85mm

Lubinski

Looking to get a new lens and so far I'm siding with the Nikon 85mm f/1.8G AF-S. I have a d5100 so it will actually be a 127mm lens. My focus is for portraits, hopefully some weddings down the road.

If you own this lens how much do you love or hate it?
Should I just save for the 1.8D, and dump the G?
or "PFFFt you man, get a 50mm"

ziggy53

I don't believe that a Nikon "D" series lens will autofocus on your Nikon D5100 body. For doing weddings I would insist on autofocus capabilities. It just speeds the entire process.

Portraits are really multiple different applications and I like to describe them in groups:

Head shots and head-and-shoulders.
3/4 length and full length.
Environmental, group and natural settings.

For the first group, which is pretty tight to the head, on a crop/DX camera I prefer to use a longer focal length, generally 85mm or more.

For the second group I would generally use 50mm or so. A 35mm lens on a crop camera can do in a smaller room.

For groups and when you want to record a larger scene, I recommend a standard zoom of 17-55mm(ish). The Nikkor 17-55mm, f2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX is about as good as it gets for this use.

Large aperture primes allow more control over DOF, which is important for flexibility and controlling background elements.

Lubinski

You are right, I forget about the auto focus sometimes, need to stick with those AF lenses. Thanks.

perroneford

It still mystifies me why Nikon forces users with the least expensive cameras into the most expensive lenses. Totally backward scenario.

Lubinski

Whats the result of an af motor in the body AND the lens..

perroneford

Seymore wrote: »

No one is forcing anyone... is all your choice. The AF-D will still work fine, you just have to manually focus and use the focus spot in the viewfinder. Then, once you upgrade the body and have the AF motor in body, this AFD lens will come into it's own.

Yea yea... the lens will manual focus. So will a 30 year old Ai lens. But that's not the point of buying a 5100 and an AF lens, is it? The only Nikon body I have without a drive is an older film camera. But I'd certainly feel a bit put out if I'd bought a new 5100 and one of Nikon's best lenses, and they didn't work together to AF.

Just sayin...

perroneford

Seymore wrote: »

And if you're doing portrait work, what do you need AF for anyways. Usually only needed for "moving" subjects. Static subjects are better shot MF, IMPHO.

Just sayin...

True, but I'll be using my 85 for more than portraits. And even with portraits, my subjects are often moving. And MF of a subject walking along a beach or playing out in the water is a royal PITA! There's a reason my MF lenses don't get much use these days.

perroneford

Seymore wrote: »

Maybe it'll work for some and not for others. D200/300's are cheap these days.
Time for an upgrade?

Well, I have a pair of D3s, a D800, a D7000, D200, D2x, and D2H. I think I'm ok as far as upgrades are concerned...

Lubinski

Upgraded from my trusty d40 I have had for about 6 years. Running with the d5100 now, wanted the d7000 but the wife talked me down.

cmadness

I just got the new 85mm 1.8 G lens last week. I have been using it on my D40 and D5100 as well. I paid $500 and through Amazon. It is well worth it. Quite an amazing lens. Focus is very fast and silent. The bokeh is what sold me. It is simply beautiful when you exicute it right.
This lens is all about separation. Both between your subject and the background, and you and your subject. 85mm on a crop sensor really makes you move back.
I also have a 50mm G which has been getting the most use of all my lenses since last year until now. The 85 is my new favorite. I had the mighty Nikon 17-55mm 2.8 and just sold it. For me, zooms simply cannot compare to primes. I picked up a tamron 28-75mm 2.8 because I thought I could use it if I needed it. Well it pretty much just sits. I went back though my files and there is a notable difference between my zooms and primes. Plus it makes me move to get my shot which makes me pay more attention to what I'm doing.
I'm now looking at the new 28mm 1.8 G that was just released. I think the 28, 50, 85 combo would be perfect for everything I do.
Good luck in whatever you decide.

perroneford

"For me, zooms simply cannot compare to primes."

I would caution you to be aware of the zooms you select. The 200-400 and 70-200 are absolute STAPLES of professional photographers worldwide. And for very good reason. They are astounding. You can add the 24-70 in there as well.

Nikon, and Canon for that matter, have numerous levels of lenses available. And I can guarantee you there is a significant difference between the common zooms, and the zooms Nikon marketed to full time professionals for daily use. You need only pick up a Sports Illustrated to see dozens of images shot with Nikon and Canon zooms. I love my primes as well, but they can really put you in a box. Sitting on an endline or sideline, you just don't have the opportunity to move back and forth, and zooms are often critical.

Lubinski

BTW, loving the 85mm..