AF-S Nikkor 85/1.8G vs Voigtlander 90/3.5 SL-II

[DanAa]

Anyone that have comments to AF-S Nikkor 85/1.8G vs Voigtlander 90/3.5 SL-II for general purpose, like people, landscapes etc.

[Birna Rørslett]

The CV 90 is manual focus, the Nikkor is AFS. In terms of size the Nikkor is nearly twice that of the CV90.

The CV90 focuses to around 1:4 natively and with the dedicated close-up attachment (part of the kit) one gets better than 1:2. The Nikkor goes to 1:8 (approx.).

The personal preferences of the user would decide which lens is the "better".

[armando_m]

I use the nikon 85mm frequently with very good results, I'm not familiar with the voigtlander

The nikon 85 will have CA wide open whenever there are edges with strong contrasts, this goes away above f2.8, the minimum focusing distance is 85cm and some times I wish it was shorter, AF on my D800 is reliable, works really well and at a decent speed, enough to follow moving people, it is a light lens with plastic exterior with a small price tag, the front element is way inside the barrel keeping it protected from finger prints and any other mechanical damage, used against the sun does not flare but will have a strong haze and lost of contrast

[Roland Vink]

The focal length of the two lenses is similar, but otherwise they are quite different as the others mentioned. The CV90 is also two stops slower than the AFS 85/1.8.

I regard the CV90 as a compact semi-macro lens. It would be suitable for landscapes, closeups and other subjects where you have time to focus carefully. Due to the slower aperture you have less ability to blur the background by reducing the DOF.

The Nikon 85 will be a better choice if you need to point and focus accurately and quickly, or if you need the faster aperture for low light shooting or the ability to blur the background.

[fish_shooter]

IMHO if one is willing to go manual focus one might as well get an 85 PC Micro-Nikkor and get the PC aspect as a bonus. The older model may even be a bargain but I have not checked recent prices.

ps. I checked. Non E version going for under $700 US at auction. That is quite a bargain as I recall paying over $1000 over a decade ago for mine new. New ones are quite a bit more now.

[Macro_Cosmos]

IMHO if one is willing to go manual focus one might as well get an 85 PC Micro-Nikkor and get the PC aspect as a bonus. The older model may even be a bargain but I have not checked recent prices.

ps. I checked. Non E version going for under $700 US at auction. That is quite a bargain as I recall paying over $1000 over a decade ago for mine new. New ones are quite a bit more now.

I will disagree with this one. The PC-E Micro-Nikkor while being impressive in terms of sharpness, exhibits large amounts of LoCa. The focus throw is also tiny. Getting good hand held results is very very difficult. These 2 reasons made me sell my copy. The older version is pretty good as well, but has the same issues.

When I first got the lens, I thought my copy had issues. It was not until I put the lens on a tripod, which it revealed itself to be extremely sharp and capable. The focus confirmation dot was also inaccurate. From then, I used it on a tripod, and subsequently sold it after acquiring a 24mm PC-E for a bargain price, one knob of that lens is broken. The 24mm nearly goes to 1:2, making it a very interesting lens. If Canon calls their 1:3 old 90mm "macro", then this 24mm certainly deserves that designation.

Here's my thoughts on the CV 95mm:
It's a very small lens, and very sharp wide open. The colours are really nice. Focus throw is also adequate.
This lens VS the 85mm 1.8 really goes down to what the OP wants. I'd personally go with the 85 for portraits, and the 90 if I shoot primarily macro and want some portrait capabilities. I sold mine due to lack of use after purchasing the 85mm PC-E.

I have a small album on the 90mm CV: https://www.flickr.com/photos/133023063@N04/albums/72157671048458831
I do kind of miss the lens, but it's too short for the type of field macro I enjoy, and too long for those silly food and "oh this thing looks nice" type of photos. I think the 45mm PC-E would be perfect for me. Dunno, too expensive.