Nikon 85mm f1.4 AIS or Zuiko 100mm f2

vegeotto · Jun 30, 2012

I have a Nikon FM2n and Olympus OM2n and I want a portrait lens, I'm undecided between these two. I walked into the camera store and found, what I think, are very good prices for both of these lenses ($395 for Nikkor and $594.95 for Zuiko).

How do these compare in terms of bokeh and sharpness? Or is it really 85mm FOV vs 100mm FOV. I have no experience with a telephoto so I'm not sure which FOV I'd prefer.

danfogel · Jun 30, 2012

What about the zuiko 85/2? Really sharp, gives you apples to apples focal length comparison. Slower, but said to be one of the sharpest Zuikos. Of course, if you will shoot in bright light, maybe go Nikon to take advantage of the higher shutter speed 1/4000 vs. 1/1000 on the FM2n.

mopar_guy · Jun 30, 2012

A sharp lens isn't always the best choice for portraits.

vegeotto · Jun 30, 2012

Yeah actually I did think about the Zuiko 85mm f2, it's been on my mind, and I was going to start looking for one of those or possibly a Zuiko 100mm f2.8, but today when I walked into the camera store I saw two steller portrait lenses. I didn't really look into the Nikon so much but the Zuiko 100mm f2 sells closer to 1k from what I've read. So it seemed to be a better deal.

I think 85mm is a better focal length in this format because I have a better chance of holding it at a slower shutter speed (maybe) and it is probably a better walk-around lens. I might go for that one or maybe a Zuiko 85mm f2.

mopar_guy · Jun 30, 2012

That's a low price for the 100mm f2 Zuiko. I won't sell mine for any price. It is one of the few Zuikos to used ED glass. My copy of the 100mm f2 Zuiko is extremely sharp and a wonderful low light medium telephoto.

Nick Merritt · Jun 30, 2012

I was going to say that's a great price for the Nikkor. I know the 100/2 and 85/2 Zuikos have fine reputations, but the Nikkor seems to always be on the short list of the very best manual focus Nikkors. I would jump on it for that price, myself.

vegeotto · Jun 30, 2012

Man, makes me want to jump on both, then sell the loser. They both seem like great deals.

Jesper · Jul 1, 2012

I have no experience of the Zuiko 100/2, but I have been using Nikkor 85/1.4 since the mid 80's and you will not be disappointed with this lens.
If both lenses are available at the same shop you might be able to take a test roll with each of them and compare.

rolleiman · Jul 1, 2012

If it's mainly for portraits, then why go for such high speed lenses?....My favourite portrait lens is the 105mm 2.5 Nikkor. I would tend to use f4 for the majority of my outdoor portraits. With f1.4 or f2, that's going to give you very little depth of field close in. The only time I would use a lens that fast would be indoor available light or night time shots.

Richard S. (rich815) · Jul 1, 2012

rolleiman said:
If it's mainly for portraits, then why go for such high speed lenses?....My favourite portrait lens is the 105mm 2.5 Nikkor. I would tend to use f4 for the majority of my outdoor portraits. With f1.4 or f2, that's going to give you very little depth of field close in. The only time I would use a lens that fast would be indoor available light or night time shots.

+1 here. 105/2.5 Nikkor is an amazing lens and very sharp yet still quite good for portraits. One of my absolute favorites and much lighter than my legendary 85/1.4 Planar which I use with my Contax system. Guess which gets used WAY more often?

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Jul 1, 2012

600 dollar for Zuiko ? You can buy a Leica lens for that price and 100 times better.

PhotoJim · Jul 1, 2012

rich815 said:
+1 here. 105/2.5 Nikkor is an amazing lens and very sharp yet still quite good for portraits. One of my absolute favorites and much lighter than my legendary 85/1.4 Planar which I use with my Contax system. Guess which gets used WAY more often?

Agreed. And a 105/2.5 Nikkor is easy to find for under $200.

jochen · Jul 2, 2012

Hello,
the 1:1,4/85 Nikkor is very sharp and has a high contrast, maybe too sharp for portraits; the 1:2/85 mm lens is much cheaper, much smaller and much lighter and not so razor-sharp, it has the usual 52 mm filter thread, wide open it is softer than the 1,4. Since the 1:2,5/105 mm Nikkor has the reputation to be one of the best lenses ever made for the 24x36 format (and I think this could be right), it has a high price.

Newt_on_Swings · Jul 2, 2012

I like my Nikkor 105 2.5 too! also the build is very simple and easy to take apart to clean if needed (I just cleaned my ais version two weeks or so ago).

But then again thats a really nice price for the 85 1.4 Nikkor... and for the Zuiko I would love to have it reading what I have on users experiences with it.

baachitraka · Jul 2, 2012

I own a Zuiko 85mm f/2.0 and as told by Jochen it may not be that sharp but it is good/great enough for portraits esp., when developed with Rodinal 1+25 or 1+50. ;-)

I only have condensor enlarger so I prefer less sharp lens. Most of the times I shoot either with Zuiko 85mm or Vivitar 135mm(not sharp but great for portraits.)

TheFlyingCamera · Jul 2, 2012

I would definitely do a side-by-side comparison of the two - when I was looking for a portrait-ish lens for my Contax, I was able to try out both the 85 1.4 and the 100 f2. The 85 1.4 was a whole stop faster, a couple hundred bucks cheaper, and it had a virtually identical field of view. We're talking maybe 2-4 degrees different. Yes, the 85 1.4 is a bigger, heavier lens, but that speed was amazing, especially for shooting in dim light.

E. von Hoegh · Jul 2, 2012

PhotoJim said:
Agreed. And a 105/2.5 Nikkor is easy to find for under $200.

105 Nikkor. A great, classic lens available in two versions, Sonnar type and Gauss type. The Gauss stops down to f:32, the Sonnar to f:22; the Sonnar is the earlier, and is reputed to be slightly less sharp at close distances. Sometimes can be found (single coated Sonnar) for under $100. This is the lens that got me re-started using the 35mm for portraits, after 10 or 15 years of using 4x5 and 8x10 exclusively.

Ken N · Jul 2, 2012

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
600 dollar for Zuiko ? You can buy a Leica lens for that price and 100 times better.

$600 for the Zuiko 100/2 is an excellent price for a lens which shames most Leica lenses. This not your typical lens.

In the world of Zuikos, the 100/2 is a superstar lens. The others in the same bracket which are exceptional for portraiture are the 90/2 and the 35-80/2.8 zoom. The 100/2.8 and 85/2, which are great lenses in their own right, are not in the same league when you are talking about portraiture.

Ken

John Koehrer · Jul 3, 2012

85/1.4=narrower DOF wide open.
Bokeh? Don't know, don't care.
As someone suggested, since they're local to you, shoot a few frames with each. You pays your money and takes your pick.

kivis · Jul 5, 2012

I vote for the Nikkor 105/2.5 Ai (not the AIS cause it has that ridiculous built in hood that never stays in place). Cheap, sharp, sharp. Did I say sharp?

Ihmemies · Jul 9, 2012

I once made a lame bokeh comparison between 35-50-85&135 with my D80.... http://hakkarainen.kuvat.fi/tempo/spam/85_vs_135/bokeh.htm

I'd say that 85/1.4 AiS makes smoothest bokeh from Nikon's fast speed MF lenses.

Nikon 85mm f1.4 AIS or Zuiko 100mm f2

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency