Nikon 85mm 1.8D or 50mm 1.4?

[Defy]

Ok so here's the deal. I wasn't going to buy the 28-70mm 2.8 AFS but i think i can get a great deal on one so i might pick it up. That means i will have my 35-70mm 2.8 left over to sell or trade. I was thinking about picking up a Nikon 85mm 1.8D to give me nice prime but i also thought about the newer 50mm 1.4. Which one should i get? Is the 50mm 1.4 that much better than my 50mm 1.8? Lastly anyone want to trade a 85mm 1.8 =) maybe the 85mm 1.4 with cash from me?

 

[JerryPH]

I am of the mind that I do NOT settle for #2 in lens choices. The 85mm F/1.8 is #2 compared to the 85mm F/1.4 cream machine. The Nikon 50mm is a nice range, especially on a DX sensor (better on a FX, though... lol) and it is #2 on the list as well... compared to the Sigma 50mm F/1.4, which is about $20 less *and* better bokeh *and* slightly better sharpness and colour contrast.

Given the choice, I would say go for the 50mm F/1.4, but not the Nikkor one... go for the Sigma. If you do your research, you will see why. This is also going to be my next lens purchase in a couple of weeks (the sigma 50mm F/1.4).

BTW, I gave my dad the Nikon 50mm F/1.8. He can use it on his F2a... the Sigma kicks major butt over the 50mm F/1.8 "toy" in direct comparison.

 

[Anjohnsonphotography]

Nikkor 1.4/ or the sigma that jerryPH is speaking on.

 

[PhotoXopher]

I have to disagree, the Sigma I had was not sharp. It's very possible that you could get a sharp copy but saying 'Sigma is sharper than Nikon' just isn't true - at least in my case and I'm sure others as well.

I realize I could have had a bad copy, but that's one of Sigma's downfalls... hit and miss.

For what it's worth, before I returned it I took it to a pro photographer friend of mine who had a D300 to test it on... same result, and he tried about everything.

 

[NateS]

The Sigma is sharper on everything I've seen. I just got mine and it is very sharp. Unless you did some controlled tests, I wouldn't rule out user error/missed focus because at f1.4....that's very easy to do (may not be the case, but might be too).

I picked up the Sigma 50mm f1.4 and basically look at it as a 85mm f1.4 since it's basically the same focal length as the 85mm f1.4 on FX. I'd argue that it's a sharp with as good of bokeh as the 85 too.

 

[JerryPH]

I have to disagree, the Sigma I had was not sharp. It's very possible that you could get a sharp copy but saying 'Sigma is sharper than Nikon' just isn't true - at least in my case and I'm sure others as well.

I realize I could have had a bad copy, but that's one of Sigma's downfalls... hit and miss.

For what it's worth, before I returned it I took it to a pro photographer friend of mine who had a D300 to test it on... same result, and he tried about everything.

Well, I've received my Sigma 50mm 1.4, and it is nothing short of impressive. Straight out of the box, with the D700's AF fine tune set to zero, here are the results:

I am *so* loving it... its going to be the first lens I use at tomorrow's wedding (and of course my 85 F/1.4 is coming too... lol).

 

[shivaswrath]

to the OP, depends on your budget and needs - frankly 2 very different lenses. . .the 85 on the D300 is a moderate telephoto and a tight portrait at best . . the 50 1.4 is a great portrait on the D300, hardly a "normal" prime. . .

I have the 35 1.8 and 50 1.4 as my prime's. . .and have debated between the 85 1.4 or 105 f/2 - like Jerry said, might as well spend the $$ on either of those cream machines if your intent is butta butta bokeh

 

[Josh66]

Both?

...Haven't used the Nikon versions, but I have both of the Canon's. They are both awesome.

 

[Sachphotography]

I have the Nikon and love it.I tried the 1.4 but the DOF is way to shallow and needs to eb stopped to at least f/5 for me to use. I like the 1.8 at f/2.5(I think) personally.
I have used the sigma on a a friends d700 and I thought it looked good. Though I have not thourogly used it I think it would be a good option. It is much bigger than the comparable lenses.