I received my 85mm EVO yesterday and shot a bit on the Zf. Brick wall test showed it to be sharp just about corner to corner at f2, I would say the last 3-5% of the frame shows softness which I don't think I would spot in a non-test environment given how little of the frame it impacts. It does take a while to correct, maybe around f/5.6, but I would consider this to be about as perfect as you can expect for a lens even if it cost 4x as much. Interestingly, my Viltrox 50mm f/2 air might be a little sharper, but that lens is also perfect. Build quality is really good for the price, a big step up from the TTArtisan 75mm f/2 which I've had numerous reliability issues with. The EVO is definitely the replacement. Here is an initial shot from yesterday at f2:
For two lenses that are basically the same length, the hood on the Viltrox is indeed as stupid as it looks in pictures online.
The Viltrox just feels girthier and more dense all the way around even though weight differences are negligible.
The better build quality of the Viltrox is immediately noticeable and seats REALLY well with the rear weather sealing.
The Viltrox is considerably more back heavy, making the lens FEEL heavier and less balanced on the Zf, again even though they are basically identical weight. The TTA just feels like it disappears when mounted. The Viltrox is right on the line of feeling too big for the Zf, even with the SmallRig, if you're looking for a "small" prime to match it.
RoamingScott wrote:
For two lenses that are basically the same length, the hood on the Viltrox is indeed as stupid as it looks in pictures online.
The Viltrox just feels girthier and more dense all the way around even though weight differences are negligible.
The better build quality of the Viltrox is immediately noticeable and seats REALLY well with the rear weather sealing.
The Viltrox is considerably more back heavy, making the lens FEEL heavier and less balanced on the Zf, again even though they are basically identical weight. The TTA just feels like it disappears when mounted. The Viltrox is right on the line of feeling too big for the Zf, even with the SmallRig, if you're looking for a "small" prime to match it.
Interesting, I usually prefer a back heavy over a front heavy lens. But weight balance is tricky and two objects of the same weight can definitely feel quite different - this was very apparent with the change in rotational inertia between the iPhone 14 Pro and the 15 Pro.
Up is down and black is white with the Zf, thanks to the heavy metal build and additional weight of the small grip plate pulling the center of mass backwards. I think the Viltrox would balance just fine on a Z5ii or Z6iii.
fjablo wrote:
Interesting, I usually prefer a back heavy over a front heavy lens. But weight balance is tricky and two objects of the same weight can definitely feel quite different - this was very apparent with the change in rotational inertia between the iPhone 14 Pro and the 15 Pro.
Updated impressions when comparing to the Z 85mm f/1.8S.
I do think the 85/1.8S is likely a touch sharper, though in real-world use the difference is really negligible. The Viltrox is still very sharp, even wide open.
Bokeh is close. If pressed I might give a slight edge to the Viltrox, which just looks really nice to my eye until you get to like 20 feet or beyond, where it's just average.
CA: slight edge to the Viltrox - the Viltrox has basically no longitudinal CA. There is a very slight hue visible if you really look on a black and white target, but it's extremely negligible. The 85/1.8 has low longitudinal CA as well..just not quite as low.
Build/Size/Handling: Win for the Viltrox hands down. Significantly smaller and lighter than the 85S.
Overall, I think there's very, very little to sway anyone to the Nikon at 3x the price. I don't still have the Nikon in hand, so I can't really comment on AF speed, because it's been well over a year since I owned the lens, but from what I remember, speed is pretty close.
As to the hood: sorry...I like the Viltrox hood. It's very sturdy plastic (thicker than most included hoods), and when reversed it sits VERY close to the lens body, so the overall size of the lens stays very compact even with the hood stored.
Re: hood, it's ok to like bad things, everyone is free to do so Of course the Viltrox hood, when reversed, blocks every single control surface the lens offers short of the aperture ring (click, af/mf, and Fn button). That's an automatic no go for me, because it means the hood MUST be put on at all times during shooting for full lens functionality. I'd be putting on a 58mm screw-in hood and leaving it on all the time instead at very little expense to packing size.
A couple of head to head samples with the TTA 75. The Viltrox seems to be the "brighter" lens, requiring a faster shutter speed in identical conditions.
The Viltrox is considerably sharper with more contrast wide open, though the Viltrox exhibits strong "soap bubble" specular highlights in the bokeh just behind the plane of focus where the TTA does not. Even closed down to f8, the far bokeh of the TTA is rounder and cleaner...the Viltrox has a harsher outer ring of each bokeh ball.
I'm immediately not a fan of the Viltrox rendering compared to the TTA, just as I suspected.
Viltrox AF is nice and snappy, but so is the TTA. I would obviously be looking to one of these 2 lenses way before I’m considering the Nikon, they are both super competitive.
Ok, Scott, now I'm just confused. There is no real soap bubble effect shown in either of your Viltrox samples, let alone 'strong'. The rendering is honestly quite close to the TTA, and the areas where there ARE any visible differences, look smoother on the Viltrox to me at f/2, and very close at f/8 (maybe a very slight edge to the TTA at f/8 in some parts of the image - a wash in others). Like, I really don't understand what you're saying at all. Look at the lower right and upper right of the two images at f/2 - the TTA looks rougher in these areas (though personally I think both look pretty nice). Other parts of the image look very, very similar to me. Distant stuff at f/8, bokeh isn't perfect on either lens, with a very slight soap bubble look on very distant highlights...but not really there on the closer stuff, and none of it is 'strong'.
(and yeah, I always put my hoods into shooting position when using a lens. It seems bizarre to criticize the Viltrox for this when it is true of basically every 85mm lens in existence.)
I mean, if you prefer the TTA, obviously that's fine, and your personal preference...but what your describing isn't what is present in the images.
Hm wasn't able to find any soap bubbles either. Maybe a little more cats eye effect on the Viltrox, but also a bit more blur overall because of the focal length difference.
It's a bit hard to tell but I actually think the plane of focus is not exactly the same between both - just comparing where the sharpest point of each lens is on the tree and how it falls off to the back, I think they are a couple cm apart in terms of depth. Actually a pretty tricky subject to focus on as well, because it's so high contrast but not flat, so very easy to pick a slightly different high-contrast area.
To my eye, the Viltrox is sharper and the OOF areas are soft. Check the OOF tree comparison at f2, the TTA it is just hard to look at and the bokeh is quite harsh compared to the Viltrox.
As usual, nuance is apparently our most scarce resource on FM.
Look, I'm downright allergic to bullshit happening in transition zones, so much so that it's THE reason I left Sony...they can't figure out how to make a pleasing fall off to save their lives. As such, when I see something, it stands out like a sore thumb.
Left is Viltrox, right is TTA, and yes, the focal plane is identical, I always check that before I post anything. The Viltrox specular highlights on the slightly-behind-plane-of-focus tree bark are hideous and jump right out at me to the point where it adds a "texture" to the photo that I find very displeasing. Maybe your eyes don't care about such things, but mine certainly do. I conduct this boring yard test on my lenses not because it's interesting but because it readily brings such issues to the forefront.
I also tend to process my images in a way where these types of highlights clash with what I do to the photo, compounding the problem.
I'm not here to make you "believe", I'm here to share my opinion. If you don't care about such things, LUCKY F-ING YOU! Wish I couldn't.
To Jordan's point though, the lack of LoCA is really impressive on the Viltrox wide open. You can see some green fringing happening on the TTA. Luckily, fringing is trivial to deal with...bokeh shapes, not so much.
Here's a more interesting comparison IMO, wide open compared to the Z 85/1.2 (the gold standard for 85mm lenses), both at f2.
No question, the Viltrox is 100% holding its own for sharpness across the frame, which is very impressive. It really comes down to whether you like the rendering or not.
RoamingScott wrote:
As usual, nuance is apparently our most scarce resource on FM.
Look, I'm downright allergic to bullshit happening in transition zones, so much so that it's THE reason I left Sony...they can't figure out how to make a pleasing fall off to save their lives. As such, when I see something, it stands out like a sore thumb.
Left is Viltrox, right is TTA, and yes, the focal plane is identical, I always check that before I post anything. The Viltrox specular highlights on the slightly-behind-plane-of-focus tree bark are hideous and jump right out at me to the point where it adds a "texture" to the photo that I find very displeasing. Maybe your eyes don't care about such things, but mine certainly do. I conduct this boring yard test on my lenses not because it's interesting but because it readily brings such issues to the forefront.
I also tend to process my images in a way where these types of highlights clash with what I do to the photo, compounding the problem.
I'm not here to make you "believe", I'm here to share my opinion. If you don't care about such things, LUCKY F-ING YOU! Wish I couldn't.
To Jordan's point though, the lack of LoCA is really impressive on the Viltrox wide open. You can see some green fringing happening on the TTA. Luckily, fringing is trivial to deal with...bokeh shapes, not so much....Show more →
I see why you prefer that section on the TTA but describing this as "soap bubble" bokeh is just not accurate - or shall we say not very nuanced? but maybe lets not go there
--> If you look closely the amount of outlining in the specular highlights is quite similar for both lenses (easiest to see in the bubbles on the left side, about mid-height, just next to the shadow area), but the Viltrox is more contrasty and that makes this transition zone look more structured and busy. It makes sense as the Viltrox is sharper and has more contrast overall.
RoamingScott wrote:
Here's a more interesting comparison IMO, wide open compared to the Z 85/1.2 (the gold standard for 85mm lenses), both at f2.
No question, the Viltrox is 100% holding its own for sharpness across the frame, which is very impressive. It really comes down to whether you like the rendering or not.
The difference in optical vignetting is quite striking. The 85/1.2 has significantly more blur towards the edges, seems like at least half a stop difference.
Also looks like a bit of difference in T-stop, the Nikon image is brighter overall - maybe 0.1 to 0.2 stop?
That 85/1.2 sure is a winner. Shame it's $3,000 and the size of a small tank. But man does it produce a gorgeous image. Honestly impressive that the Viltrox gets anywhere near it, though as mentioned above, the vignetting is quite apparent when comparing the faster lens stopped down. (also one of the amazing things about a lens like the 135 Plena, which shows very little optical vignetting even wide open).
Jman13 wrote:
Shame it's $3,000 and the size of a small tank.
And yet I paid half and enjoy it on the Zf from time to time The 1.2's hood, hilariously large though it is, still doesn't block the Fn button either
If you have a bigger camera like the Z8 or Z9, the Viltrox feels downright tiny at least compared to something faster. I can already tell the Viltrox 1.4 would be a no-go on the Zf. Now I'm very curious to see what Nikon does in the 85/1.4 space.
But man does it produce a gorgeous image. Honestly impressive that the Viltrox gets anywhere near it, though as mentioned above, the vignetting is quite apparent when comparing the faster lens stopped down. (also one of the amazing things about a lens like the 135 Plena, which shows very little optical vignetting even wide open). 