Nikon MidRange Zoom. *The Hunt Continues*

The 85 is an amazing lens, no doubt about it. Hard to go wrong with an investment like that. For used lenses my favorite source is KEH:


That seems to be the consensus. And at that price, I can buy a BRAND NEW copy of it with far more confidence, on fleabay, from one of those top rated upper echelon sellers and know I will have a no fuss-no muss transaction.

The more research I do, the more I think primes are the way to go for me. Yeah, I do some walking around, and yeah, it would be nice to have a good vacation lens, but most of the things I do, and aspire to do, are going to be shot from a tripod and meticulously set up. I don't need a zoom for that. I need razor sharp.

Decisions and first world problems are hard.

I guess my question would be, if such is the case and you already own a 50 do you really need an 85? Don't get me wrong, the 85 is a first rate portrait lens (the focal length works smashing for it) but without being sure what it is your shooting then I guess you need to ask yourself what the benefits of having the 85 would be in conjunction with the 50, and whether or not that justifies the cost.
 
I guess my question would be, if such is the case and you already own a 50 do you really need an 85? Don't get me wrong, the 85 is a first rate portrait lens (the focal length works smashing for it) but without being sure what it is your shooting then I guess you need to ask yourself what the benefits of having the 85 would be in conjunction with the 50, and whether or not that justifies the cost.

Who are you... My wife? :lol:

No, I don't really need an 85mm prime. Hell, I don't need the zoom lens I was looking for when I started this thread. It's not about NEED... it's about WANT. I'm American dammit. :D (it's a joke folks.... take a breath...)

I do plan on taking the senior portraits of all the nieces and nephews, and would like to get more involved in pet photography, so I believe a nice 85mm prime will be very hand for that. And since there is no way on God's green earth I would be able to swing the purchase of the 70-200mm 1.8 VC lens from Tamron past my wife, this would be the way to get into a lens that will handle those situations.

I think it will also be an invaluable tool for my upcoming trip to the Gulf with my entire (all 14 of us) immediate family and their spawn. I promised some frameable shots of the grandiks to my parents, and come heck or high water I'm going to deliver.

The good midrange zoom I want is $1500. The portrait zoom I want is $1000. The 85mm prime is $430 and an inadequate fast midrange zoom is $350.

Quite a quandary.

My $500 budget doesn't leave me much choice, and the choices it leaves me both have their pros and cons.

Again I say, first world problems are hard.

Can I do all of this with the nifty fifty?

Probably.

Will I be as happy with the result?

Don't know.

Am I willing to take the chance?

Welllllll.......

Also, I was under the understanding that a good, reasonably well rounded prime setup would be 35, 50, 85 and something long. Am I mistaken on that? I feel that would cover quite a bit of ground for quite a few scenarios.
 
Who are you... My wife? :lol:

No, I don't really need an 85mm prime. Hell, I don't need the zoom lens I was looking for when I started this thread. It's not about NEED... it's about WANT. I'm American dammit. :D (it's a joke folks.... take a breath...)

Also, I was under the understanding that a good prime setup would be 35, 50, 85 and something long. Am I mistaken on that? I feel that would cover quite a bit of ground for quite a few scenarios.

The 85 is a bang up lens for portraits, no doubt. It's also a great midrange telephoto for the money. You could also look at some of the older model 70-200 mm 2.8's that don't have VR/VC/OS:

SIGMA 70-200MM F/2.8 APO D EX HSM (N90S & LATER) AUTOFOCUS LENS FOR NIKON {77} | KEH Camera
 
I should upgrade my 85mm because I want too .. nah ....

At one time I had a 24mm, 50mm, and 85mm.
Then I got my 24-85/2.8-4.0
a nice and sharp lens that can also do macro-type photos.

NOW, I sold my 24mm, and bought a 2nd and 3rd 50mm, sold one 50mm
and thus have the 24-85, 50/1.8 & 50/1.4 and 85/1.8

morale of the story ...
The more you buy,
the more you keep.
 
Photographers didn't have stabilization for decades and decades.
It's all about keeping steady and shutter speed.
Even then, with stabilization you still can't take a 3 second shot moving all around.

I've been using an 80-200/2.8 for sports for years and it's an AF-D lens, screw-driven focus.
 
You could also look at some of the older model 70-200 mm 2.8's that don't have VR/VC/OS:

SIGMA 70-200MM F/2.8 APO D EX HSM (N90S & LATER) AUTOFOCUS LENS FOR NIKON {77} | KEH Camera

I've considered that... but I'm leery of not having the stabilization with a long heavy lens. Shouldn't I be??

Honestly? Nope. Even without a tripod as long as you keep your shutter speed at acceptable levels it isn't needed. My sigma 70-200 mm has the OS feature, I have it shut off because I just don't use it. I keep my shutter speed at 200 and above handheld so it's not really a feature that sees much use on my lens.
 
Well... my Wife just made this decision REALLY easy for me.


She ordered a new copy of the Nikon 85mm 1.8g for me. Should be here Monday. :D

I love my Wife. She's all kinds of awesome. I'm sure I will be tickled pink with it. Thanks all... I appreciate your input and knowledge!
 
Well... my Wife just made this decision REALLY easy for me.


She ordered a new copy of the Nikon 85mm 1.8g for me. Should be here Monday. :D

I love my Wife. She's all kinds of awesome. I'm sure I will be tickled pink with it. Thanks all... I appreciate your input and knowledge!
Sweet glass

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 

Most reactions

Back
Top