I use the same model of lens for weddings and portraits, and it has been fantastic for me! I don't need anything else in that range. I'm good just with that (among large-aperture 85-135 prime lenses).
*Tony:* We really love those long lenses, to compress those facial features. *Fans:* Alright cool. A few years later: *Fans:* Phew! I spent a lot of money but I finally got that lens you recommended. *Tony:* Actually, I think wider shots look better now. Long lenses are a bit 90's. *Fans:* (┛◉Д◉)┛彡┻━┻
Photography is an art, and as such is subjective, and an oft changing medium, especially in the modern era. Unless you’re already on top, you’ve gotta stay agile to get ahead. And sometimes even if you are on top you’ve got to work too stay there.
As a hobbyist that is beginning with the A73 I'm going for the Sony 85 F1.8. Small, lightweight, great value for the price. Also I agree with Tony, I rather have the lens that focuses better than a lens might be a little sharper but lacks focus consistency, if shot isn't in focus then all best optics in the world don't mean much.
People on here are getting upset because they think Tony's blanket statement that 135 is too tight is the end all be all. It's about making art which is subjective. Usually the best isn't what everyone else is doing anyway (yes I own a 135 and love it)
Sony 85 1.8 $548.00 - Sony 85 1.4 GM $1798.00. For the price and quality of the 1.8 I'm not going to notice anything you talked about it's a great lens. Good video anyway I've learn a lot with your videos...Thanks!
I love my Sony 85mm f/1.8 even on my a6000. It definitely gives your portraits and headshots a pleasing look. The GM 85mm = The law of diminishing returns.
Tony: I have both the 85mm F/1.4 GM and the 135mm F/1.8 GM. Both are exceptional lenses, although I do find that the 135 is sharper around the subject and compression is of course superior. Like you, however I do prefer to work closer to my subjects, so if I have to choose 85mm is a perfect focal length for portrait photography. I find that the 135 is great for candid portraits during the course of a wedding ceremony or a reception in that you can “snipe” from further away and really isolate your subject.
I always feel like 135-200mm is a bit more for special and specific portrait shots. I love love love my Samyang 135mm f2, but I also love using my samyang 85mm 1.4, and I also love my Nikon 105mm 2.5. It honestly depends on the situation which I use.
There is something about Zeiss glass that is simply amazing. Along with wide-open edge to edge sharpness, the 85mm f/1.8 Zeiss Batis has right-out-of-camera outrageous color & contrast that I like better then the 85mm G-Master.
Good comparison. Years ago I bought the Canon 85 1.2 - first version. And it was love at first sight - such an amazing lens. Even if it's sometimes hard to focus at 1.2. I still have it. But for my Sony I chose the 85mm 1.8 because of its size. And I compared it with the 85 1.2 GM. Actually the 1.8 felt a bit sharper to me, but that of course all depends on the situation. More important is its compact size. One of my favorite lenses together with 24 1.2 GM.
I've been using the 85mm f/1.2 L II with an MC-11 adapter and learned a way to get it to show up as F1.2. If you go to the menu, navigate to Camera 1 > Exposure2 (10/14) > Exposure Step, and set it to 0.5EV , it'll finally be F1.2 instead of F1.3 wide open. Make sure your EV dial is exactly at +0 or it'll still show up as F1.3. I learned about this thanks to a post by Brian Smith in a dpreview thread. He notes that it's just to make us feel better since it's wide open at F1.3 when using 0.3EV steps, but having the EXIF metadata reflect reality is a nice bonus. As for the lens itself, I really enjoy how it renders photos. It's undoubtedly my most used lens.
The 100 STF is pretty unique in its look, the apodization element is very different from the other lenses. The F2.8 is really F5.6 in practice, so maybe that is why they weren't including it in their lineup. The 100 STF can focus hunt in lower light. 85mm GM does not focus well in low light either. The 100 STF will have a look that you might not like. Some people feel it's a little bit too unnatural to them and looks fake. It is quite sharp in the focused area and very very smooth in the transition to out of focus. The bokeh shapes are more round and the edges dissolve instead of increasing contrast/color. It kind of smooths and homogenizes everything.
For me the 85 is my lens of choice for portraits (actually the Sigma 56 on APS-C). But I'll use the 135 (actually the Sony 85 1.8 on APS-C) for some shots. Using two bodies I don't have to change lenses, just grab the other camera. Both are great lenses, priced right, sharp, and with good color. I'll use the 85 for full body shots and the 135 for torso shots.
I shoot Canon, and I own two of the focal lengths mentioned here, an 85mm f/1.2 L and a 135mm f/2L. I use the 85mm when I have enough time to plan a shot and ensure precise focusing. It comes in handy when I need to obliterate a background for subject separation, but it does come at a cost. Chromatic abberation on areas of contrast transition is highly pronounced when using studio strobes or flashes, and flaring is definitely an issue without the lens hood or shooting into highly backlit scenes. When I need to work with more speed, say in outdoor portraits or with children, I reach for the 135mm f/2, which has blazing fast autofocus speed and is astonishingly sharp for the era from whicj it hails. Chromatic abberation has never been a noticeable issue with this lens, and the added background compression can *almost* make up for the creaminess of a background at f/1.2 at 85mm. I have even been brave enough to try an event shoot based mostly on street photography scenes with the 135mm focal length!
Thanks once again for lots of useful information in choosing our lenses. I have the 85 m m 1.8 and I love how small and light and compact it is. It acts like a scalpel and separates the subject from the background no matter how far I am from the subject or it from the background. I'm sure I could see a small Improvement in blur and bokeh with the 1.4 but the extra weight would make street shooting less pleasant. With my a7iii and the 85mm 1.8 it can just dangle on my waist not drawing my attention until I need it. Since I'm not a professional portrait shooter I think it's the best choice for me and other amateurs. Thanks again and be safe guys!
The only lens I wasn't impressed with in this entire video was the one mounted to the recording camera. :/ Great comparisons of the lenses on the table, Tony. I have a differing opinion on the nicest focal length for portraiture (I greatly prefer the 135mm look), but I can respect your thoughts here. Happy shooting!
For standard portraiture I grab the Sony 85mm f/1.4 GM or the 55mm f/1.8 if I need something a little wider. For candid portraits nothing compares to the 135mm f/1.8 GM it's AF on a 7R3 is noticeably faster and more accurate than literally any other lens I've ever put on my Sony's (And that must be over 40 lenses). The Sigma 135mm f/1.8 is remarkably close to the GM but the GM is slightly better in just about every way. It's CRAZY to say but I actually hope they update the 85GM with the XA element and the duel linear motors of the 135GM. It makes that much of a diff.
85 mm 1.8 is the best lens created which has incredible value for money in my opinion. Most photographers who are not pros will love the lens. It is tag sharp and has amazing color rendition.
I own the Sony 85mm 1.8 and the Sony 135mm 1.8 - Both lenses are great. The 85 is small lightweight, cheap and really really good. It is my workhorse it most situations. I never thought that I need the 1.4 over the 1.8. Besides: Your clients are not going to notice anyways. The 135mm on the other hand is the craziest lens I have ever worked with. That thing is sharp as a razorblade and super fast and accurate at focusing. I bought it for weddings instead of the 70-200 2.8 and I am super happy, but I found that I barely use it outside of weddings. I much prefer the 85mm working distance.
You can shoot the canon 85mm at 1.2 on the MC-11 but there is a setting you have to adjust in camera. I use this setup for my 50mm 1.2. But as you said the autofocus is painfully slow
Portrait lenses focal length (for me) is mostly a function of task. I use about half Sigma Art and half native lenses. Ideally f1.4 or better (up to 100mm, then f1.8 or 2 is ok), though the Canon 50mm f1.8 STM can be used in a pinch because of it's sharpness (e.g. You were not planning a portrait doing a wildlife shoot, but your partner takes an adorable pose, and it takes no space in the bag). Rough focal length guide: As for a group/crowd, 28mm. For a family, couple or full body shots with some border, 35mm. For one person, full body shot, 35mm or 50mm. For upper torso, 50mm or 85mm and for headshots, 85mm up to 180mm. Every rule can be broken at times. But unless you are going for special effects, no close ups with 28mm. Nobody wants a zucchini for a nose. For ultra compression you can use up to a 300mm prime, but you'll be standing in the next county. Of course, you don't need a zillion lenses for one shoot, especially at the longer end. What you need will be a function of the task at hand and the setting.
I have quite a few lenses. But my two workhorses are the 85 1.4 GM and the 24-70 2.8 GM for my portraits and street photography. I agree with Tony, the aperture ring is a joy to use. I highly recommend it for anyone who is serious about portraiture.
Its interesting that you did not include the Batis 85mm or the Batis Apo 135mm. The Batis line is made from the ground up specifically for the Sony FE mount, unlike the Sigma Art line.
Is there any difference, using a zoom lens like 70-200 f2,8 and setting it in 85mm for portraits apart from the aperture? Do this lens compress different?
Helpful video as always. I am stuck between Sony E and Canon EOS R for now. I am looking at mixing systems without overlapping too much. I am not a portrait photographer but I am a Portait/Figure painter and drawer. I am looking out for the Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 IS to be the all rounder for me. I may use a Batis 40mm f2 for Sony and the Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 IS for Canon and mix that way. I need as little compression as possible for Portaits and need contrast. After I spend $1200 for the Batis and probably $3000 for the Canon I will be waiting a while for any other lenses. Like you recommended-will likely rent first.
Stuart Anderson I own the 90macro and the 85-1.4gm. Both are great but they were really designed for different purposes. Yes the 90 is sharp but the autofocus is far slower than the 85 and from experience the sharpness difference (if any) is small in most real world use. You can take a good portrait with the 90 but you’ll realize that it wasn’t designed with that task in mind very quickly. It’s not the image quality that is the issue but the workflow and how efficient it lets you work. Most people would be happier with the 85-1.4 or 85-1.8 most of the time if they are taking portraits. You can get the job done with the 90 but it wouldn’t be what I’d reach for first.
@@stacybehrens7152 I can totally understand that. I was really just a little surprised that it wasn't mentioned at all, since it's a similar focal length, really sharp and so many people use it as a portrait lens. I do more product photography than portraits so, for now, it does double duty for me.
My favorite Prime is the Sony Zeiss 135 (A-Mount) but the one I use most is the Sony Zeiss 85, because with the 135 I’m just too far back from my models (especially when I want to capture more than just a head shot). I do love the results of the 135, but anytime I want something with a focal length greater than 85mm, I opt for the Sony G-Master 70-200 F2.8. Also, as sad as it may sound, I rarely shoot wide open in studio and to get the tac-sharpness I want for the whole image, I find I’m at f8-f11. Both the 85 and 135 do an amazing job at f8+ even though the main reason for getting them (initially) was to shoot wide open.
Hey Tony, What do you think of the Sony 90mm Macro lens G for Portrait? I heard it's a very sharp lens, dx mark has it number 10 in the world of lenses
Jad Reviews I have that 90mm macro. It’s a great lens for macro and works for portraits in a pinch but the focusing is very slow compared to the other G primes from Sony. Verrrry slow. Plus the max aperture is 2.8 which sometimes matters.
@@stacybehrens7152 So you wouldn't recommend it to photograph kids running around because of the slow focus? But what about adults that you can pose or let them stay still for the picture? Does it give you better results than the 85? Or would you say it's a tie? I am really confused and trying to decide between the 2. Is the slow focusing really frustrating? Thanks
Jad Reviews I also have the 85gm. It depends on what you want to do. If you do a lot of macro and only do portraits very occasionally then maybe the 90. But most people will be happier with the 85-1.4 or 85-1.8. The 85s are better general purpose lenses than the 90 macro. I think the sharpness differences won’t be readily apparent in most real world use. Your skill as a photographer is likely to make far more difference. Unless I’m doing macro I use the 85 much much more. The 90 really is a specialty lens that happens to also be serviceable for general purpose use. But it’s not a portrait or action lens. For stuff like taking portraits it really is substantially slower than the 85-1.4. Trust me you will definitely notice the difference. It’s not that the 90 is bad but just that it was designed for a different purpose. If you really are still conflicted though maybe try a lens rental?
A lot of reviewers say the 85 1.8 is a bit sharper and focuses faster than the 1.4. That has been my experience as well so I purchased the 85 1.8 and have loved it. I've especially loved the extra 1,000 plus dollars in my pocket. On a side note I find that I am not shooting wide open that often anymore. When I do studio portraits I'm usually shooting at f8 or f11 and outdoors I usually am trying to incorporate the environment with a background into the picture a little more. 🤷🏿♂️
I have the 85mm F1.8, and I love it. But if I were to upgrade to a GM lens for portraits, I think I’d go with the 135mm GM instead of the 85mm GM, even if I have to shoot a little farther from the subject. Having said that, I’ll still rent both lenses to try them before I’ll buy them.
I saved, saved, saved and got the 85 GM when it and the 85mm 1.8 Batis were the only ones on the market. The 85mm GM is like a drug - a highly addictive drug - the way it captures a scene - especially when you put some distance between you and your subject is mindblowing - I have owned the famous 135mm 1.8 Zeiss for A-mouny adapted to my E-mount and thought that was one of the best portraits lens for the system - that is until the 85 GM - not trying to shoot holes in the 85mm 1.8 - but the GM cost the price it does for a reason - try it and you will see what I mean - Thanks Tony - really enjoy your videos!!
Where is the Zeiss Batis 85mm f1.8? I own the Sony 85mm 1.8 and although it’s sharp I find it rather lacklustre. Looking for something with character, which is where the Zeiss could come in
I’ve had the Sony 85 f/1.4 for over a year now and love it
4 роки тому
I have the Sony 85mm and Zeiss 135 1.8 (I use it with an adapter) I shoot children portraits. I love the 85 for its sharpness and focus but 135mm creates a bigger distance and actually appreciate that if I'm not working with my own kids, but with clients. Coming close may seem a little intimidating for children. I refer to the video because one of the things that crossed out in 135 was the distance but it actually depends on your style of portraiture. Nevertheless, I agree that the 85mm 1.4 if fantastic.
No doubt the higher priced Sony primes are great. However, I have found the 85 1.8 to be very sharp with great color rendering. Considering adding the 135 or 70-200 for a longer length portrait lens.
I've owned the 85mm 1.8, currently the 1.4, and now using the Sigma 105mm 1.4 and just got my delivery of the Sony 135mm 1.8 - although 85 and 105 are close in focal length, I much prefer the rendering of people with the 105mm over the 85mm (when I really look at the shots by side it becomes more apparent as the eye is trained to see the differences). The 135mm is very nice from Sony (I haven't very much time with it) but I had a 135mm from Nikon, and if given the working distance it was an amazing lens, and it gave a beautiful, classic look that a lot of other photographers where not shooting style wise.
I have my sigma 105 1.4 on my a6400 and will never take it off its too amazing. Walk around all day with this thing and i am not in shape at all LOL 4lbs is nothing compared to my old nikon set ups back in the day.
I bought the Sony 85mm F1.4 and a week later Sony brought out the 135 F1.8. I could have kicked myself but practically in use I have realised I made the right choice as the 135 simply too long a length for my studio work. Would I like the 135? Yes, who wouldn't given the reviews but can I justify it, sadly not yet! Great review Tony thank you.
Tony I guess you used the Canon EOS R to record this, hence why the focusing is slow. Pls use A7III whenever you need to show items in close-up or adjust the focusing speed if that is possible on the EOS R.
I've been doing exactly the same thing, although I shoot with Nikon... 135mm was good, but ruled out pretty quickly, 105mm was very nice and hard to pass up, but If I had to pick one it would be the 85mm f1.4
Tony any reason you left the 85 1.8 Zeiss off this? Is the image quality you get from the Zeiss Batis lens not big enough to justify the extra cost vs. the standard Sony 1.8?
Heya. I've been into wildlife and macro photography and plan on getting into serious portrait photography. I was thinking about getting the Canon 70-200 f4L IS USM because I can't afford the f2.8 IS version. I am thinking about this lens mainly for the versatility and the sharpness of it but on the other side of things I could get a Canon 85mm 1.8 or maybe even a Sigma 85mm 1.4 if I force it a bit. Which would you suggest for getting into portrait photography and eventually shooting weddings and maybe some hotel photography?
Unrelated to the video topic, but that’s a neat perspective you got there in that Old San Juan shot. I don’t see many pictures from that angle.
5 років тому
any chance to get a zeiss batis review? especially the 40 mm :) I use the 25mm and 85mm because i love that series BUT i'm thinking of getting the 40mm
The 105 Sigma is a beast in all respects- I absolutely love it. I use it with a canon 5ds- What I don't love about it... is the slow focusing. Hand holding it waiting for it to find the spot will build your muscles quickly. Oddly enough though, once you become accustomed to the weight and how it focuses you can minimize the focus searching.
My feel about portraits is that people currently prefer humans in settings to close-ups. Possibly because everybody has seen one selfie too much. And started resenting similar things - even if the smart-phone sellfie is so different from a shot with a luminous tele on a proper camera. If that's a trend I like about it that it poses a different photographic challenge. And a more complex one
When I first went full frame with my 5Dlll I bought a few f1.4 lenses, but when I switched to Sony and got my A7r lll, I decided I wanted to keep my system small and light, so the first lens I bought was the Sony 55 f1.8 and the second lens was the 85 f1.8, they are both really good and for me the size and weight more than make up for the lack of f1.4....... I have no regrets, I still have my old Sigma 50 and 85 f1.4 lenses that work fine with the mc-11, but I haven't felt the need to use them, the other day I pulled all my bigger glass out of the closet and played around with them going back and forth with my new f1.8 lenses, and my f1.8 lenses are as sharp or even sharper at f1.8 as my f1.4 lenses stopped down to f1.8.......... and the difference in back ground blur isn't that much, it made me just want to sell all my old glass, but I still own my 5Dlll, but I also haven't used it since getting my Sony, maybe someday I will buy some f1.4 glass again when I get tired of what I got, maybe when Sony puts out an 85 GM ll, or a new 50 f1.4 ..... and maybe Sony will make both of them f1.2 to try to compete with the new Canon glass. but for now I am happy with my small and light glass, I went on a trip and took my 55 and 85 f1.8 and my 28 f2 witch is also really small and light, and it worked out perfect for me. even though there are some times where I miss a zoom,,,,,, maybe someday I will buy the Tamron 28/75 f2.8..... another small and light lens. I really think Sony was smart with there 55 and 85 f1.8 lenses, because they are a great option for someone like me who wants really good quality without the weight. as far as the aperture ring on the 85 GM, most people seem to complain that they move it without realizing it. and for me it is not necessary. because usually you put the lens at f1.4 and it stays there for the shoot, it's not like you are changing it all the time. maybe it would be good for video, I am looking forward to when Sigma makes glass specifically for mirrorless. and hopefully it will be smaller and lighter than the huge lenses they are making now. like there new 40 f1.4 monster. and as far as Canon goes, I wouldn't be surprised if the new Canon 85 f1.2 that they made for there new mirrorless Camera is better than the GM. as far as focal length goes, I have never bought a 135 lens, but I do like the look they give you. but like you said I would rather shoot at a closer distance.
I got the SEL85F1.4GM on Ebay for $2071 AUD in July 2018, its has been my go to lens for low light event shooting on the A7RIII, it and the 70-200F2.8GM has had the most positive comments on my social media. Mind you I found it can still "hunt" in low light, so it not always snappy as the 70-200GM
We've found the focus to be too unreliable to be able to recommend it... based on our own testing from people like Manny Ortiz, and many emails I've received from owners.
Regarding the 85 1.8 vs 1.4, everyone else I've ever seen review the two side by side has said that the 1.8 is actually a little bit sharper? However all of the other corrective aspects such as flaring and abberation are definitely more controlled on the 1.4.
Any thoughts on the Zeiss Batis 85mm 1.8? I'm (perhaps) falsely assuming contrast will be better than with the Sony 85mm 1.8. Am getting along well with my Zeiss Batis 40mm 2.0...
Tony you could set Canon 85 mm f1.2 to f1.2 on the Sony if you change the stop step increment from 1/3 to 1/2! I had the same problem and someone on facebook gave me the hint I mentioned here.
My Sony 85mm f/1.4 is really sharp, but I find the AF hunts a lot with it in low light ... more than the 24-70 for example. Maybe just my copy, but ...
Tony, great video... small typo to correct: the comments list the Sony 85mm f/1.8 twice... twice. I bought this lens and love it! BTW: I only bought it once!
Hey Tony, thanks for the review! I noticed when you show a lens close up in front of the camera, it takes time for your camera to focus on it. How about you place an overlay of the showcase video within your review video? I think that would be really cool and you could do that while you talking and presenting each lens?
I have both the Sony 85mm f/1.8 and f/1.4. The f/1.4 is noticeably sharper, but for the weight is really hard on my neck and shoulder for any length of time.
I bought the 85 1.8 and for the price and to use it for hobby is a joy to use.
I use the same model of lens for weddings and portraits, and it has been fantastic for me! I don't need anything else in that range. I'm good just with that (among large-aperture 85-135 prime lenses).
ivan rivas I have the 1.8 as well in Canon and I wouldn’t trade it for another. Love my photos
I absolutely love the Sony 85mm f/1.8... If I were not a happy owner of that lens, I might look at the Samyang 85mm f/1.4
The 85 1.2 is wide open using the MC-11 when the aperture is set to f/1.3.
That's good to know! thanks!
*Tony:* We really love those long lenses, to compress those facial features.
*Fans:* Alright cool.
A few years later:
*Fans:* Phew! I spent a lot of money but I finally got that lens you recommended.
*Tony:* Actually, I think wider shots look better now. Long lenses are a bit 90's.
*Fans:* (┛◉Д◉)┛彡┻━┻
that's the way she goes!
Photography is an art, and as such is subjective, and an oft changing medium, especially in the modern era. Unless you’re already on top, you’ve gotta stay agile to get ahead. And sometimes even if you are on top you’ve got to work too stay there.
@@WesPerry I was just messing around :-)
I'm still crying for the bokeh and look of my canon 135/2, but now i'm shooting 35 and 55.
Yeah. And that's further reason why we should take what people say into consideration, but never base our decisions on what others say is best.
As a hobbyist that is beginning with the A73 I'm going for the Sony 85 F1.8. Small, lightweight, great value for the price. Also I agree with Tony, I rather have the lens that focuses better than a lens might be a little sharper but lacks focus consistency, if shot isn't in focus then all best optics in the world don't mean much.
Bought the Sony 85mm 1.4 late last year. It's been the greatest photo gear purchase I've made in the past 20 years.
I got the Sony 135 and sold my 85 GM. No regrets. No looking back. I love the 135 for portraits.
People on here are getting upset because they think Tony's blanket statement that 135 is too tight is the end all be all. It's about making art which is subjective. Usually the best isn't what everyone else is doing anyway (yes I own a 135 and love it)
Does the 135 GM makes noise like the 85 GM when focusing ? The bokeh (especially with lights) is not so nice on the 135...See videos from Manny Ortiz
I would've liked to see the Zeiss Batis 85 in that test, -rather than the adapted Canon.
Me too! Why skip the Zeiss? I like the 85mm Batis better then the G-Master!
Agree! I've added the Zeiss to my kit for portrait work and I love it!
How about the Batis 85?
Love my 85 1.8, but I definitely wanna try the 1.4!
Don't forget the new samyang also a great option and 1.4. But yes the 1.4 makes a clear difference in bokeh and subject isolation
My Viltrox 85 is just fabulous on my a6400. Could not be happier.
Can we get a Samyang 85mm f/1.4 vs Sony 85mm f/1.8 video ?
Sony 85 1.8 $548.00 - Sony 85 1.4 GM $1798.00. For the price and quality of the 1.8 I'm not going to notice anything you talked about it's a great lens. Good video anyway I've learn a lot with your videos...Thanks!
I love my Sony 85mm f/1.8 even on my a6000. It definitely gives your portraits and headshots a pleasing look. The GM 85mm = The law of diminishing returns.
I sel my 1,8 for the 1,4 and i‘m so happy i dont want back to the 1,8
The 85 1.4 GM is definitely a great lens for portrait work, it's such a joy to use!
Tony: I have both the 85mm F/1.4 GM and the 135mm F/1.8 GM. Both are exceptional lenses, although I do find that the 135 is sharper around the subject and compression is of course superior. Like you, however I do prefer to work closer to my subjects, so if I have to choose 85mm is a perfect focal length for portrait photography. I find that the 135 is great for candid portraits during the course of a wedding ceremony or a reception in that you can “snipe” from further away and really isolate your subject.
I always feel like 135-200mm is a bit more for special and specific portrait shots.
I love love love my Samyang 135mm f2, but I also love using my samyang 85mm 1.4, and I also love my Nikon 105mm 2.5.
It honestly depends on the situation which I use.
I also love my Nikon 105 2.5. When I heard about the 1.4 version, my first thought was: Which part of the eye do you want in focus?
There is something about Zeiss glass that is simply amazing. Along with wide-open edge to edge sharpness, the 85mm f/1.8 Zeiss Batis has right-out-of-camera outrageous color & contrast that I like better then the 85mm G-Master.
I have the 85 1.8 and the 105 1.4, and I prefer using 105 1.4 all the time lol. It's like my favorite lens !
same
Mines too
Good comparison. Years ago I bought the Canon 85 1.2 - first version. And it was love at first sight - such an amazing lens. Even if it's sometimes hard to focus at 1.2. I still have it. But for my Sony I chose the 85mm 1.8 because of its size. And I compared it with the 85 1.2 GM. Actually the 1.8 felt a bit sharper to me, but that of course all depends on the situation. More important is its compact size. One of my favorite lenses together with 24 1.2 GM.
Can I know which length you used for this video
This is right on time for me, I basically needed any excuse to pull the trigger on the 85 1.4....thanks lol
Me: I’m going to use my 1.4 instead of my 1.8
Client: So, just make me look slimmer.
I've been using the 85mm f/1.2 L II with an MC-11 adapter and learned a way to get it to show up as F1.2. If you go to the menu, navigate to Camera 1 > Exposure2 (10/14) > Exposure Step, and set it to 0.5EV , it'll finally be F1.2 instead of F1.3 wide open. Make sure your EV dial is exactly at +0 or it'll still show up as F1.3.
I learned about this thanks to a post by Brian Smith in a dpreview thread. He notes that it's just to make us feel better since it's wide open at F1.3 when using 0.3EV steps, but having the EXIF metadata reflect reality is a nice bonus.
As for the lens itself, I really enjoy how it renders photos. It's undoubtedly my most used lens.
What about the Sony 100 STF GM f 2.8, would have been good to hear how it compares too
The 100 STF is pretty unique in its look, the apodization element is very different from the other lenses. The F2.8 is really F5.6 in practice, so maybe that is why they weren't including it in their lineup. The 100 STF can focus hunt in lower light. 85mm GM does not focus well in low light either. The 100 STF will have a look that you might not like. Some people feel it's a little bit too unnatural to them and looks fake. It is quite sharp in the focused area and very very smooth in the transition to out of focus. The bokeh shapes are more round and the edges dissolve instead of increasing contrast/color. It kind of smooths and homogenizes everything.
I literally bought an 85mm f/1.8 today... and it's amazing !
ApertureAce canon?
For me the 85 is my lens of choice for portraits (actually the Sigma 56 on APS-C). But I'll use the 135 (actually the Sony 85 1.8 on APS-C) for some shots. Using two bodies I don't have to change lenses, just grab the other camera. Both are great lenses, priced right, sharp, and with good color. I'll use the 85 for full body shots and the 135 for torso shots.
I shoot Canon, and I own two of the focal lengths mentioned here, an 85mm f/1.2 L and a 135mm f/2L. I use the 85mm when I have enough time to plan a shot and ensure precise focusing. It comes in handy when I need to obliterate a background for subject separation, but it does come at a cost. Chromatic abberation on areas of contrast transition is highly pronounced when using studio strobes or flashes, and flaring is definitely an issue without the lens hood or shooting into highly backlit scenes. When I need to work with more speed, say in outdoor portraits or with children, I reach for the 135mm f/2, which has blazing fast autofocus speed and is astonishingly sharp for the era from whicj it hails. Chromatic abberation has never been a noticeable issue with this lens, and the added background compression can *almost* make up for the creaminess of a background at f/1.2 at 85mm. I have even been brave enough to try an event shoot based mostly on street photography scenes with the 135mm focal length!
Thanks once again for lots of useful information in choosing our lenses. I have the 85 m m 1.8 and I love how small and light and compact it is. It acts like a scalpel and separates the subject from the background no matter how far I am from the subject or it from the background. I'm sure I could see a small Improvement in blur and bokeh with the 1.4 but the extra weight would make street shooting less pleasant. With my a7iii and the 85mm 1.8 it can just dangle on my waist not drawing my attention until I need it. Since I'm not a professional portrait shooter I think it's the best choice for me and other amateurs. Thanks again and be safe guys!
Curious why not compare the 100mm STF?
i was hoping to see that here too
The only lens I wasn't impressed with in this entire video was the one mounted to the recording camera. :/ Great comparisons of the lenses on the table, Tony. I have a differing opinion on the nicest focal length for portraiture (I greatly prefer the 135mm look), but I can respect your thoughts here. Happy shooting!
InstaBlaster.
For standard portraiture I grab the Sony 85mm f/1.4 GM or the 55mm f/1.8 if I need something a little wider. For candid portraits nothing compares to the 135mm f/1.8 GM it's AF on a 7R3 is noticeably faster and more accurate than literally any other lens I've ever put on my Sony's (And that must be over 40 lenses). The Sigma 135mm f/1.8 is remarkably close to the GM but the GM is slightly better in just about every way. It's CRAZY to say but I actually hope they update the 85GM with the XA element and the duel linear motors of the 135GM. It makes that much of a diff.
85 mm 1.8 is the best lens created which has incredible value for money in my opinion. Most photographers who are not pros will love the lens. It is tag sharp and has amazing color rendition.
yep, pro uses and loves it too
I own the Sony 85mm 1.8 and the Sony 135mm 1.8 - Both lenses are great. The 85 is small lightweight, cheap and really really good. It is my workhorse it most situations. I never thought that I need the 1.4 over the 1.8. Besides: Your clients are not going to notice anyways. The 135mm on the other hand is the craziest lens I have ever worked with. That thing is sharp as a razorblade and super fast and accurate at focusing. I bought it for weddings instead of the 70-200 2.8 and I am super happy, but I found that I barely use it outside of weddings. I much prefer the 85mm working distance.
Exactly my thoughts while I m planning to invest in Sony.
You can shoot the canon 85mm at 1.2 on the MC-11 but there is a setting you have to adjust in camera. I use this setup for my 50mm 1.2. But as you said the autofocus is painfully slow
Edwon Richardson I just use my 85mm F1.2 on a Canon body - works great, and the bokeh is the best in the business
The 85mm F1.8 focuses faster than the GM actually, its also better for video. Its a true workhorse!
Not my experience with both.
Portrait lenses focal length (for me) is mostly a function of task. I use about half Sigma Art and half native lenses. Ideally f1.4 or better (up to 100mm, then f1.8 or 2 is ok), though the Canon 50mm f1.8 STM can be used in a pinch because of it's sharpness (e.g. You were not planning a portrait doing a wildlife shoot, but your partner takes an adorable pose, and it takes no space in the bag). Rough focal length guide: As for a group/crowd, 28mm. For a family, couple or full body shots with some border, 35mm. For one person, full body shot, 35mm or 50mm. For upper torso, 50mm or 85mm and for headshots, 85mm up to 180mm. Every rule can be broken at times. But unless you are going for special effects, no close ups with 28mm. Nobody wants a zucchini for a nose. For ultra compression you can use up to a 300mm prime, but you'll be standing in the next county. Of course, you don't need a zillion lenses for one shoot, especially at the longer end. What you need will be a function of the task at hand and the setting.
I have quite a few lenses. But my two workhorses are the 85 1.4 GM and the 24-70 2.8 GM for my portraits and street photography. I agree with Tony, the aperture ring is a joy to use. I highly recommend it for anyone who is serious about portraiture.
Its interesting that you did not include the Batis 85mm or the Batis Apo 135mm.
The Batis line is made from the ground up specifically for the Sony FE mount, unlike the Sigma Art line.
Never heard of Batis
@@apierc1 Batis is a Zeiss lens.
Is there any difference, using a zoom lens like 70-200 f2,8 and setting it in 85mm for portraits apart from the aperture? Do this lens compress different?
Why not including the Batis 85?
- native
- stabilized
- weather sealed
- fast, accurate focusing
- very sharp wide open
Renting every lens possible is expensive. From what I have seen the IQ is the same as the sony 85 1.8 but it has IS, nicer body and costs more.
Tony why do u have your camera sensor open for like 5mins on the table
What do you think of the Sony FE 90mm F2.8 as a portrait lens?
Not recommended at all !!!
The FE 90 works well as a portrait lens. The biggest downside for me was the pronounced cat's eye bokeh therefore I sold it!
Have the Sigma 105 1.4 and that's the way to go, especially if you have a 50/55mm. Such a special lens and perfect for headshots.
I have, and love the Sony 85 f/1.8, but I have an unexplained yearning for that huge Sigma 105mm
Same here.
I find 200-300mm best for beauty work but often use 50-105mm for casual portraits.
Helpful video as always. I am stuck between Sony E and Canon EOS R for now. I am looking at mixing systems without overlapping too much. I am not a portrait photographer but I am a Portait/Figure painter and drawer. I am looking out for the Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 IS to be the all rounder for me. I may use a Batis 40mm f2 for Sony and the Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 IS for Canon and mix that way. I need as little compression as possible for Portaits and need contrast. After I spend $1200 for the Batis and probably $3000 for the Canon I will be waiting a while for any other lenses. Like you recommended-will likely rent first.
Just buy Sony....another world
I know the Sony 90mm Macro is just 2.8, but it's so sharp.
I have it and use it as a portrait lens every now and then. One of the sharpest lenses I've ever tried!
Stuart Anderson I own the 90macro and the 85-1.4gm. Both are great but they were really designed for different purposes. Yes the 90 is sharp but the autofocus is far slower than the 85 and from experience the sharpness difference (if any) is small in most real world use. You can take a good portrait with the 90 but you’ll realize that it wasn’t designed with that task in mind very quickly. It’s not the image quality that is the issue but the workflow and how efficient it lets you work. Most people would be happier with the 85-1.4 or 85-1.8 most of the time if they are taking portraits. You can get the job done with the 90 but it wouldn’t be what I’d reach for first.
@@stacybehrens7152 I can totally understand that. I was really just a little surprised that it wasn't mentioned at all, since it's a similar focal length, really sharp and so many people use it as a portrait lens. I do more product photography than portraits so, for now, it does double duty for me.
The 55 mm 1.8 is also crazy sharp
My favorite Prime is the Sony Zeiss 135 (A-Mount) but the one I use most is the Sony Zeiss 85, because with the 135 I’m just too far back from my models (especially when I want to capture more than just a head shot). I do love the results of the 135, but anytime I want something with a focal length greater than 85mm, I opt for the Sony G-Master 70-200 F2.8. Also, as sad as it may sound, I rarely shoot wide open in studio and to get the tac-sharpness I want for the whole image, I find I’m at f8-f11. Both the 85 and 135 do an amazing job at f8+ even though the main reason for getting them (initially) was to shoot wide open.
Hey Tony, What do you think of the Sony 90mm Macro lens G for Portrait? I heard it's a very sharp lens, dx mark has it number 10 in the world of lenses
Jad Reviews I have that 90mm macro. It’s a great lens for macro and works for portraits in a pinch but the focusing is very slow compared to the other G primes from Sony. Verrrry slow. Plus the max aperture is 2.8 which sometimes matters.
@@stacybehrens7152 So you wouldn't recommend it to photograph kids running around because of the slow focus? But what about adults that you can pose or let them stay still for the picture? Does it give you better results than the 85? Or would you say it's a tie? I am really confused and trying to decide between the 2. Is the slow focusing really frustrating? Thanks
Jad Reviews I also have the 85gm. It depends on what you want to do. If you do a lot of macro and only do portraits very occasionally then maybe the 90. But most people will be happier with the 85-1.4 or 85-1.8. The 85s are better general purpose lenses than the 90 macro. I think the sharpness differences won’t be readily apparent in most real world use. Your skill as a photographer is likely to make far more difference. Unless I’m doing macro I use the 85 much much more. The 90 really is a specialty lens that happens to also be serviceable for general purpose use. But it’s not a portrait or action lens. For stuff like taking portraits it really is substantially slower than the 85-1.4. Trust me you will definitely notice the difference. It’s not that the 90 is bad but just that it was designed for a different purpose. If you really are still conflicted though maybe try a lens rental?
A lot of reviewers say the 85 1.8 is a bit sharper and focuses faster than the 1.4. That has been my experience as well so I purchased the 85 1.8 and have loved it. I've especially loved the extra 1,000 plus dollars in my pocket.
On a side note I find that I am not shooting wide open that often anymore. When I do studio portraits I'm usually shooting at f8 or f11 and outdoors I usually am trying to incorporate the environment with a background into the picture a little more. 🤷🏿♂️
Good to know about the 1.8. Thanks for sharing.
I have the 85mm F1.8, and I love it. But if I were to upgrade to a GM lens for portraits, I think I’d go with the 135mm GM instead of the 85mm GM, even if I have to shoot a little farther from the subject. Having said that, I’ll still rent both lenses to try them before I’ll buy them.
I saved, saved, saved and got the 85 GM when it and the 85mm 1.8 Batis were the only ones on the market. The 85mm GM is like a drug - a highly addictive drug - the way it captures a scene - especially when you put some distance between you and your subject is mindblowing - I have owned the famous 135mm 1.8 Zeiss for A-mouny adapted to my E-mount and thought that was one of the best portraits lens for the system - that is until the 85 GM - not trying to shoot holes in the 85mm 1.8 - but the GM cost the price it does for a reason - try it and you will see what I mean - Thanks Tony - really enjoy your videos!!
Where is the Zeiss Batis 85mm f1.8? I own the Sony 85mm 1.8 and although it’s sharp I find it rather lacklustre. Looking for something with character, which is where the Zeiss could come in
I’ve had the Sony 85 f/1.4 for over a year now and love it
I have the Sony 85mm and Zeiss 135 1.8 (I use it with an adapter) I shoot children portraits. I love the 85 for its sharpness and focus but 135mm creates a bigger distance and actually appreciate that if I'm not working with my own kids, but with clients. Coming close may seem a little intimidating for children. I refer to the video because one of the things that crossed out in 135 was the distance but it actually depends on your style of portraiture. Nevertheless, I agree that the 85mm 1.4 if fantastic.
No doubt the higher priced Sony primes are great. However, I have found the 85 1.8 to be very sharp with great color rendering. Considering adding the 135 or 70-200 for a longer length portrait lens.
how is the new samyang 85mm/f1.4 and how is the combo use with the canon 85mm/1.8 with mc11/metabones use?
Superb review!! I was waiting for this!! Glad u shared!! Thanks
I've owned the 85mm 1.8, currently the 1.4, and now using the Sigma 105mm 1.4 and just got my delivery of the Sony 135mm 1.8 - although 85 and 105 are close in focal length, I much prefer the rendering of people with the 105mm over the 85mm (when I really look at the shots by side it becomes more apparent as the eye is trained to see the differences). The 135mm is very nice from Sony (I haven't very much time with it) but I had a 135mm from Nikon, and if given the working distance it was an amazing lens, and it gave a beautiful, classic look that a lot of other photographers where not shooting style wise.
The new Samyang/Rokinon 85 1.4 deserves to be considered. Especially for the price.
It is better than the G master
@@richardcollinsphotography1288 it has heavy yellow warm tint, not even greak lens for skin tone
Shoot those technical reviews in 4k so we can see the sharpness better.
I have my sigma 105 1.4 on my a6400 and will never take it off its too amazing. Walk around all day with this thing and i am not in shape at all LOL 4lbs is nothing compared to my old nikon set ups back in the day.
You forgot or ormitted Sony 90 mm/f2.8 macro oss. Fantastic lens for a reasonable price.
where is the Samyang 85 f1.4 EF AF ?
In a trash can.
Jason vong did a comparison on his channel
The samyang is another good option.
Samyang is Rokinon, also Bower. Not great lenses in a lot of aspects. They're growing better with time though.
@@Zarabozo Seems like they just stole(bought) old optical schemes from 70s and sell them as new.
I bought the Sony 85mm F1.4 and a week later Sony brought out the 135 F1.8. I could have kicked myself but practically in use I have realised I made the right choice as the 135 simply too long a length for my studio work. Would I like the 135? Yes, who wouldn't given the reviews but can I justify it, sadly not yet! Great review Tony thank you.
What about zeis 55mm. Give it a Try you will like it.
Tony I guess you used the Canon EOS R to record this, hence why the focusing is slow. Pls use A7III whenever you need to show items in close-up or adjust the focusing speed if that is possible on the EOS R.
I've been doing exactly the same thing, although I shoot with Nikon... 135mm was good, but ruled out pretty quickly, 105mm was very nice and hard to pass up, but If I had to pick one it would be the 85mm f1.4
Another great Video Tony...Have to agree ...Sigma doesn't focus as well as OEM lenses.
Tony any reason you left the 85 1.8 Zeiss off this? Is the image quality you get from the Zeiss Batis lens not big enough to justify the extra cost vs. the standard Sony 1.8?
Just out of curiosity what lens did you use to film this piece Tony?
6:25 do these lenses produce radically different colors or is this an white balance difference?
135mm is still my favorite fl. Your preference for 200mm always left me scratching my head as overkill but competition at 85mm is too crowded.
Would have liked to have seen the Sony 90mm 2.8 macro lens in this lineup.
Heya. I've been into wildlife and macro photography and plan on getting into serious portrait photography. I was thinking about getting the Canon 70-200 f4L IS USM because I can't afford the f2.8 IS version. I am thinking about this lens mainly for the versatility and the sharpness of it but on the other side of things I could get a Canon 85mm 1.8 or maybe even a Sigma 85mm 1.4 if I force it a bit. Which would you suggest for getting into portrait photography and eventually shooting weddings and maybe some hotel photography?
I remember you reviewed the 100mm f/2.8 STF lens, how does that stack up against these 5? Also the Laowa competitor (manual only, I know)?
Unrelated to the video topic, but that’s a neat perspective you got there in that Old San Juan shot. I don’t see many pictures from that angle.
any chance to get a zeiss batis review? especially the 40 mm :) I use the 25mm and 85mm because i love that series BUT i'm thinking of getting the 40mm
The 105 Sigma is a beast in all respects- I absolutely love it. I use it with a canon 5ds- What I don't love about it... is the slow focusing. Hand holding it waiting for it to find the spot will build your muscles quickly. Oddly enough though, once you become accustomed to the weight and how it focuses you can minimize the focus searching.
Tony, you could take a picture of Chelsea with a gas station disposable camera and she'd STILL make that camera look good! 😆
My feel about portraits is that people currently prefer humans in settings to close-ups. Possibly because everybody has seen one selfie too much. And started resenting similar things - even if the smart-phone sellfie is so different from a shot with a luminous tele on a proper camera. If that's a trend I like about it that it poses a different photographic challenge. And a more complex one
When I first went full frame with my 5Dlll I bought a few f1.4 lenses, but when I switched to Sony and got my A7r lll, I decided I wanted to keep my system small and light, so the first lens I bought was the Sony 55 f1.8 and the second lens was the 85 f1.8, they are both really good and for me the size and weight more than make up for the lack of f1.4....... I have no regrets, I still have my old Sigma 50 and 85 f1.4 lenses that work fine with the mc-11, but I haven't felt the need to use them, the other day I pulled all my bigger glass out of the closet and played around with them going back and forth with my new f1.8 lenses, and my f1.8 lenses are as sharp or even sharper at f1.8 as my f1.4 lenses stopped down to f1.8.......... and the difference in back ground blur isn't that much, it made me just want to sell all my old glass, but I still own my 5Dlll, but I also haven't used it since getting my Sony, maybe someday I will buy some f1.4 glass again when I get tired of what I got, maybe when Sony puts out an 85 GM ll, or a new 50 f1.4 ..... and maybe Sony will make both of them f1.2 to try to compete with the new Canon glass. but for now I am happy with my small and light glass, I went on a trip and took my 55 and 85 f1.8 and my 28 f2 witch is also really small and light, and it worked out perfect for me. even though there are some times where I miss a zoom,,,,,, maybe someday I will buy the Tamron 28/75 f2.8..... another small and light lens. I really think Sony was smart with there 55 and 85 f1.8 lenses, because they are a great option for someone like me who wants really good quality without the weight. as far as the aperture ring on the 85 GM, most people seem to complain that they move it without realizing it. and for me it is not necessary. because usually you put the lens at f1.4 and it stays there for the shoot, it's not like you are changing it all the time. maybe it would be good for video, I am looking forward to when Sigma makes glass specifically for mirrorless. and hopefully it will be smaller and lighter than the huge lenses they are making now. like there new 40 f1.4 monster. and as far as Canon goes, I wouldn't be surprised if the new Canon 85 f1.2 that they made for there new mirrorless Camera is better than the GM. as far as focal length goes, I have never bought a 135 lens, but I do like the look they give you. but like you said I would rather shoot at a closer distance.
I think I would like a 50 to 85 zoom for headshots and full length portraits. Not much of a zoom range so should be easy to design.
I got the SEL85F1.4GM on Ebay for $2071 AUD in July 2018, its has been my go to lens for low light event shooting on the A7RIII, it and the 70-200F2.8GM has had the most positive comments on my social media. Mind you I found it can still "hunt" in low light, so it not always snappy as the 70-200GM
Massive trolling by not including the Sigma 85mm/1.4 Art. Second best portrait lens after the Sony 135/1.8
We've found the focus to be too unreliable to be able to recommend it... based on our own testing from people like Manny Ortiz, and many emails I've received from owners.
"So I'm gonna choose the lens that focuses accurately and consistently"..... (Then video camera loses focus)
Regarding the 85 1.8 vs 1.4, everyone else I've ever seen review the two side by side has said that the 1.8 is actually a little bit sharper? However all of the other corrective aspects such as flaring and abberation are definitely more controlled on the 1.4.
Tony, have you looked at the new Rokinon 85 f/1.4 FE? Really interested in hearing what you have to say about how it compares to the 85 GM.
Good video, very educational. Spot on .
Any thoughts on the Zeiss Batis 85mm 1.8? I'm (perhaps) falsely assuming contrast will be better than with the Sony 85mm 1.8. Am getting along well with my Zeiss Batis 40mm 2.0...
Tony you could set Canon 85 mm f1.2 to f1.2 on the Sony if you change the stop step increment from 1/3 to 1/2! I had the same problem and someone on facebook gave me the hint I mentioned here.
Great review Tony. I wonder how you would rank the Sony 100 STF GM in this group since it is designed specifically for portraits.
Thanks
Any opinions on the nokinin/samyang 85 50, and 35mm F1.4? maybe for hobby?
The Sony 85 1.8 was the first lens I bought for my sony. I use it all the time.
What length would you recommend for a cropped sensor? (A6300). 50mm?
My Sony 85mm f/1.4 is really sharp, but I find the AF hunts a lot with it in low light ... more than the 24-70 for example. Maybe just my copy, but ...
Tony, great video... small typo to correct: the comments list the Sony 85mm f/1.8 twice... twice. I bought this lens and love it! BTW: I only bought it once!
Hey Tony, thanks for the review! I noticed when you show a lens close up in front of the camera, it takes time for your camera to focus on it. How about you place an overlay of the showcase video within your review video? I think that would be really cool and you could do that while you talking and presenting each lens?
Thanks Tony, took your advise on the Sony 85/1.8 could you also give me an idea on the perfect landscape lenses regards Terry
excellent photos . Please tell me nikon 35mm f1.8 g vs nikon 50mm f1.8g optical quality is same or not ?? thanks
I have both the Sony 85mm f/1.8 and f/1.4. The f/1.4 is noticeably sharper, but for the weight is really hard on my neck and shoulder for any length of time.
Is there a way to see the high res of the sample photos taken so we can have a better look at the differences?