p.1 #8 · If you could have the nikkor 50mm f1.4 or the 85 f1.8 ....
Well, portraits and kids running around in the yard are pretty different subjects!
Little kids run all over the place, and they are more likely to want you to be involved in their game(s). In that case, a wider angle of view would be preferable--a 50 may be OK but a 35 or 28 would (IMO) be better (and the 35 f/2 is a good, cheap option). An even better option, as one poster suggested above, is a zoom (but not the 24-70 behemoth; this is where my old, lightweight Tamron 28-75 really shines). If you have the $$$, the Nikon 35 f/1.4 G is a corker of a lens for little kids' portraits (whole body, not head-and-shoulder; for our most recent additions to the family, I'd practically need a macro lens for those! ).
Bigger kids are less likely to want you to play with them, in which case you'll be shooting from a distance. The 85mm may be too short a lens for this; again, I'd suggest zooms like the 80-200 f/2.8 (cheap and plentiful on the used market). The 80-200 can also serve as a portrait lens, head-only or head-and-shoulders.
p.1 #10 · If you could have the nikkor 50mm f1.4 or the 85 f1.8 ....
Well this is a tough question. 85mm is great FL for portraits, no question. Now this is coming from someone who has had a 17mm lens for the last few years as my ONLY lens. I am getting into other aspects of photography, so other focal length lenses will be bought soon enough.
I think 50mm is a great "all around" FL on full frame. I would even say 35mm would be great as well. You could get the 85mm 1.8G and the 50mm 1.8G for around $600 and see what you like. Do you NEED 1.4?
p.1 #14 · If you could have the nikkor 50mm f1.4 or the 85 f1.8 ....
Well...since you already have two great lenses that will do what you want already. I'd go for the 50 f1.4 so you'll have something for low light indoors. Better yet, I'd forget the 50 and 80, and get the new Sigma 35mm f1.4.
p.1 #16 · If you could have the nikkor 50mm f1.4 or the 85 f1.8 ....
VinnieJ wrote:
I would get the 85/1.8G and if you decide later you want a 50 as well then save some money and get the cheaper 50/1.8G. +1. That is what I did.
p.1 #17 · If you could have the nikkor 50mm f1.4 or the 85 f1.8 ....
I recently said in another thread, if you're asking whether you should buy an f/1.4 lens you probably shouldn't. I have an 85mm f/1.4D but in hindsight that was a poor choice. I never shot it wide open enough to justify buying it instead of the 1.8D. If I had to buy an 85mm lens now I would get the 1.8G.
My 50mm lens is the f/1.8D. I like having a small, fast lens instead of a much bigger, slightly faster lens.
There are people who make effective use of the f/1.4 versions. My point is, if you're uncertain about which to buy you probably aren't one of them.
p.1 #18 · If you could have the nikkor 50mm f1.4 or the 85 f1.8 ....
"The shilling for Sigma gets old.
Just saying..."
Ha +1. Sigma must have some auto-response thing to every Nikon 50 and 85 1.4 post here and at Nikonians.
To the OP, as others have said, I think you'd like the 85G 1.8 best for the application. If it doesn't work for you, you can sell it in a heart beat and get the 50. And, as others have said you already have a great kid lens, the 70-200VR. It doesn't get much better than that for candids and portraits.
....
).