DSLRUsers.com

I'm still new to these forums, some of you might know Heath Bennett - He's my brother..... unfortunatley I can't ask him for advice on this matter because he's overseas at the moment - without internet/phone.....

I have a little money to spend on a couple of lenses to get myself up to speed.... I have a d70s with a 18-70 lens at the moment...

These lenses are on my checklist

- A macro lens
- A portrait lens
- A wide angle lens

I've already decided to get the 12-24 DX nikon af-s to fulfilll my wide angle needs.

Now the remaining question is do I need to buy 2 lenses for portrait and macro? If there's much between 1.4 85 and 2.8 105 as far as differing strengths I'll have to get the 1.4 and save for a while to get the 2.8, which I don't mind doing. But if there's not much difference between the two i'll get the new 105 2.8 and be done with it.

I'm aware that the 18-70 can suffice as a portrait lens, but I need to do a photoshoot in 2 weeks at a factory in low light and the 1.4 and 2.8 seem appropriate. How readily available is the 1.4 and 2.8 lenses in Sydney? I'm aware I don't have enough posts yet to go through birdy so I'll go looking online/in shops.

I've read a bit on a comparison at dpreview but it didn't really answer all my questions.

The 105 VR is so new I don't think anyone has one yet so probably hard to get an opinion on it.

Which 85 1.4, the manual or AF version? The AF is excellent, do a search under Wendell or Killakoala, both have the lens and have posted beautiful work with it

I cannot comment on the other lenses as I've never used them but the Tamron Di 90 mm 2.8 is a great macro and portrait lens. It's cheaper ($550 - $600) and gives wonderful images.

I rate it up with my other good lenses - 50/1.8 and the recently acquired 70 - 200/2.8 VR

Both of them are totally difference, 105VR can be used as portrait lens but quality and bokeh is not the same with the 85/1.4, though the 105VR is still months or year away.
Stick with the 85/1.4 and you'll be surprised.

I mean the new 1.4 - the one that Wendell posted some shots with recently.

Thanks guys for the tips. If the 105 is months off and there is a difference with the boquet then I'm definatley going to get the 1.4.

Havn't seen Killakoala's shots yet - I'll do a search.

jben_net wrote:I mean the new 1.4 - the one that Wendell posted some shots with recently.

Thanks guys for the tips. If the 105 is months off and there is a difference with the boquet then I'm definatley going to get the 1.4.

Havn't seen Killakoala's shots yet - I'll do a search.

Actually, you don't need to search or see any shots of the 85/1.4 to convince you to make your final decision on that lens.
Many reviews + proof of this gem is all over the net.
Get it and you won't regret

There would be a number of ways you could go here... certainly the rollsroyce option is the nikon 85/1.4, it's quality is well documented and you would be owning a gem.

Another option at the Tamron 28-75/2.8 or even as shakey suggested the tamrom 90/2.8 macro which ticks off the macro on your list as well. However, a couple of notes... on the neg side, neither tamrom will provide you the lowlight capabilities of the 85/1.4, nor are they as solidly built (the 85 is a tank)... on the pos side, they are both much cheaper and you'll get both for the price of one 85/1.4, also the 28-75 will give you a zone range that can come in handy when foot-zoom is not an option.

Another option would be to consider a 70-200/2.8 range that can be used (often is) for portrait work and give you a telezoom in the bargain.
The neg of this option is the min focus distance of the lens is much greater than the 85/1.4.

One final note... re macro decisions... there are a number of good options available... the key issue is to decide what manner of macro work you wish to do that will dictate the beset working distance. e.g. photographing funnelweb spiders at a 2mm working distance may not be desirable.

cheers and happy researching !!!

Ok so i'll get the 12-24, the 1.4 85 and save/wait for the new vr 105 macro

Thanks for the info on the other lenses though MJ..... I think I'll go nikon for resale value

It always amazes me how people are so friendly and keen to help out around here. Good little community!

That's the whole point of this place... the day we stop helping and exchanging in open conversation is the day this place will die.

Your lens selection sounds good... be aware that the new 105VR is yet to be proven and the cost benefit of VR on macro might be questionable... if your prepared to wait I'm sure someone will acquire one and give us all the benefit of their experience.

Plenty of folk have and are happy with the current nikon 105 macro and other brand options around (not sure of the resale premium of nikon macros vs others, whereas the 85/1.4 for e.g. does offer a clear resale advantage unlesss your selling to me, in which case I'm happy to relieve you of your burden at a nominal cost )

Hi JBen_net,

I think you are making a good choice. I considered the same issue over the past few months and I came to the following solution:

I will be buying the Tokina 12-24 rather than the Nikkor 12-24 as it's half the price and getting rave reviews.

I have a down payment on a Nikkor 85/1.8. I considered the 85/1.4 but at more than double the price I couldn't justify it as I don't know if I want to make portrature a major part of my photographic style.

I bought a Sigma 150mm 2.8 macro instead of the Nikkor 105. It gave me that little bit more reach to keep away from the funnel webs and it's still 2.8.

Maybe if I had another couple thousand to spend, I might have made other choices, but I'm trying to keep my photographic spending in balance with other spending requirements.

Best of luck with your new gear.

Cheers
John

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Nikkor 60mm 2.8 macro. From what I hear it's really sharp (another nikon forum and guys at 2 different camera shops).

I think you should take your memory card or camera to a shop and take some test shots and see what you think.

Also, many have said that the 85 1.4 is one of the sharpest lenses with the most pleasing bokeh out there, no matter the manufacturer.

Well I did it. Drove from newcastle through storms, traffic jams etc.... bought the 1.4 85 following everyones advice - i've only taken a few shots so far but WOW..... its very nice.... also got a sb800 and a 12-24.

oh and thanks for the tip on the macro

Congrats! You have done well!

jben_net wrote:Well I did it. Drove from newcastle through storms, traffic jams etc.... bought the 1.4 85 following everyones advice - i've only taken a few shots so far but WOW..... its very nice.... also got a sb800 and a 12-24.

oh and thanks for the tip on the macro

Have lots of fun, can't wait to see the results of your new toys!!

dooda wrote:I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Nikkor 60mm 2.8 macro. From what I hear it's really sharp (another nikon forum and guys at 2 different camera shops).

Absolutely correct... the 60/2.8 macro is one of nikons shapest... but as per my previous posts, depends on the working distance that suits. The 60/2.8 might have you uncomfortably close to that red belly black snake you'd like to photograph

Yeah, it would obviously depend on how intense the macro work is, but for a sharp lens that is in the portrait range that has macro capabilities, it would be tops on my list.

dooda wrote:Yeah, it would obviously depend on how intense the macro work is, but for a sharp lens that is in the portrait range that has macro capabilities, it would be tops on my list.

dooda,
These lenses can be used in both fields: macro + portrait, they are sharp but those can't beat the 85/1.4.

Tamron 90mm macro
Nikon 60mm macro
Nikon 105 macro

But does the 85 1.4 have macro abilities? That's the only reason I suggested it.

I'm not a huge macro guy, so the capabilities would be nice, would get much more use out of it from the portrait side.

dooda wrote:But does the 85 1.4 have macro abilities? That's the only reason I suggested it.

I'm not a huge macro guy, so the capabilities would be nice, would get much more use out of it from the portrait side.

Nikon doesn't make any combination of great gem (lens) with macro capabilities.
Perhaps you have to look into difference brand as Tamron or Sigma

dooda wrote:But does the 85 1.4 have macro abilities? That's the only reason I suggested it.

I'm not a huge macro guy, so the capabilities would be nice, would get much more use out of it from the portrait side.

Get the Tamron 90mm macro then.