Nikon Z 50mm f1.2 S lens review vs Nikon Z 50mm f1.8 S | The Z 50mm challenge Image & Video Samples 

I personally like the 1.8 because the 1.2 called me poor.

Enjoyed the review. I have seen a couple of other good comparison’s between these two lenses, but in this review, the differences were clearer. Overall, I can see why pros and well-heeled hobbyist spend the money. Like other professional Z glass (or Canon RF glass, etc.) the value proposition is clear to those who decide to make the investment. I am glad you pointed out the other big story; “How well the 50 f1.8 lens stands up in a comparison!”. I think that is true regardless of the price point. The price and size just makes the 1.8 all that more remarkable.

Due to the lower element count of the 50mm Z 1.8 S lens, it has superior tonal and color contrast, whereas the 50mm Z 1.2 S lens has excellent bokeh and sharpness. However. due to the price and weight, I'm going with the 50mm 1.8 S Lens.

Thank you for confirming a quality of 50 1.8s,an outstanding lens.

Excellent video! I love the side by side comparisons. I have the original Z6 and the 50mm 1.8 lens. While the 1.2 is amazing these comparisons made me very happy with my lens. As an amateur enthusiast on a budget the 1.8 can't be beat!

This video came out SO GOOD! Again, it was fun to film this with you and settle the debate for a 1.2 or 1.8 lens for a viewer out there. #RockAndRoll

Nice video of the Nikon Z 1.8 and the 1.2 lens. The 1.2 is definitely really good for the bokeh and great detail and sharpness of the subject especially in the small area of the subject, it comes into view really good. I think the 1.2 is worth the price tag and it will pay for itself in photo jobs. Michael is so cool to see with you. Great video Vahagn.

Great video guys! I have both lenses, 1.8 is amazing for it's price and when I don't need faster lens, the smaller factor is really useful. And 1.2 just blows my mind every time I use it. Sharpness at 1.2., bokeh... I really love it despite it's size and weight.

Great collab. I'm sold on the 1.2. I already own the 1.8 and it's just gorgeous and sharp, but who can resist that bokeh on the 1.2?

Thank you for the video , it's very detail to take over each parts of different situation .

How about showing few low light samples...

Damn that 1.2 wide open is on a whole new level!

The 50 1.2 is just fantastic, I enjoy it every single time! :) The 1.8 is more practical and a really great alternative! But the joy of the 1.2 is worth every penny, for me ;)

“Is that Penn Park … IT IS PENN PARK !” Im from Whittier, crazy reaction seeing you here !

Thanks, Vahagn. I really enjoyed the review and this helped me decide to stick with the 1.8 for now.

Thx for comparison. The 1.2 ia a great lens no question, but the 1.8 gives definitely the most bang for the bucks.

That is a very helpful comparison. 1.8 for my Z 50. Thank you.

The 50/1.8 is incredible, regardless of price!

Excellent video! To me, I am going to sell my Sigma art 85 1.4 for Nikon Z 50 1.2S over 1.8 due to the sharpness and image quality 1.2 performs well in all environment than 1.8. 50mm 1.2 is also the best focal length for wedding photography too. 50 1.2 is the winner for wedding photography! What do you think @Vahagraphy? Thank you so much!

Great video thank you. I see no material difference between them wide open and my clients won't appreciate any subtle bokeh difference. In my POU (philosophy of use) I can move my distance to subject and get identical separation in many cases (to a point). I can tax deduct these lenses but the ROI just isn't there for me. The extra size and weight of the 1.2 vs 1.8 is a non-starter for me because of the locations and travel requirements. If I'm going to switch to Z Mount it makes no sense to me to end up with a honking great heavy piece of glass when the 50/1.8 Z produces results like this; not to mention the 50/1.2 AI-S that does essentially the same job in a far smaller package.

The 1.2 at an aperture of1.2 obliterates the background with a nice dreamy distortion. The 1.8 at an aperture of 1.8 compared with the 1.2 at an aperture of 1.8, well, I couldn't see the difference. My money is on the 1.8. A very good comparison video. Rock on dude.

On a roll bro!

Great comparison, great images and video to make it super clear what you get for the extra money and weight of the f/1.2; and yes I am super late to this party at well!

I felt the 1.8 looked better lol... but both are really good, if I could afford the 1.2s I would get them but the 1.8 did amazingly! Thank you as always.

Nice comparison. I just picked up the 1.2 and it IS worth it IMHO. The micro contrast is second to none.

Thanks!

Great Video!, I have the 1.8 with the Z7-II, the 1.8 is a Great Lens, but hands Down, the 1.2 is Better, I can see myself eventually purchasing the 1.2 if I ever decide to do photography as a profession, it would be a got to have Lens

It's better, but not by much! Impressive lenses from Nikon recently - even the 40mm f2 is very good. Only photographers will see the difference.

The Z 50mm f1.2 has smoother bokeh, but slightly less colour saturation and contrast wide open than the f1.8 but both seem to even out at f2.8. The Z f1.2 I think, would be right in it's element at a small-to-medium size venue band shoot where I can shoot close to the stage. Most of the musicians I know however, are too broke to pay well enough for me to justify buying this lens.

Excellent review! You might want to check out Monochrome Memoirs or Matt Irwin on their reviews. I would love to see thdm on your show👍

Well on this one the 1. 8 on my camera and 1500! 1n my pocket would be a win win thanks Rock on

I think I missed this episode. But I just wanted to say that at the 50mm focal length I could never see myself getting the 1.2. In fact, I'm even more impressed with my 50/1.8 after watching this video. To me, the 1.2 is certainly great, but no way in hell is it worth the penalty in cost and size and weight over the 1.8. Maybe this just reveals how much of an amateur I am. 📷😃👍

Great video!

Thanks for this great review Best Comparison 👍

Enjoy your channel and I have learned a lot from Nikon shooters. As for your channel on Jared Polin, yes he is a great photographer but like me, I am a beginning photographer, I just don't take his opinion on a lens or camera I am interested in . I do my research on a lens or camera if I am deciding to buy.

I currently have the 50 1.8 and 85 1.8. In your opinion is it worth it to upgrade to the 50 1.2? Or would money be better spent on the 85 1.2?

I recently bought a Z 50 1.8S and am on the verge of being entitled to resign and refund. I like to be uncompromising. But I am increasingly inclined to stay with my 1.8S. The difference with the 1.2S in bokeh doesn't seem to me to justify going for such heavy and expensive equipment. The bokeh drawn by the 1.2S seems unnatural to me. I also considered the Nikkor Z 50 1.4, which is noticeably less sharp. Additionally, there is a manual Voigtlander Nokton 50 f/1 on the market, which is priced comparably to the 1.2S, but without AF. On the other hand it is lighter and brighter. Unfortunately, my editing program does not have a correction profile for it. Nevertheless, Nokton offers a truly artistic bokeh f/1.0. I would appreciate any suggestions.

Hi Vahagan, which would be best? An 85mm 1.8 S lens or a 50mm 1.2 S lens?

I think I’m gonna hold out for the 85mm1.2

One can compare those two lenses as you had done, but also from a competitive advantage POV. How often does one see images taken with a 50 f/1.2 S (or a NOCT), whereas almost everywhere and from everyone with a 50 f/1.8 S. In other words, too ordinary. That's one of the reasons why I haven't shot with a 50 f/1.8 for over four decades, even as an enthusiast. But I have the Z 50 f/1.2 S. Q&A: 1) It is the photographer, not the gear. What if the photographers have the same skills and experience (e.g., the same person)? Hence the difference may come down to equipment. 2) The difference is minimal. Sad but true and that include the NOCT. Unlike the old glasses, the f/1.8 has harsh out of focus background, f/1.4 is smooth and f/1.2 is creamy. Hence, the price difference probably can only be justified in situations when the f/1.8 comes up short. Then, it becomes business as usual for the photographer who has the f/1.2 S while the f/1.8 S owners may have to work harder. 3) Pros and cons: The pro is f/1.2 and cons are: pricey, too big & heavy and the control ring is too loose, thus the photographer often has to double check for any accidental change of values. Hence, I disable the control ring. 4) Does it worth the price difference? The text book answer is diminishing return. 5) Do you need one? IMO, no if you have to ask, otherwise, horse for courses. Personally, I expect more from the Z lens collection. For instance, I wish Nikon offers a 28-70 f/2 just as Canon does, instead of repeating the old standard bearer (24-70 f/2.8).

I knew the 1.2 would be better but wow I am so surprised just how much better it is. The 1.8 is a fantastic lens so yea surprised

What about the 1.8 for reflex? It only costs 200 dollars and it can be used with an adapter

Interesting video. Thx for that :-)

❤️❤️❤️

Gotta get that 1.2!!!

I prefer the 1.8 but your other recent video where you bought the 1.2 makes the 1.2 look much better but I don't think that the average shooter is going to think the 1.2 delivers a good value.

Oh you can tell the difference for sure, the 1.2S has that special quality. The 1.8S is incredibly comparable however, I don't think most non-photographers could even tell the difference. (Other than the price). I concur: if I was using this lens to make money, 100% 1.2S. However, for the casual photographer, it's a gigantic and intimidating lens for casual portraits. I think the 1.8S is better all around for most times when you're not actually shooting wide open.

Thanks man. Great video. I’m new to photography and I just bought all the 1/8 Nikon S Line lens. Because of the price and overall satisfaction from the 1/8 vs the price of the 1/2. I also went from a d3300 to the New Z9. 😂. I know, BIG JUMP! What’s the best setting focus mode setting for taking pictures of 2-5 people? Because sometimes one person is focused and the others aren’t. Please advise. New Subscriber. Thanks man. 😊 Ps, I’m still learning so I may need simple terminology and examples😂

Very interesting to see the difference between the lenses was stark. Are you going to slowly change to Z mount lenses when the Z9 makes its appearance or have you decided now to switch from F to Z mount 🤔

Can you compare the sigma 50mm 1.4 art with the adapter

Excellent!

the 1.2 has a real character. it's what you pay. Same as the Sigma 35mm f/1.2 I own on my lumix S1R... or the Leica 50mm SL 1.4 If one does portrait for his leaving, yes the 1.2 deserves...

Nice review!

This different. Both has similiar premium quality from 1.8 up. The deciding factor is the size. If 1.2 size half the length ill buy the 1.2

Love my 50 1.2S

side to side with sigma 50 mm1.4 art would be nice to see

The f/1.2 is without a doubt worth every bit of $2200. The fact that the f/1.8 is a homerun as well shouldn't detract from that. For me personally, the f/1.8 is 'good enough' as I don't shoot this focal length often. But, when I do need a fast 50mm, I have the reliable f/1.8 in the bag, and it won't take up much room! That said, I now have $1800 EXTRA to spend on other gear! (you can find more f/1.8s on the used market than the f1.2, and it was only $400 in 9/10 condition)... With that extra cash I saved, I can grab a 105mm Z MC, an 85mm f/1.8S, and still have enough to fill my gas tank to take me to a location where I can use these amazing lenses! That said, I do still want that f/1.2... I just have other priorities.

Looks to me like the 1.2 is a half stop darker?

The 50mm 1.2S lens is an amazing lens, but having the 50mm 1.8S lens is not justifiable with the slight difference. I am going to save the cost difference and wait on the 85mm 1.2S lens when ever it comes out since I already have the 50mm 1.8S which is amazing in its own right

Thanks for the reviews! Guess I'm old school---I've always been impressed with Nikon's AFS FX Nikkor lenses with their gold lettering, gold ring, gold N and of course the outstanding quality and sharp images. The Z lenses may be more tech advanced...however, they remind me of the bland looking kit lenses back in the day. So, I recently ordered the latest Z adapter with the Z9! Canon's RF lenses also look like kit lenses in my opinion...I adapt my Canon EF L lenses on my R6.

The 1.2 makes you smile more

Nowdays. I prefer great f1.8 ie great f1.2 except at the time i actually need it.

Great lens but the question is will the client appreciate it if there's nothing to compare it to. So what photographer is going to have two lenses with the same focal length just to prove a point.

I'd prefer a non S f/1.4 that is a light and compact as the 50 1.4G. I no longer shoot professional and my days of breaking my back hand holding lenses are over. As amazing as the S line in, I just want a small light 1.4 and I'm ok if it isn't as good. I just want af, no adapter, and that 1.4 aperture. Nikon is making it hard to stay with them. I don't want to go Sony but they have a 1.4 that is much more like my old g lens.

Personally , not worth the money. Beautiful lens no question . It really does depend what you’re using it for . If your a wedding photographer, I could see it ,sure . I wanted to see the 1.2 on the Z 6 . He had it on the Z6 II .

In short, for the masses, go for the 1.8. For studio and wedding photography, go for the 1.2, period!

At 1,8, the 50f/1,2 has smoother bokeh in the foliage. But is it worth this price difference. the 1.8 is known already as being very good. And it's what we can expect for it as it's already 2 to 3 times the price of a regular F mount 1.8 50mm ...

50 1.2 look like the bokeh we can see in some big Hollywood movie at 2100 USD it is actually kind of cheap ... If only Nikon Z6II had NLOG internally

The 1.8 looked sharper for the still shots. The 1.2 a bit soft(that could be down to the narrower depth of field) For video the 1.2 was a clear winner ✅

good video

The 50mm 1.2 is sooo pleasing for Video but i heard it shouldnt be that Good for Video because it’s Not a Stepper Motor ?! And Nobody Testing this Lens for Video! This Video was the only one i found with small Video testing in it!

At f1.2 the depth of field at several feet is just too narrow, f1.8 is the goldilocks speed. Unless it's for really really low light.

and I thought compression was the same at the same focal length

for 1.800$ less I can live with less blur. Anyway the client (wedding photography) will not be able to see the difference, unless they watch your video😊

For me it's not worth it. It's huge and If I'm editing the image and do want more blurred background I'll just open up Luminar AI.

no IO'll no put the money for the 1.2

thanks you made me buy this lens....😒

a quarter of the price, less than half the weight? Zero comparison. 1.8 all day

Ridiculous size.

Damn Nikon, what are you doing? U were so proud of ure big mount but now these lenses for it? Why is Canon RF 50mm 1.8 so much smaller lighter and cheaper than ure 50mm 1.8... This lens should be a good beginner allround lens for travel and having fun - but ure version is to big and to expensive... This type of lens doesnt need to be the best corrected lens of th world - it should be sharp in the middle and have a nice bokeh - thats it... the 50mm 1.2 looks like a sigma art lens with an adapter. looks to me very frontheavy and not a joy to use. be honest nikon, did u take an old dslr design and put an adapter on it? then u wasted money for this idiotic display noone needs - seems to me, u dont understand what photographers need. we already have displays on the camera, u think we need an extra display on the lens? did some photographers ask for this??? why shouldnt i buy a 500 dollar sigma art lens and use it with an adapter, when ure original looks like this anyway. yes, the image quality of the nikon glass seems to be good, but i dont think many people would see a significant difference to a sigma art... and nikon - when u presenting the most expensive 50mm 1.8 on the market (even sony zeiss fe 55mm 1.8 is cheaper), ure design should at least look premium - to me, these 1.8 lenses look plasticky and cheap... im sorry, but i cant help to feel disappointed in nikon. i expected more...

How much we have waiting for 85 mm 1.2 ? 🥲

Great video!