I find for portraits all of the new mirrorless lenses are more harsh than I would like. There is too much contrast and vibrance. Photos look like all the new cgi movies and that’s not a good thing. I think the newer Nikon G series lenses struck a really good balance between IQ and pleasing character, especially this 58.
I own the 58 for many years now and still feel that it serves and satisfies my needs in portrait and people photography. I am not into clinically sharp images in portraits although I also own the Z50/1.8 which results that I am not using it very often.
I can understand that, I would have kept the 58 but it couldn't meet the demands of fast paced events. A little too long as i'm instinctively know the 50mm.
I have used 35 1.4G,58 1.4G and 85 1.4G my most used lens was 58mm best for portraits weddings better than 85mm for sure not in CA though but images looks different and you got perfect trinity like 28,58,105 however I would choose 24-70 2.8 and 58+105mm for candid or ceremony shots for weddings.
Thank you, thank you, thank you for this review. I 'll never, ever sell my 58/1.4. It's one of the very few modern lenses left with real character, rather than just crude sharpness and high contrast (although you can easily turn it into that on post). If I was forced to keep one setup, it would be my 58/1,4 on my Df or Z6ii, BW, on an HP5 simulation. No photoshop required, ever.
Yes, there are a lot of people who like the new contrast and crudeness, but looks like we agree on the retro look. I'm loving it on the zfc, such a nice build and feels closer to the art of photography.
Nice one! Coming from a z5, I’m debating on getting a df paired with a 58 1.4 or just a 50 1.2 and forget getting a df. I think personally it’s a no brainier to go for the first option
Loved this lens when I owned it and will most likely purchase again, but it's an optic I would probably never shoot unless it's a portrait or I'm doing some kind of special still subject work where I wanted to achieve a certain look wide open. If I'm taking a 50 out for a day on the town I'm reaching for the 50 1.8s every time. If you want a really special lens you can take out and shoot all day no problem, the 28 1.4 is unbeatable.
I have this lens. I used it last weekend for a wedding. It’s great. Love the rendering and very little post editing ! Files look great straight out of camera. Skin tones are WOW ! Not overly sharp
The 58 1.4G is a beautiful lens for portraiture. I think you'll continue to fall in love with it. Remember, don't be tempted to use it on a DSLR - you'll have trouble with focus shift.
You made me even more excited about my 58 1.4. I took it out while watching and shot objects in my den - delighted by the dreamy magic of its out-of-focus rendering.
Nikon 58mm 1.4 vs canon 50mm 1.2 ef Not moving the camera or subject. 58mm1.4 bokeh is smoother than canon50mm 1.2. That’s why i love 58mm f1.4 so so much.
I owned all three. I got rid of the 58, which had been my personal do-everything lens for three years, but was not reliable enough for event work, even on the Z bodies. The 50 f/1.2 offers a lot more than just bokeh; it's ironic that you have to use it as an everyday lens to really appreciate its versatility, because the size and weight keep most people from doing that. I feel totally confident using that lens with the light coming from ANY direction. Not a lot of lenses I could say that about. The 58 was great in nightclubs, but the 50 f/1.2 eases my mind on the job.
@@russandloz Yeah. I'll never understand how they were able to make two lenses with such excellent optics so stunningly different in size and weight. The 105 macro is also stunningly light for its optical quality.
Thanks for this video. For the last 3 years the 58 has been my go to mid-range prime lens inbetween the 28 and 105 1.4 lenses. I do love its look and character. However, the softness below f/2 and the relativity large minimum focus distance mean its a bit weak in some circumstances. As you alluded to, i don't think I would fully trust using it in an ultra low light ceremony, if shooting at wide open was the only option. I recently purchased a 50mm 1.2s for a good price, and i feel like it's much closer to my other 2 prime lenses in its strength wide open. So I believe the 50 1.2 is the way forward. But for now I'll be keeping the 58mm in my kit as backup or when i need something a bit more discreet. 😄
Yes I can see those points you make are the same for me. I would keep the 58 for the times you also don’t want to carry the 1.2. I wish there was a 1.4 that was good ands small. The 50 1.4 wasn’t very good
What an excellent comparison, really well done! I have the 50 1.8, and if $ were no object sure I'd pick up the 1.2. But for my somewhat limited use of the 50 prime in general (although I am using it more these days), the 1.8 is ideal. And if I'm putting $ into a 1.2 - it's definitely going to be the 85 over the 50. The 58 1.4 has its own unique look, it's fantastic. But other than the 200-500, I'm off of F lenses now. Thanks guys!
I picked up a battered and bruised 58 last year, and it rarely leaves the camera (Z6). It especially comes alive after sunset, and I don’t think it’s ever been too slow to focus even in low light. There’s a remarkable separation between subject and background, yet as you say, the transition is totally smooth which makes the subject integrate into the scene.
I’m with Loz on this one. The 50/1.8 is all I need and more in a 50mm lens. The limitations I run into are my own shortcomings in talent, ability, and editing.
I sold my z 50f1.8 once I got my hands on z 24-70 f2.8. The 24-70 f2.8 is brilliant and feels like prime lens quality in bokeh and sharpness, not too much difference from f1.8 and f2.8. I have ordered the 58 f1.4 and hope it will give me different character in image colours and creamy separation.
Like you said the 50 1.2 is special but I can’t be bothered to carry that as an everyday lens. I like the look but it’s to big. Maybe if nikon produce some smaller 1.4 primes that will be the sweet spot.
I’ve seen so many videos that praise this lens so I’d keep this lens for its look and feel. However, there is absolutely no way I would ever sell my 50 1.2s or my 85 1.2s they’re superior in every way imo
@@russandloz for me it’s not a problem on my Z9 because it balances well. I’m always happy using my 70-200 so don’t really see a problem with the weight. I do agree that it’s not ideal on Z6/7 but still wouldn’t change for the world.
I have your trinity plus the 200 f2 VRii. I will keep these four F primes forever with my D5. The z glass I only have a zoom trinity z14-30 f4, z24-120 F4, z100-400. They are amazing travel lens and so sharp. But for portraits, I love and prefer the characters of the 4 F mount primes, 58 and 105 being used the most and 200 f2 always gives me the shot of the day. Great choice and video!
Great video as always. I loved the find edge’s technique to ascertain the field curvature. I hadn’t seen that used before. A great follow up vid could be a 50 f1.4 vs 58 f1.4; which is sharper wide open. I’m guessing the 58 would blur more of the background due to the focal length
It would seem from what I can see on RU-vid that our favourite 50 1.2S has most of the advantages of both the 50 1.8S and the 58 1.4. Cool... The 58 will have a more gradual and perhaps more appealing transition because the gradient is much less as the starting place is far less sharp. I've never used the 58 but I must say your wedding photos were great. looks like you've cost me some money now.🤣 But in answer to you question the 58 would always be a supplementary lens for a certain look on occasions with the 50 1.2 the main workhorse. I think there would be too many occasions where the 58 wasn't suitable.
@@musiqueetmontagne Yes, unfortunately the 58 just wasn’t suitable for a lot of reasons but when I look back at the results it certainly has a character the z can’t recreate.
@@russandloz Indeed, but how many speciality lenses can we keep. I would keep them all but it may precipitate a divorce. 🙈.. I still use my 50 F1.2 AIS on an FTZ wide open for occasional head shots or city at night shots because nothing else, certainly not the excellent modern we corrected lenses, can create.
@@musiqueetmontagne Exactly, I have a future update of this video where I end up selling the 58 even though it's my most unique lens. I sold it for the same price I paid but still, can't keep them all
I love my Z6 but one thing for sure about the Z Mount lenses though-the design is so boring compared to the intricacies of the F mount lenses-crafted with such character while the Z mount is basically a boring, black barrel tube 😂
Yes I can't help feel that too. At first I was excited by it all, but now I like the f mount on z bodies for the new innovations and better focussing (at times)
58 is slow to focus even on the z9. you will see on the dance floor or in dark places where the lens will fall apart. It will start to work at about f2.5.
You have confirmed what I’ve long suspected about the 58mm f/1.4 G-the focus falloff is more GRADUAL than most lenses. Which explains why it doesn’t look good on test charts yet renders portraits so BEAUTIFULLY. I’d pick the 58mm f/1.4 over the others every time. I’m still shooting with a pair of D4S’s and the very same prime lens lineup you have! The 28mm / 58mm / 105mm “Unholy Trinity”.
Great video. I primarily use a Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-s on my D750, and I absolutely love it for portrait work. I've been considering picking up one of the 58mm f/1.4s as a more modern compliment. You did a great job walking through the pros and cons, and it was especially nice to see you focus on the background rendering. And coming from a manual focus lens, I don't care much about AF speed, LOL!
Thank you both! This is an amazing review of this odd Nikon lens, which has puzzled me for several years! I just ordered a used copy and am really excited to try it out. My main nifty-fifty is my 55 mm f/1.4 Zeiss Otus, which is obviously not the the same, but it will be interesting to compare the two. Thank you!
@@russandlozYour video did it finally! I’ve been tempted for a long time to get this “odd” Nikkor lens. Your video showed some gorgeous examples, which I really liked. I also own the 50 f/1.8 s for Z mount and although it is a wonderful lens, I never gravitate towards it as I feel it is, as Vivian would say, “BORING”! I like the character of some of the older f/1.4 lenses as well as the almost “demonic” 135mm f/2 DC and 105 f/2 DC lenses. The DC lenses are just pure perfection when you learn them!
Nice comparison. I have all 3 of these lenses and also used to have the F Mount 50mm 1.4 G lens as well although I subsequently sold that one as it was definitively the worst of all these lenses. As far as the 3 I still have (those in this comparison) are concerned they are all good in their own right and each has a unique use case for me. There is no question that the two S line lenses are much sharper than the 58 1.4 G lens. So when sharpness is needed its one of those over the 58mm. The big difference between the two S line 50's is really size, weight, bokeh and price, so these are the factors that lead to a decision between them. For me, if I am traveling, then the 50 1.2 S is often out - but if its a local portrait shoot I will use it. If I know that I need the most shallow DOF then the 1.2 is the obvious choice although the 58 1.4 is not far behind here, and it is also very light and portable whereas the 1.2 is not. If looking for character the 58 1.4 is a great choice, but with that comes a lot of aberrations that are corrected in the S line lenses. Like you, I got the 58mm used for a good price and for a good used price this lens is absolutely worth having - although I do not think it is worth it at all for $1,600 - anything 1k or lower and it is worth having. In the end, I find myself using them all - probably using the 50 1.8 S the least as I do opt for shallower DOF in general, but there have been some times when the 50 1.8 S was the best choice - I wanted sharpness and precision and was traveling. In the end, I plan to keep all three of these lenses and use them accordingly - its actually nice to have such diverse choices as this useful focal length. Thanks again for a thought provoking video! -PD
@@russandloz For sure - though I seriously doubt that Nikon will be making any 1.4 lenses anytime soon. They seem to be committed to the 1.8 - 1.2 distinction. And the 1.8 S lenses are so good optically and still reasonably small and light that they are really an excellent option for many photographers - even pros - that want light weight and small but with pro output. Now that Nikon has definitively allowed 3rd party manufacturers to license the Z mount (Tamron and Sigma), it may only be a matter of time until Sigma is producing 1.4 Art lenses for the Z mount - time will tell. For now, I am patiently waiting for the 35mm 1.2 S - this lens will quickly become a stand out and staple lens in the line up IMO. -PD
THANKS A LOT, excellent video! I do people-photography, and recently moved to fully mirrorless because of the Z 85/1.2. With an interim Z7ii, because I'm still waiting for my Z8 (my mirrorless entry was the inconspicuous Zfc, replacing my backup D800). And I sold my trusted D850+105/1.4 combo because I like the Z 85/1.2 even more than the 105/1.4 as my main go-to lens. I did not use my 58/1.4 a lot on my DSLRs - not because of the lens but more, because I only need the focal-length if I'm distance constrained. But I was considering to replace it with the Z50/1.2 because it might give me even better "looks". With your video-input, I will keep it for now and maybe get a 50/1.2 loaner for an intense try-out. I like the 58/1.4 "look" when I "nail" the picture, even though to me it is hit&miss. Sometimes to me the 58's pictures @1.4 just look similar to the other/old Nikkor 50s/58s (F, G, AIS), but also sometimes they look a lot better to me on how the focus/defocus parts of the image appear - something I immediately loved about the 105/1.4 all the time, and the Z85/1.2 as well (where I like 85 better than 105 for not having to get this far away sometimes).
What I love with the 105 f1.4 is that you can take images at a distance and people will not notice you as much and still get beautiful images. I do need something closer tho like a 58 or 85. One lens cant rule them all.
I like the 58mm, it renders skin tone better than the Z lens, which is too much contrast. But i dont like the F lens mount though the stupid FTZ adapter, It looks horrible on Z system, autofocus also hunts a bit slower than the Z lens.
I guess different people have different expectations about the look a 50mm should provide. I struggle to understand why you might choose to judge the 50 1.8 S for portraiture at a middle distance. At a comfortable distance from the subject I much prefer the 85mm 1.8S for portraits. If you want great subject separation from the background with a 50 perhaps you pick a spot where the background is further away instead, or get really close to the subject. With the same framing how do the 35, 50, 85 and 105 look to you?
Yes it’s a good point that in an ideal scenario you should maximise any lens with shorter distances etc. Though often in event photography I don’t have that luxury of time or space. The 105 will always have the best subject separation but I could seldom have the space to use it. That’s why I like the 28 and now 58 1.4’s so I don’t need space or that much time to create subject separation.
Great video been looking for the nikon 58 1.4 pricing keeps going UP I would love you to try it against the 58 mm 1.4 voiglander manual focusing lens which I have but really tempted with the nikon cheers Jonathan
i think situation is similar like EF vs RF 50mm f1.2 Canon. I mean F version much smaller lighter even with adapter and most importantly have character, Z grow bigger heavier and sharper but lose the character of F :)
I have owned and made great images with all three. The people who care the least about bokeh quality (as long as there is some) are the customers and viewers. Good bokeh is for the photographer. The 58 had great bokeh but was too soft wide open, IMHO. The 50 1.8 is nice and sharp but has more clinical and busy bokeh. The 1.2 certainly has the best overall image quality but falls down on size, weight, and cost. If the work is fore yourself get the 50 1.2. If images are for a client, the 50mm 1.8 will suffice.. For this photographer, the 1.2 is best except when portability is important -- read, have both.
It’s a good lens. But I ended up selling it and keeping the Nikon 50 1.2 as it’s faster focussing and better focal length for me. There is a video explaining this
It is a bit lower than normal as we had wind interference so had to use audio correction software. We use rode go move but I don’t feel they are great with Nikon when it comes to voice peaking.
@@russandloz Because your are not being serious and wasting time for the first 3 minutes or more of the review. I decided to just watch a different review on the same lens.
You can skip the intro for very serious side by side comparisons. We like our chat and some silly moments, as do our followers. People like different things @@CEEPMDEE
@@russandloz I just found this channel and i did like the chat. It was also good to see the rendering of the lens, since you used all the 3 lenses and even labeled it.
