Review of the first day of work with the 85mm lens. I got it at 2:00 PM and went to work with it at 4:00 PM, shooting mainly portraits. I now have the complete basic 1.8 series of Nikon lenses (35mm, 50mm, 85mm).

I got this lens because, on one hand, the 70-300mm lens I have is not very bright (4-5.6), and on the other hand, I wanted the lightest possible weight in my hands, even if it means changing lenses 15,000 times.

Well, the lens is amazing. Solid and compact construction, silent. Not as fast as other Nikon lenses in my opinion (50mm, 35mm, 24-120mm, and of course the king 70-200mm, which focuses faster even in low light), but still acceptably fast. I mainly worked at f/2.8, which produced very vibrant colors. However, when I switched to f/1.8, I saw that the image was still crystal clear. The bokeh, especially for someone like me coming from f/5.6, is beautiful. There is a noticeable difference in quality compared to the 50mm lens, and less noticeable compared to the 35mm, which is the most expensive of the three. I think it is my second favorite lens after the 35mm. And you might ask, "how did you figure all this out in just 4 hours of shooting?" and I would answer that I had a great need in my work a year ago to find something wider than 50mm, so I went for the 35mm and it stayed on my camera. A year later, after countless film shoots, series, and concerts that I cover, I was looking for something more telephoto than the 50mm and I ended up with the 85mm. I should mention that my dream lenses, the 105mm f/2 DC and the 135mm f/2 DC, were also on my list, but I didn't choose them due to their weight and a conversation I had with a wise teacher who said, "The 135mm will give you 10 photos on one subject and you have to be 1.5 meters away. Take the 85mm and you'll get 35 photos from 1 meter away." And today, exactly what the wise teacher said happened. However, they still remain as thoughts for future purchases, but as soon as I find the right photographic conditions. Until then, two bodies with the 35mm and 85mm lenses are the absolute hit and run for my work.

UPDATE: I exclusively worked on night subjects with poor lighting using the lens at f/1.8 and at 2000 ISO on the D750, which even at 6400 ISO produces acceptable images. The grain was more than noticeable in my image, to the point of being unacceptable. So far, this is the biggest downside I can find.

UPDATE 2: Terrible autofocus. The worst I have seen in an 85mm lens. Slow with a lot of focus breathing. The lens is a diva. It wants you to be outside with your lights, setting up models and shooting. If you want run and gun, it definitely isn't for you.

Usually used as an outdoor portrait lens mainly with the D7200. Equivalent to approximately 129mm on a crop sensor, compared to Canon's 137-138mm (it has a smaller crop sensor). Sometimes desirable, sometimes restrictive.

Pros:
Excellent sharpness, sufficient even for the D810.
Very good separation from the background and bokeh.
Accurate color reproduction.
Low price, although it has had significant fluctuations, purchased for 450-455 euros, went up to 560 and gradually stabilized. Includes lens hood.
Almost no coma in night shots.
Accurate focusing, speed is just satisfactory.

Cons:
Chromatic aberrations (longitudinal), especially when there is a bright sky in the background. It is best to avoid such portrait shots, although this applies to some extent to all non-apochromatic lenses.

Now, regarding a previous comment, what can I say about skin rendering. Canon has a "rosy" setting on sensors intended for amateur use. In professional models, it stops producing pinkish tones and the color performance is not distinguishable from Nikon and other manufacturers. Also, the Canon 85mm 1:1.8 (as well as other older EF lenses) focuses much better with expensive Canon bodies, but its sharpness is now borderline. It is more than sufficient for cheaper bodies, but it loses accuracy in focusing. I apologize for commenting on another lens, but let's not let inaccuracies float around.

As first impressions, I have to say that the lens is excellent. Very good color reproduction, sharpness, and BOKEH quality. As for the construction, it may not be as impressive (like the equivalent and expensive TAMRON 85mm), but it is lightweight and comes in a very good balance with my D7500 that I use it with. For this reason, I have started to take it with me more often, instead of the TAMRON 24-70 f2.8 G2 that I also have, which is twice as heavy and bulky (...which I eventually gave away for the TAMRON 35-150 because the 24-70 didn't suit me). However, the truth is that it is not the most versatile lens (especially on an APS-C camera). The other day, for example, I decided to take it to the beach to take some photos of my family and friends playing in the water. The few photos I managed to take turned out amazing, but two out of three times, I couldn't find a suitable spot to capture what was happening. Things were happening much faster than my walking speed, and the lens autofocus is not the fastest. Not to mention that to capture a full group photo, I had to almost step out of the beach. So, here, what they say about Prime lenses "making you play with your feet and not with the zoom" applies, because you end up playing in general. I regretted not bringing the 24-70 with me. I think the 85mm is ultimately more suitable for "controlled" situations. Whoever gets it, though, should have a good zoom lens as a second option. Other than that, I am very satisfied, so I give it 5 stars (until further notice)

I use the lens on a crop camera (Nikon D7200), so the 85mm effectively becomes 127.5mm (1.5 crop factor).
The background separation from the subject is amazing, the sharpness is excellent, as well as the color rendition. The bokeh is also of very high standards.
I used the 50mm f1.8 (75mm on the D7200) but when it comes to portraits, the 85mm won't detach from the body.
However, I will make an observation and mention a negative point..
Firstly, because it doesn't have VR, on crop cameras and depending on how steady your hand is, the shutter speed needs to be faster than its focal length (I would say at least 1/160).
And secondly, the chromatic aberration. At wide apertures and especially when the light source is behind your subject, the green and purple edges (e.g. in the hair) are so apparent that no matter how much you try to correct them in Lightroom, you can't eliminate them. It requires great attention in how you position your subject.
Although an excellent lens, 4/5 stars for the above two points. Its price could have been a bit lower because it now lags behind in comparison to other lenses in these areas (of course, the prices of others may be higher, especially due to VR).

Update 05/02/2020
I now also use the lens with the Nikon Z6, which is Full Frame. The overall performance of the lens is excellent, and now you also have the in-body image stabilization (IBIS) of the camera to compensate for vibrations.

The lens costs 511 if you buy it through an importer and 560 if you buy it from an official representative. The exact same Canon lens costs 358 through an importer and 389 from an official representative. Because I only buy from an official representative, I will compare these prices. The lens is a classic portrait lens. The result of the Canon +85 compared to the Nikon +85 cannot be compared, as Canon has a much more beautiful skin representation for portraits, which the average amateur cannot achieve no matter how much they try in Photoshop and Lightroom. However, there is no difference in the optical performance of the two lenses. Why is the Nikon 171 euros more expensive? In practical terms, when attached to a crop (I tested it on various cameras, including the 7200), the lens reaches 130 mm, which is not suitable for portraits at all because 1) you have to be very far away from the subject (and in closed spaces, this can simply be impossible) and 2) at 130 mm without VR, any movement by the photographer creates blurring and 3) if you shoot at 1.8, there is a high chance that the photos will come out unfocused (meaning instead of focusing on the eye, it will focus on the eyelashes, etc.). The bokeh is uniform and will be liked by most people. However, I would not recommend it for DX (crop) use due to the large focal distance. I also consider it to be overpriced compared to the build quality and competition...

Amazing lens. For the simple amateur photographer, it is the necessary lens for photographing at parties, where groups are mainly interested in their faces and not what appears in the surrounding space. Its clarity simply cannot be compared to any zoom lens, and the somewhat old colors it produces make it ideal for portraits. But it is also suitable for a trip because with APS-C cameras and a magnification factor of 1.5, it converts to a 130mm lens on the scale of FULL FRAME cameras. If the extra conversion to another 1.3 crop factor is also used, which some cameras offer, then immediately we have an old 200mm lens at our disposal. In conclusion, the only thing someone needs when they buy it is to have another camera body or to buy another one, so that the lens is permanently mounted on the second one and ready for use at any time, without the need to change lenses in the field, resulting in the camera sensor getting dusty. The feeling so far is that since it was purchased, it has created intense dilemmas, as its frequent use seemed necessary in 80-90% of cases that required high-quality travel photography.