Another lens thread...Help!

[MrsLittle]

I really want it but afraid to carry it everywhere with me. I'm really petite and worried it might be too giant to hold. Is it really that big?

 

[SCraig]

It's hard to choose, since I love shooting everything in sight. But yes, I do photograph children and families more and I want to eventually get a few photos of my boys playing sports but more for fun.

I love to photograph babies and small children and have invested quite a bit of money in fabric, blankets, baby accessories etc. I guess I would say that is where I will do most work. Does that mean the 24-70 would make more sense for me?

It would make more sense to me. I'd recommend that the lens be more oriented to what you would use it for the most.

In the future you could either get another lens for sports (there is no such thing as too many lenses) or perhaps try a 1.4 or 1.7 teleconvertor with the 70mm. A 1.4 TC on a 70mm lens and APS-C sensor camera would equate to about 147mm on a 35mm camera. A 1.7 TC would equate to about 178mm. You give up one stop of light and a slight amount of sharpness (not all TC's are created equal). They won't replace a good lens but TC's are a relatively inexpensive means to get a little more reach from a lens though.

 

[maaatter]

You could always throw a tripod in your bag if you're worried about it being too big.

 

[tirediron]

A couple of thoughts on the 70-200: It's an outstanding piece of glass, but it's a bit too short to be a sports lens, even on a DX body, and bear in mind while the VRII has improved optical and stabilization characteristics, what it loses are the focus-lock buttons at the end of the lens barrel. IMO, the improvements to the optics and the VR do NOT make up for this loss. I have a VRI version, and I will keep it as long as I possibly can.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I had a D7000 before I got my D700 and I used the 70-200 on it and really liked it. You should keep in mind that on a DX camera, the 70-200 will be more like a 105-300 due to the crop sensor.

^^^^that, and loving the VRII!

 

[RichardsTPF]

I really want it but afraid to carry it everywhere with me. I'm really petite and worried it might be too giant to hold. Is it really that big?

Talking about the size, is it too heavy/big to carry it around for vacation purpose?
To shoot landscape/cityscape, a wider than 24mm lens is also on my wish list.
So what's your options? Is it too much: camera+tripod+flash+wide angle lens+50mm+70-200mm+filters&battery?

 

[MrsLittle]

My head is spinning from having to make a decision. I know it sounds crazy but I am now considering the 85 1.4, the pictures that come out of that thing look like a dream. It seems to be clearly geared towards portrait shooters. Does anyone know if it's a better option than the 24-70. I probably should mention great Bokeh is important.

 

[djacobox372]

On a dx camera the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 is an excellent alternative to the 24-70mm.

You might also consider the nikon 80-200mm 2.8 af-s, it usually sells for about 300-400 less then the vr1.

 

[KmH]

Nicknamed 'The Cream Machine' because of the ultra-smooth, cream cheese type bokeh it produces:

Nikon 85mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

Or the newer AF-S version - Nikon 85mm f/1.4G AF-S Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR