Fingtam
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2012
- Messages
- 55
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- Jacksonville, NC
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Towards the end of this year I am going to be starting a photography business dealing mostly with outdoor family photos.
I currently own a D800 body and a phenomenal 16-35mm lens, a very good 50mm prime, and a somewhat cheap telephoto zoom.
For a long time I've been seriously considering buying the nikkor 70-200mm f/4g ed vr (or possibly the more expensive f/2.8 version), but I've also heard a lot of people say that for portraits you really need to go with a fast prime.
The Nikon 85mm f/1.4G IF AF-S Nikkor has caught my attention. Everything I've read about it online has been nothing but extremely impressive, and it is in about the same price range that I have been considering.
With that said, I think I would feel really limited by the one set focal length with the prime as opposed to the 70-200mm zoom.
Really the only thing that bothers me about the 70-200mm is the max aperture of 4 (or paying about a thousand dollars extra for the 2.8, plus the extra size and weight of the bigger lens)
At this point I cannot afford to purchase both, so I would love to hear any input that might help me make my decision.
I currently own a D800 body and a phenomenal 16-35mm lens, a very good 50mm prime, and a somewhat cheap telephoto zoom.
For a long time I've been seriously considering buying the nikkor 70-200mm f/4g ed vr (or possibly the more expensive f/2.8 version), but I've also heard a lot of people say that for portraits you really need to go with a fast prime.
The Nikon 85mm f/1.4G IF AF-S Nikkor has caught my attention. Everything I've read about it online has been nothing but extremely impressive, and it is in about the same price range that I have been considering.
With that said, I think I would feel really limited by the one set focal length with the prime as opposed to the 70-200mm zoom.
Really the only thing that bothers me about the 70-200mm is the max aperture of 4 (or paying about a thousand dollars extra for the 2.8, plus the extra size and weight of the bigger lens)
At this point I cannot afford to purchase both, so I would love to hear any input that might help me make my decision.