Nikon 85mm f1.8G vs Sigma 85mm f1.4 HSM

gqtuazon

Gear Head
I'm still trying to explore the advantages of the f1.4 vs f1.8. I know these are two different lenses and the Nikon 85mm f1.4G might be more appropriate but I do not have that lens.

Here is the size comparison to start with. The Sigma is definitely much bigger and heavier as what you would expect for a f1.4 lens.


Nikon vs Sigma 85mm by gqtuazon, on Flickr

Current price from BH photo as my price reference for the Nikon 85mm f1.8G is $496.95
The Sigma 85mm f1.4 HSM is $894.00 and compared to the Nikon 85mm f1.4G it is priced at $1,599. USD.

I have not done any extensive testing yet. The Nikon 85mm f1.8G appears to have no purple fringing whe shooting outdoor at f1.8. The Sigma tends to have this at f1.4.

AF appears to be very responsive in low light and both have focus override feature that I like compared to the older D lens.

I'll do some more testing on sharpness but I am certain that they will be very close by f2.8. I wish I have my D800E to test them but the D3s will do for now.

So, one thing that surprised me with my testing is the difference that each lens provides at higher ISO.

With the camera mounted on a tripod, M mode, Auto ISO to 6,400, 1/400, matrix metering.

Sigma Aperture ISO
f1.4 2,800
f1.8 4,000

Nikon f1.8 4,500
 

Whiskeyman

Senior Member
Glenn,

My first thought, after seeing the differences in shutter speed, was to look again at the lens filters installed on them. Since they are the same filter type and manufacture, that shouldn't make a difference.

What I'm seeing from this one example is that at the same aperture, the Sigma is a faster lens, by about 10%. That could be caused by several factors, the first three that come to mind are the number of elements, aperture accuracy, and lens elements coatings.

I haven't seen or heard of aperture accuracy issues in a long time, but I do remember hearing about it from a recording crew where I used to work.

As far as coatings go, especially with today's ultra-multiple element lenses, any improvement in lens coatings can greatly add to the speed of a lens. Also, the fewer elements in a lens, the more light that should be transmitted through it.

I'm interested in hearing more about this. The Nikkor 85 f1.8 isn't a Nano-coated lens; maybe it should be. If third party lenses really improve, it just may force Nikon to step it up a notch on their own. I, for one, am not opposed to that.

WM
 

rikman

Senior Member
Hi Glen
In NYC on a work trip. Made a visit to B&H, love that place, like a kid in a candy store :) Anyway, I've been lusting for an 85 1.4G but couldn't get enough funds right now so I pulled the trigger on a used 85 1.4D. Looking forward to shooting some portraits.

Rich


Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
 

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Hi Glen
In NYC on a work trip. Made a visit to B&H, love that place, like a kid in a candy store :) Anyway, I've been lusting for an 85 1.4G but couldn't get enough funds right now so I pulled the trigger on a used 85 1.4D. Looking forward to shooting some portraits.

Rich
Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

Hi Rich - congrats on your new legendary lens. They've called that lens the "cream machine" since it does melt the background nicely.

I originally wanted to get the Nikon 85mm f1.4G about two years ago but they have been out of stock for a very long time. I guess most wedding photographers got them. Since then, Sigma released their f1.4 version, so I bought that one instead. It is a keeper lens for me.

Post some images when you get the chance.
 

Scott Murray

Senior Member
Hi Glen
In NYC on a work trip. Made a visit to B&H, love that place, like a kid in a candy store :) Anyway, I've been lusting for an 85 1.4G but couldn't get enough funds right now so I pulled the trigger on a used 85 1.4D. Looking forward to shooting some portraits.

Rich


Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
Love my 85 1.4D
 

rikman

Senior Member
Hi Scott,

I think I'm following your Flikr page …you have any pics on there with the 85 1.4D ?




Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
 

rikman

Senior Member
First images with Nikon 85mm 1.4D
 

Attachments

  • DSC_6808.jpg
    DSC_6808.jpg
    83.9 KB · Views: 1,570
  • DSC_6812.jpg
    DSC_6812.jpg
    61.4 KB · Views: 486

rikman

Senior Member
More 85mm 1.4D images
 

Attachments

  • DSC_6813.jpg
    DSC_6813.jpg
    59.2 KB · Views: 6,082
  • DSC_6843.jpg
    DSC_6843.jpg
    68.2 KB · Views: 526
  • DSC_6844.jpg
    DSC_6844.jpg
    96.3 KB · Views: 460
  • DSC_6916.jpg
    DSC_6916.jpg
    53.4 KB · Views: 457

ShootRaw

Senior Member
The Nikon 85mm 1.8g does have purple fringing from time to time in harsh sunlight..Mainly from metal or reflective surfaces..Can be fixed in post..
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
I'm still trying to explore the advantages of the f1.4 vs f1.8. I know these are two different lenses and the Nikon 85mm f1.4G might be more appropriate but I do not have that lens.

Here is the size comparison to start with. The Sigma is definitely much bigger and heavier as what you would expect for a f1.4 lens.


Nikon vs Sigma 85mm by gqtuazon, on Flickr

Current price from BH photo as my price reference for the Nikon 85mm f1.8G is $496.95
The Sigma 85mm f1.4 HSM is $894.00 and compared to the Nikon 85mm f1.4G it is priced at $1,599. USD.

I have not done any extensive testing yet. The Nikon 85mm f1.8G appears to have no purple fringing whe shooting outdoor at f1.8. The Sigma tends to have this at f1.4.

AF appears to be very responsive in low light and both have focus override feature that I like compared to the older D lens.

I'll do some more testing on sharpness but I am certain that they will be very close by f2.8. I wish I have my D800E to test them but the D3s will do for now.

So, one thing that surprised me with my testing is the difference that each lens provides at higher ISO.

With the camera mounted on a tripod, M mode, Auto ISO to 6,400, 1/400, matrix metering.

Sigma Aperture ISO
f1.4 2,800
f1.8 4,000

Nikon f1.8 4,500

Glenn

The Sigma has a lower T-stop according to DXO which would account for this. That's if my limited understanding of what T-stop means works here. I'm happy to be corrected on this point if others have a better understanding of this metric.
 

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Glenn

The Sigma has a lower T-stop according to DXO which would account for this. That's if my limited understanding of what T-stop means works here. I'm happy to be corrected on this point if others have a better understanding of this metric.

Geoff - I haven't checked and compared the specs from other websites, just for my own personal experience on the significance of a f1.8 and F1.4 at higher ISO level.

I've heard about the terminology but have not paid attention that much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
Geoff - I haven't checked and compared the specs from other websites, just for my own personal experience on the significance of a f1.8 and F1.4 at higher ISO level.

I've heard about the terminology but have not paid attention that much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Sigma is 1.7 T-Stop whereas the Nikon is 1.9. The lower the number the better and it indicates how well the light passes through the lens. This would explain the lower ISO on the Sigma. The bottom line is it sounds like the Sigma is optically superior at passing light at the same apertures as the Nikon. The Nikon 1.4 is also 1.7 T-stop.

It is not inconceivable that I've taken a small amount of knowledge and made it sound like an answer, when in reality it has nothing to do with your observation Glenn :)
 

gqtuazon

Gear Head
The Sigma is 1.7 T-Stop whereas the Nikon is 1.9. The lower the number the better and it indicates how well the light passes through the lens. This would explain the lower ISO on the Sigma. The bottom line is it sounds like the Sigma is optically superior at passing light at the same apertures as the Nikon. The Nikon 1.4 is also 1.7 T-stop.

It is not inconceivable that I've taken a small amount of knowledge and made it sound like an answer, when in reality it has nothing to do with your observation Glenn :)


Thanks Geoff for the explanation. It makes sense and it matches the readings that the camera was sensing when using the lenses at higher ISO levels. :D
 

Iluxa007

Senior Member
The problem with sigma lenses is that they have inconsistent AF. I've owned some high end sigma lenses and never liked the consistency AF. (50mm, 85mm, 120-300mm f/2.8 OS)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

gqtuazon

Gear Head
The problem with sigma lenses is that they have inconsistent AF. I've owned some high end sigma lenses and never liked the consistency AF. (50mm, 85mm, 120-300mm f/2.8 OS)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With prime lenses, I always do an Auto Fine Tune to get the best results. Once I've done that, it is as sharp as you can get. Same goes with my Nikon lenses.
 

Iluxa007

Senior Member
With prime lenses, I always do an Auto Fine Tune to get the best results. Once I've done that, it is as sharp as you can get. Same goes with my Nikon lenses.

That wasn't my point. AF consistency and AF offset are completely different things. Sometimes it would focus and be spot on, other times it would just be slightly OOF. I don't have issues like that with nikon lenses. And I use my most accurate point; the center.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top