Nikon Z 85mm f/1.2 S VS Nikon Z 85mm f/1.8 S: Which is Better For You? 

I deliberately bought the 1.8. Others may need the bokeh of the 1.2. For me, there is no objective “better”. There are differences of physically, optically and financially. But it’s not about better as such. I think people who buy the 1.8 are likely to want a smaller and lighter lens. Those who want the 1.2 will want to shoot with ultra smooth bokeh and sometimes a very very narrow depth of field. They are alternate lenses for different uses, needs and budgets. It is a good thing that both exist and we can choose.

Jason, Thank you for the time and effort compiling the detailed comparison of the two great lens. I'm sure you're assisting a number of photographers that are on fence as to which lens to purchase and those considering an upgrade to 1.2.

Super video! Saw this from the Amazon page. Have been mulling over the 1.2 and 1.8. Getting back in to full frame and looking at Nikon again.

Great to see your videos again. I sold my beloved 85mm f/1.4D a couple of years ago and just bought the 85mm f/1.2. I’ve never used the 85mm f/1.8 but find that the 1.2 excels in low light. I’m pretty amazed by it particularly it’s sharpness wide open.

nice video! I own both lenses and I really prefer the 1.2. When you shoot with different lighting and backlit, you will see how the 1.2 does a lot more than the 1.8. It renders amazing! and has character

Awesome and honest comparison! Great job on the video length, information and you leave the images up for a perfect amount of time (some RU-vidrs flash it across the screen too fast) I own the 85 1.8 and love it, unfortunately I will end up getting the 1.2 for that extra special something it offers.

I have the Z 85/1.8S and it made me sell my 1.4G F mount glass. About the sharpest lens in DxOMark. So for subject sharpness you do not need the 1.2S. In general you don't need it for studio portraits either. I would shoot studio portraits at f/5.6 or f/8, in general. Maybe in very special cases for, say, people with bad skin, you could place 1.2 sharpness in one eye and obliterate details by having the problem outside Depth of Field (DoF). As I also have the Z 105/2.8S macro lens, I frequently use that for (head shot or a bit more) portraits and I love its "rendition" more than the Z 85/1.8S, actually. (Note that the 105's 2.8 compares to f/2.2 on the 85/1.8S - ceteris paribus. And if perspective compression is no problem by shooting farther away and your studio is deep enough, then a 200mm at f/2.8 gives DoF comparable to an 85 at f/1.2 - ceteris paribus. But also note that DoF next to distance, aperture and focal length, depends on the Circle of Confusion (CoC) that impacts DoF significantly. The CoC combines the impact of camera/film resolution, lens resolution, processing, image depiction size and image viewing distance.) The same will apply to the Z 85/1.2S - its rendition is more beautiful than the 1.8S's and that's hard to describe in words. My message to starting - say wedding - photographers is, though, that you're not going to tell a bride who complains she does not look like a supermodel in your photos, that the rendition and the background blur are so beautiful. Start simple and use the money you did not spend to set up shoots and build portfolio. Train your eye and brain that way. The difference between the 1.8 and 1.2 85mm "S" class lenses is US$700 versus US$2,700 - US$2,000 difference. With 3.9 times the price, the 1.2 only has 2.7 times the volume and 2.5 times the weight.

Jason ,, great video. Have you tried to stop the 1.8 down to get the round boch balls,, ?? Just wondering if it gets stopped down at some point they might become perfectly round as well. Thank you.

Great comparison. I have both lenses. I shot with the 1.8 since it was released and I loved it for everything I needed it for. Only if you are a working professional or serious hobbyist would I suggest getting the 1.2.

Very nice photos and video. Thanks for sharing your experience.

The general brightness of the 1.2 create a character that feel more spacious to me. Great vid, like your content!👍🏾

Great video. I have the 1.8. Paid $699 for it. I love it and although I can see the upgrade difference in the 1.2, as an amateur I would not spring for the extra $2,100 for it. If I were a professional I probably would go for the 1.2.

1.8 is nice, but the tonal differences I see a significant difference. For my work, I don't chase bokeh and sharpness so I look at tonal transitions and micro contrast. I wouldn't be unhappy with neither, but if money was not an issue I would get the 1.2

Very nice vid and reporting, thank you!

Is the 105mm 1.4 (art or Nikon) better or comparable to the 85mm 1.2 in terms of out of focus rendition (bokeh) ? It would be interesting to see a comparison. I am a big fan of « non common focals » such as the 75mm (long enough but not too long for body shots) or 105mm/135mm lenses for better compression or distant shooting (concerts)

Great review, thanks!

Thanks for you video. I agree the 85s are great lenses, each in their own way, but I think the perfect compromise would be a high-quality Nikon Z 100 mm f/1.4 S. You would get most of the separation of the 1.2 in a smaller package.

Good review. Thank you.

Nice comparison as always. For people weighing up which primes to put their money into, it would be interesting to add the a 70-200 at 85mm/2.8 into the mix, to show what that prime difference is compared to the fastest zoom at that focal length.

For me when it’s comes about high quality images prices isn’t issue, shooting one and getting right is better than shooting too many times . Thanks for sharing, nice job !

I have the 50mm 1.2 S, and love it. Skipping the 85 because at weddings I’m a 35mm / 85mm shooter, two bodies on a harness. The weight would suck at after 10 hours of shooting.

Did I miss what camera you shot these on? Stunning photos

Night and day difference in bokeh really, and night and day difference in price too. It comes down to how much you shoot portraiture. If you're a regular portrait shooter, then the f/1.2 will be well worth the trouble.

Some details: if you are using the Z8 or the Z9 you have to take into account that both the stacked sensor and the shuttleless designs contribute to less dynamic range and lower high iso performance and less dynamic range. When you are shooting to ISO 1600 with the 1.8 you will be able to shoot at ISO 700 with the 1.2 Also it focuses better, less prone to focusing in the eyelashes.

I’m more and more confused if I need or not a 50 1.2 or an 85 1.2 or None of them. I watched Mat Irwin’s, yours…each video on the 1.2’s and I really don’t see much of a difference. I own the 50 1.8 and the 85 1.4 G…there is a subtle difference but the price difference is too big for that minimal progress.

Good video and very beautiful model 🤩

Superb video, thanks.

I own the 1.8s, and the Sigma 1.4 (FTZ/Nikon d850) had a chance recently to test the 1.2. Keeping this short: I'll just wait for the Nikon 135mm hopefully before I die

Great video. Good information.

Thanks for the video. A little bit to add: both lenses are amazing. However, there are differences more than what you are describing, which seems to be mainly about your personal 'use case'. Specifically, there are important technical differences like the fact that the 85mm 1.8 S focus breaths noticeably and the 1.2 S has very little focus breathing, so for video there is a technical difference beyond just 'bokeh'. Also the 1.2 S has more contrast than the 1.8 S, but you need to see them side by side to tell, and finally when both lenses are at 1.8 the 1.2 is the sharper lens. Of course, all that being said, you need to see the shots side by side to notice these differences, and as you point out the 1.8 S is less than half the weight and less than a third the price. Personally, I have both lenses and will keep them both as they serve different purposes - for events and travel/destination commercial jobs the 1.8 S is great due to its small size and light weight with very close IQ. On portraiture assignments, the 1.2 S is the clear winner for bokeh - it is noticeably better at 1.2 than the 1.8 at 1.8 and gives a more unique look that is harder to replicate without such a lens. Also for dark venues the 1.2 gives you much cleaner files as it is 1.5 stops faster than the 1.8. In short, 'bokeh' is not the whole story, but there is a clear difference here, and use case plays a very important role in this decision, but both lenses are excellent and you can 'get the shot' with either. -PD

Thank you!❤

Unless you are shooting in low light and in need of extreme bokeh, get the 1.2. Any other situations the 1.8 is the better purchase cost wise. Where is that kanji wall?

It's always a good day when I find a new (to me) RU-vidr who uses Nikon!!! :) Great review!

I just got mine , the 85 mm 1.8 ! tested it lastnight and OMG I love it ! stunning lens 💎super sharp💎

Enjoyed your video. I luved my 85mm f1.4 G sad to see it go. But ordered the F1.2 S lens. Main thing for me will be fast motors inside and f1.2 shallow focus field for 8K and 4K video. Can't wait. All the best Nigel Rand UK Nikon Z9 Pro

It's nice to have 1.2s 85mm as an collection, but there is no need to spend for the 3K over for the lens. There are to many great lenses, that nobody really will notice. But i love small and compact, 1.2 85mm it's to big, but the quality is amazing, specially in cinematic mode for example! But the 1.4 are my favourite. And the 1.8s looks great, sometimes you don't even see the difference, that's what i meant having an lens and shoot with it.

Very well and interesting movie. Indoor low light could of been interesting compression . Thank you

Hey, just thought I would comment that the difference between f/1.2 and f/1.8 is just over 1 stop, not 3 to 4. I appreciate the work you put in, but I think that you should have chosen images or comparisons that highlight the faster focus falloff of the 1.2. This can be accomplished by getting closer to your subject. By watching the video, I dont see any compelling reason to choose the 1.2 option- they appear too similar.

As owner of both 85 1.8 S and 1.2S, and I like the 1.2 so so so much more, actually not becasue I spent more money so I like the 1.2, I owned the 85 1.8 first, but coming from Canon 85 1.2and Sony 85GM, I really don't like the Bokeh I am getting from the 85 1.8 so I bite the bullet and went ahead to sped the extra money on the F1.2 lens, But the 85 1.8 is a great lens for landscaoe, it'ds small and light so I am just keeping it, but I actually use the Zeiss 85 Loxia for landscape most of the time so it will be just matter of time I will eventually get rid of the 1.8S.

please give a link to the files so that you can download them and compare them yourself, thank you!

Grateful for the video, but it cost must be the biggest factor with the 1.8 at only a third of the cost. If you have to analyse the differences so closely to bring them out, that provides your answer, at least it has for me.

You really have to be a cutting edge pro photographer to justify the 1.2. Or maybe be a rich enthusiast where money is no object.

I doubt anyone is thinking which is better. The 1.2 is better. However, they would consider which is better for them.

Nikon 85mm f1.4 F MOUNT beats both . After the unfair tests with f mount 85 1.8 budget lens against z mount 85mm 1.2, seemed a bit old cheap vs new expensive , welcome 85mm f 1.4 (interesting) thats why they show a 1.8 on a d850 , kidology ,

excellent!

AI and background blur eat into the advantage even more so I would so

LOL. I just asked you in the video I watched for the first time if you've compared these and if you traded your Z9 for the Z8). ;-) Sorry, I've been out of touch!

You are comparing two lenses but not giving the correct samples of the strength made by 1.2 compared to 1.8

The difference between f/1.2 and f/1.8 is not “three or four extra stops.”

I doubt if "non photographer-public" will see any difference....

hard to concentrate on the Bokeh 😅

Your obviously closer with the 1.2 than the 1.8 ! Can see it a mile off , the perspective is a mile out , why not use the 85 1.4 ? Because theres NOT enough difference to warrant the 1.2 , iv tried them both the 1.2 isnt all that. between 1.2 and 1.4. ! So you used the 1.8 theres a country mile between them ,, , typical pushing the new lenses where the 1.4. Is EVERY bit as good 1.4 is missing here the 1.8 is trashy , 1.2 and 1.4 are very similar , i cant do with primes , rarely get to use 1.2 or 1.4 , pro zooms are as good you get to use 2.8 throughout , like my 1.4s were always on 2.8 or slower in bright light

Jason, 1. Why do you speek so fast? Number of words per second is here no subject!!! 2. Why do you show your graphics and pictures only half a second? 3. Who in this world wants and can listen, watch, understand an memorize this valuable information in such a short time? Pleeeeeease!!! Not everybody on RU-vid is American....

We swapped from the 1.8, we photograph weddings and it is not better - it is FAR better - also FAR heavier - be warned

The difference in the picture is $ 100, but the difference in price?) Here are the things ....

I appreciate the video, but the truth is both of these lenses render just awful.