Register · Software · Search · Image Upload · Buy & Sell · Hosting

	Moderated by: Fred Miranda
	Username   Password Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell FM Forum Rules Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews FM Forums | Nikon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload end Short telephoto Advise

mike09 Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #1 · Short telephoto Advise So, I'm in the market for a short telephoto lens. Somewhere in the range of 85 to 150. Here are what I'm looking at so far: Nikon 85 f1.8 Tamron 90 micro f2.8 Nikon 85 f1.4 Nikon 105 f2.0 Nikon 135 f2.0 The above is what I'm looking at in terms of length and price. From most favorable in terms of price (84 f1.8) to least feasible due to price (everything but the Tamron). I know the Tamron is a great lens, I've tested it before, but I like a lot of available light shooting, so for the comparable price, gaining a stop and a half of speed with the 85 f1.8 is nice. I'm certainly not a professional by any stretch of the imagination, but what I'm looking for is something with a little more reach. All I have at the moment is a 50 f1.4, and a 17-35 f2.8, and I've gotten too comfortable with the wider focal length. So I'm looking for something to give me better subject isolation and decent bokeh. Since I don't have a significant budget to spend on a nice versatile 70-200, I'm gonna stick with the primes. Unless of course the 70-300 is something to consider. But I like the idea of being more discrete and carrying a large zoom would be a bit obvious I think. Would it be a better idea to idea to spend some extra money on the faster and/or longer lenses? Currently the lens would be mounted on a D200. Nov 19, 2009 at 04:30 PM

Shutterslam Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #2 · Short telephoto Advise On a crop sensor, and based on what you're describing, the 85 1.4 or 1.8 would be a good fit for you. The 1.4 is a world class lens and capable of nuking backgrounds if you're close enough to the subject and wide open. I use it for full/torso/head shots whenever the need arises. I have the 70-300 as well and the although the reach is there, and the sharpness below 200 is acceptable, bokeh, especially on point light sources, renders polygons instead of circles (creamier), which kills it for me. Anyway - the 85 1.4 has a pretty proud following and with good reason...you get shots with that lens that you can only produce with a handful of lenses. Hope that helps. Nov 19, 2009 at 04:42 PM

jasoncallen Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #3 · Short telephoto Advise I've owned both the 85/1.8 AF-D and the 85/1.4 AF-D, and either would be a good addition to your kit. The 85/1.8 delivers sharpness pretty much wide open. The only think I never 100% cared for on that lens was the bokeh rendition... the defocused areas of the image had a sharpness about them that I can't quite put my finger on, but it's very obviously different from the various 80-200 & 70-200/2.8 lenses I've owned, and it's worlds apart from the 85/1.4's creamy backgrounds. After using a rented 85/1.4, I couldn't go back to the 85/1.8... I sold mine and coughed up the cash for the 1.4 AFD! The 85/1.4 is a professional workhorse for those needing an extra of low-light performance, and DREAMY, CREAMY bokeh. They call it "the cream machine" for a reason At almost 3 times the price of the 85/1.8, it's hard to justify if you're not earning money with it, but it's a lens that will stay with you for a LONG time, across generations of Nikon's bodies! The longer primes are great for more reach, but on a DX body, they're going to be significantly longer than what you have, and you're going to be wanting something in the middle range between your 50 and a 105 f/2 or 135 f/2 prime. I'd say the 85/1.8 is the safe bet! Nov 19, 2009 at 06:01 PM

mike09 Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #4 · Short telephoto Advise jasoncallen wrote: I've owned both the 85/1.8 AF-D and the 85/1.4 AF-D, and either would be a good addition to your kit. The 85/1.8 delivers sharpness pretty much wide open. The only think I never 100% cared for on that lens was the bokeh rendition... the defocused areas of the image had a sharpness about them that I can't quite put my finger on, but it's very obviously different from the various 80-200 & 70-200/2.8 lenses I've owned, and it's worlds apart from the 85/1.4's creamy backgrounds. After using a rented 85/1.4, I couldn't go back to the 85/1.8... I sold mine and coughed up the cash for the 1.4 AFD! The 85/1.4 is a professional workhorse for those needing an extra of low-light performance, and DREAMY, CREAMY bokeh. They call it "the cream machine" for a reason At almost 3 times the price of the 85/1.8, it's hard to justify if you're not earning money with it, but it's a lens that will stay with you for a LONG time, across generations of Nikon's bodies! The longer primes are great for more reach, but on a DX body, they're going to be significantly longer than what you have, and you're going to be wanting something in the middle range between your 50 and a 105 f/2 or 135 f/2 prime. I'd say the 85/1.8 is the safe bet! I see what you're saying. Although I did pull the trigger and buy the 17-35, it was still a lot used, but is certainly a wonderful lens. I'm gonna have to go to B and H and try both the 1.8 and 1.4 first hand. Maybe seeing the delicious bokeh first hand will sway me toward the 1.4, I just hope if that happens I don't max my credit card out. In terms of robustness, are the 85 1.4 and 1.8 about the same? I mean, are both lenses weather sealed, or generally built like tanks like other Nikon pro glass like my 17-35? Or is it more like the 50 1.4 where it's just an all around solid lens. One more thing to add, what about the 105 2.8 micro. I know the new AF-S version is out, but how about the older AF-D version. Any thoughts? Nov 19, 2009 at 09:42 PM

	FM Forums | Nikon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload end

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password   Lost password?