this year, I would reserve a 85 f/1.2S rental immediately, especially if the 35mm f/1.2S is also released this year.
The extra size, just like the 50mm 1.2, might be because of designing it for minimal focus breathing. How does it compare in that regard against the Canon and others?
They chose the biggest mount but to feed the bigger rear element, all glasses have to be bigger (I think)
Big and heavy lenses look pro. People don't want small 50mm f/1.2 like the Sony GM. Cameras need to be big and heavy like the Z9, and the lenses need to be heavy and long like the Nikkor.
I believe so, focus breathing is very controlled on the 85mm f1.2 also.
For 85 i think majority prefer lower than 1.8. Around 1.4 to 1.2
preOrder 🔄
I do not think Jared Polin has been very fair to Nikon. The reason I keep watching his videos is that he is a great photographer. There are so many CZcamsrs who cannot take a good photograph if it could save their life. So if Polin likes this lens, I guess he really liked it
My 1.8 never back focuses with full body portraits. Interesting. Maybe faulty lens
I had the same problem with 85 f/1.8 on Nikon Z9, today I have the same problem on Nikon Z8. If I close the aperture down to f/2.2 the problem goes away. But that's not what I want to do with this lens. Haven't found another solution yet. Interesting that on Z6II it works fine.
The most crazy honest photographer on youtube , when you become 50 years old you think you will be still in youtube ? and what is the future for your channel ?
Thanks for quality video :)
Is it possible for you to make a comparison: 85mm 1.2 Z vs 85mm 1.4G? :)
Looks like Nikon Z 85mm F/1.2 S got more T-stops on its glass.
Jared, you seem to be comparing Nikon v Canon colour science
yes it will be for you do to fact you have to have glass on bro. only teasing you
I'm already going to have to finance this camera..... was really hoping it came with a lens. That's gonna be an additional $800 to get a lens for this beast.... 🙃
Following You From Last 4years
Jared - for those of us with an 85mm f1.4 in the Nikon F mount for dSLRs - should we upgrade ? What do you think ?
Not if the 1.4 is working for your needs.
What will 10-20% improvement do for you? Better images for your clients? Yes, upgrade. More satisfaction of taking the best image you can, and feeling challenged to match your abilities with the camera/lens? Yes, upgrade. Anything else, probably stick with the 85mm f/1.4G.
@@UnconventionalReasoning the f1.4 from the F mount is indeed a wonderful lens, and I think most of us that shoot with it are gonna think long and hard 0:14 before making the switch. But at the end of the day, if you shoot portraits in studio - this may be the most important focal length in the camera bag, and probably worth getting the bear in class lens if we can manage it.
@@johnpeterson7264 Yes, that's what I meant by "better images for your clients". Though studio portraits may minimize the advantages of the 85mm f/1.2S over the 85mm f/1.4G. Environmental portraits may be where the new lens separates itself.
IBIS in the lens? :D