They can be had on Fleabay for about 700 Benjamin's or so now, depending on condition. IIRC I paid about $600 for mine but that was a while ago and it was mint and included the len shade, which is necessary because of that HUGE front element!
Nikon 85 mm 1.4 G
- Thread starter crycocyon
- Start date
They can be had on Fleabay for about 700 Benjamin's or so now, depending on condition. IIRC I paid about $600 for mine but that was a while ago and it was mint and included the len shade, which is necessary because of that HUGE front element!
ok,, I am a bit confused, in that the focus sensors is independent of the image sensor, and we are really talking about the 51 focus system verus the 39 focus system of the D7000, why the 51 autofocus system has issues with this lens, I have no idea, but it should be independent of the DX vs FX debate, but more on the focus sensor array and the software.
since my 85 1.4 is the AIS manual, I just manual focus anyway, and I will say that the 85 1.8D has zero issues on the D800.
since my 85 1.4 is the AIS manual, I just manual focus anyway, and I will say that the 85 1.8D has zero issues on the D800.
I suspect it's a combination of both issues going on. It's not uncommon to send your camera and lens combo to Nikon and have them match the two together and it sounds to me like this what you'll have to do to get razor sharp images out of this combination. Don't be concerned with other people saying it didn't work. Because it does for most people.
Secondly, the broader issue that Marcel was pointing out that subtle changes can affect the original focus is a direct result of a high resolution camera. Or it could very well be that the lens you're using has issues such as focus shift, something that has cropped up in other Nikon lenses. It's been shown conclusively that focus shift can vary from lens to lens of the same variety and focal length.
On the issue of D800 and lenses, Nasim's post below pretty much sums it up.
One important thing to note here, is that I performed all tests on the Nikon D800E DSLR (which I will be using for all lens reviews going forward). With a high-resolution 36.3 MP sensor, the Nikon D800E shows many lens flaws that might not be as evident on lower resolution DSLRs like the Nikon D4. While these optical issues can be clearly seen on the D800/D800E, they are not as noticeable on a lower-resolution camera. Before the Nikon D800, I used the Nikon D700 and D3s camera bodies to test all lenses. Things like focus shift and field curvature were not looked at with so much detail, as I have done in this review. I will soon be updating other lens reviews with more data from detailed tests and I will also use Imatest for lens performance analysis, similar to what I have done here. I am sure I will find some serious flaws in many popular Nikkor lenses.
Secondly, the broader issue that Marcel was pointing out that subtle changes can affect the original focus is a direct result of a high resolution camera. Or it could very well be that the lens you're using has issues such as focus shift, something that has cropped up in other Nikon lenses. It's been shown conclusively that focus shift can vary from lens to lens of the same variety and focal length.
On the issue of D800 and lenses, Nasim's post below pretty much sums it up.
One important thing to note here, is that I performed all tests on the Nikon D800E DSLR (which I will be using for all lens reviews going forward). With a high-resolution 36.3 MP sensor, the Nikon D800E shows many lens flaws that might not be as evident on lower resolution DSLRs like the Nikon D4. While these optical issues can be clearly seen on the D800/D800E, they are not as noticeable on a lower-resolution camera. Before the Nikon D800, I used the Nikon D700 and D3s camera bodies to test all lenses. Things like focus shift and field curvature were not looked at with so much detail, as I have done in this review. I will soon be updating other lens reviews with more data from detailed tests and I will also use Imatest for lens performance analysis, similar to what I have done here. I am sure I will find some serious flaws in many popular Nikkor lenses.
Yes, and I think the 85 1.8 G also doesn't cause the problem because of its depth of field being less shallow. But your point about 39 vs 51 point autofocus is a very good one. I never actually checked the 39 autofocus point setting on the D800 and that's definitely something I'll try next. Thanks!
85 is real nice on DX...
Not only that, it is equivalent to 127. mm f/1.4 on that camera.
It's probably "focus shift" and it's common among fast glass. Here's some info about it:
http://diglloyd.com/articles/Focus/FocusShift.html
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/10/how-to-shoot-with-wide-aperture-lenses
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
http://diglloyd.com/articles/Focus/FocusShift.html
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/10/how-to-shoot-with-wide-aperture-lenses
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Yes, focus shift sounds like the issue at hand. Something AF adjust will NOT be able to correct. There are a lot of theories I went through in the thread I started, perhaps one of them is causing the issue you're having? Make doubly sure, and if all fails, Like some have said, send it in for calibration. I'm willing to bet it will return better. You'll just be out a lens and or camera for a number of weeks
Patrick M
Senior Member
I can't speak for this particular lens but I will show you what a manual focus 85mm f/1.4 AIS Nikkor does on a D700. It is so sharp you have to wear leather gloves to keep from cutting yourself! I am pretty sure Nikon did not change the optical formula of this superlative lens when they went from AIS to AF
Two words describe this shot
Gor. Geous
Well done...I love the blue eyes and faded shot. Very very nice.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
I read that a guy removed one of the shims in the sigma version and thought he fixed it, but later realized that he reversed the problem. His lens back focused at distances greater than 20 feet and from focused at distances less than 10 or so. Mine did the same, but after it came back its been 80% spot on with a +4 micro adjust. I hear that they adjust some sort of electronics inside the lens when you send it in, presumably getting it to "talk" with the camera in a more precise way or something..
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Strange in that first description of the issue, the guy found that the focus was always shifted further away. In my case it is shifted closer by a small amount.
Ok....after writing that I just did another series of tests as I was going to test fewer focus points. Since it is daylight now I had opportunity to test samples against bright backgrounds (livingroom window with daylight) and it actually was working fine (!!!). Then I thought ok it is a low light issue. So I went into the kitchen with the lights out and shot a few dimly lit objects at high ISO (so camera shake isn't a factor), and I was shooting f/1.4 and it was locking onto very small objects in the frame without problem. :confused-new: I tried different ISOs just to be sure. I would be watching where the focus points fall on the viewfinder, and it locks on precisely....regardless of whether I shoot 1.4 or 2.8. Man, my camera is possessed or something? I'll have to try shooting again this evening. But I was shooting at like 6400 ISO with 1/8th second exposures in the kitchen and it was still locking on where I saw it locking on. When I was on my first shoot with the lens on Thursday I kept it at f/2.8 of course so I have no idea what happened between when I first reported this and today. But I'll keep an eye on it. But my goodness, when it works, what it can do with selecting part of a subject, no matter how small, and rendering it within such a narrow depth of field....wow.
Ok here are examples of test shots I completed a moment ago.
In this image the corner of the speaker was selected and boom!
So I tried something more complex like these leaves. The center leaf was selected.
Here's a comparison with f/1.4 on the left and f/2.8 on the right. And although softer at f/1.4 as to be expected, it is still in focus. (the comparisons belows are crops of the original images)
So then I thought ok I should go in dimmer light conditions, but again, no problem. Again f/1.4 on the left and f/2.8 on the right.
And back to brighter light. f/1.4 left, f/2.8 right.
Huh. No problem.
Here's an illustration at f/1.4 that blew me away. The focus indicator fell exactly on the front section of the little raised camera of my TV, exactly as I saw it in the viewfinder, and there it is in the photo. I think this photo illustrates just how demanding it is for the autofocus system to deal with a lens like this. I can't imagine the Canon f/1.2 lens. Wow.
So now all I can do is keep testing and see if it comes up again.
The only possibility that comes to mind at this point is that the camera itself had to "learn" the lens.
In this image the corner of the speaker was selected and boom!
So I tried something more complex like these leaves. The center leaf was selected.
Here's a comparison with f/1.4 on the left and f/2.8 on the right. And although softer at f/1.4 as to be expected, it is still in focus. (the comparisons belows are crops of the original images)
So then I thought ok I should go in dimmer light conditions, but again, no problem. Again f/1.4 on the left and f/2.8 on the right.
And back to brighter light. f/1.4 left, f/2.8 right.
Huh. No problem.
Here's an illustration at f/1.4 that blew me away. The focus indicator fell exactly on the front section of the little raised camera of my TV, exactly as I saw it in the viewfinder, and there it is in the photo. I think this photo illustrates just how demanding it is for the autofocus system to deal with a lens like this. I can't imagine the Canon f/1.2 lens. Wow.
So now all I can do is keep testing and see if it comes up again.
The only possibility that comes to mind at this point is that the camera itself had to "learn" the lens.
Last edited:
That is a beautiful photo illustrating the capability of the AIS lens and how it stands up even today.
I was curious about what exactly did change, if anything, in the optical formula, so I did some digging and made a cutaway comparison of the AIS lens on the left and the G lens on the right (and actually scaled them based on the size of the bayonet mount). The AIS lens has 7 elements in 5 groups, the G lens has 10 elements in 9 groups.
Last edited:
Yep. Shooting test charts will always disappoint IMO. Once you get the technique of shooting a very wide aperture lens down (which requires a different skill set entirely), they go away quickly enough. I've learned that you just need to use the lens within it's intended operating distances. For a fifty millimeter, you wouldn't try doing macro, for instance. You'll get severe focus shift that way. Or vice versa.
Nowadays, I'll shoot charts just to ensure that the lens isn't out of spec to a problematic state.
Nowadays, I'll shoot charts just to ensure that the lens isn't out of spec to a problematic state.
