Best Primary Lens for D700?

Shaun,

Thanks very much for the tip. Just curious, is it 4.6 feet from the camera body or 4.6 ft from the front of the lens? 'Cuz you know, that an 8-10 inch difference right there, right?

Christian

Shaun Bell said:

I heard a 135 is the works as well, maybe a 1.8 : ) I think your best bet is the 70-200. Don't worry about 2.8 to f2, you'll pay a fortune to get that little extra. The 200 F2 is huge! And anyway, you're shooting a D700...don't really need F2. As for working distance, it's the lens that's used 90% of the time in the studio. How about getting the 70-200 and a older 50mm 1.4? Good cheap walk around lens.

--
http://www.paphotographics.com

Click to expand...

I believe the minimum focusing distance is calculated from the sensor plane of the camera - Look at your D700 body on the lower-right corner of top LCD screen. That circle+dash marks the sensor plane. I think you measure from this spot.

Oh, and just because a lens is not AF-S doesn't mean it doesn't focus quickly. I've read numerous times the 85 f/1.8 focuses quickly, especially on the semi-pro/pro bodies. The 50mm f/1.8 focuses pretty quickly also.

As for examples of my kid portraiture with MF lenses:

Rokinon 85 f/1.4





105 AIS f/2.5 (on D90)



(on the D700, the only posed shot here with 2 umbrellas for light)



If I had the cash I'd probably get the 70-200 VR2, or VR 1 if you're not worried about corners too much.

Xian C N said:

Thanks very much for the tip. Just curious, is it 4.6 feet from the camera body or 4.6 ft from the front of the lens? 'Cuz you know, that an 8-10 inch difference right there, right?

Christian

Shaun Bell said:

I heard a 135 is the works as well, maybe a 1.8 : ) I think your best bet is the 70-200. Don't worry about 2.8 to f2, you'll pay a fortune to get that little extra. The 200 F2 is huge! And anyway, you're shooting a D700...don't really need F2. As for working distance, it's the lens that's used 90% of the time in the studio. How about getting the 70-200 and a older 50mm 1.4? Good cheap walk around lens.

--
http://www.paphotographics.com

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
JL Smith
http://jl-smith.smugmug.com
Gear listed in profile!

Like you, I'm in the middle of a switch, comming from Oly.

I bought last month the D700 with 24-70mm.

The 24-70mm is so worth the consideration! Amazing piece of glass, very sharp, great bokeh and focus is really fast. Almost all the pictures of my kids are keepers, no more miss focus or hunting (in low light) like I had with the 50mmf2, Summilux D 25mm or other HG-lenses.

Yesterday I picked up a 50mm 1.4G. While not focussing as fast as the 24-70mm, it nails the focus every time. No hunting at all. First I was afraid of the lack of sharpness wide open (compared to the Summilux or zd50) But from results I've seen till now it's very good. I think this lens is a great and cheap starting point to build a new system.

That's funny, I'm switching from Nikon to Oly lol! Well, actually I bought a Pen for my fun camera. And fun it is.

--
http://www.paphotographics.com

Our most used lens as our grandchildren were growing up was the 60mm f2.8 Macro AFD you could get as close as you wanted, It just seemed perfect. Out side we would use the 80-200 f2.8 AFD along with the 60.

50G is da way to go.

I think you would be crazy running around after your kid with a huge 70-200.

so I would solve the problem by

A. wait till spring and get sigmas new 85mm 1.4 that is listed on there site as $0.00 MSRP FREE (ok not free but lets say it cost $1100)
B. using a higher iso and slightly shower AF in the nikon 105

C. bite the bullet and grab the older 85mm 1.8. great lens but old.... and by the time nikon puts out a new one your kid might not be as much of a kid any more... and there is the chance that nikon might try to only sell there cheaper primes as DX lens. (that would be interesting. DX 16 f2.8 - 35 f1.8 - 60 f1.8 FX 24 1.4 50 1.2 85 1.4... but wont happen)

--
http://www.LightPaintPhotography.com

Hi,

I just wanted to thank everyone for their help over the last couple of days and says thanks for all the great insights and knowledge!

Although there was no consensus, all the different opinions really helped me make my lens choice— which is this: I've gone ahead and ordered the 70-200 VRII as well as the 85mm 1.4D.

I'm thinking that based on all the feedback I'd gotten and my own uses that these two lenses should cover my needs well.

I know many people recommended something akin to a 50mm. I'm going to try with the 70-200 and the 85 and if the 85 somehow isn't working out (i.e., focus too slow, min focus distance too long or just not wide enough) I'll trade the 85mm in for a 50 1.4G.

Thanks again everyone!

He Xian,

I missed the original thread and just saw your decision. Both lenses you have chosen are great. I love my 85 although I don´t use it that much after having received my 70-200. Having said that I still recognize a pic made with my 85 as soon as I see it (compared to the 70-200). It has a certain quality/feel to it that is exceptional, especially the bokeh.

You will surely enjoy both and will be looking for something wider soon. The 24-70 is a gem and I use it almost as often as the 70-200.

Cheers,

zion

You can't really go wrong with those two.

I am doing something slightly different myself now, almost complementary to what you are doing: I am going to use the 17-35/2.8, 50/1.4 AF-S and 135/2 DC as the basic setup. Until I can get hold of the 135DC, I use the 105/1.8 AIS and/or the Sigma 150/2.8 macro.

I have the 24-85/2.8-4 AF-D (with 1:2 macro, very useful) and 80-200/2.8 AF-S and use them quite a lot, but I prefer smaller and faster primes, even though the D700 makes fast glass much less urgently needed.

I don't think the 105/2 and 135/2 DC lenses are outdated at all, but they are specialty lenses, and I really hope Nikon will come up with something like a 135/2 AF-S VRII for genral use soon. Today, I think the 105/2 DC is the worthiest successor to your excellent 50/2 macro in the Nikon lineup.

I agree with the quality of the 85, but just like you I tend not to use it as much. I think for maximum versatility the 24-70 and the 70-200 is the bread and butter setup. And you can't forget the 14-24 : )
--
http://www.paphotographics.com

Shaun,

Thanks for all your help on this thread!

Christian

SNR,

Thanks! I'm pretty happy with my choices (in theory). They arrive today, so we'll find out for sure soon enough.

And yeah, if Nikon released some new FX portrait lenses, I'd be all over 'em!

Happy shooting,
Christian

SNRatio said:

You can't really go wrong with those two.

I am doing something slightly different myself now, almost complementary to what you are doing: I am going to use the 17-35/2.8, 50/1.4 AF-S and 135/2 DC as the basic setup. Until I can get hold of the 135DC, I use the 105/1.8 AIS and/or the Sigma 150/2.8 macro.

I have the 24-85/2.8-4 AF-D (with 1:2 macro, very useful) and 80-200/2.8 AF-S and use them quite a lot, but I prefer smaller and faster primes, even though the D700 makes fast glass much less urgently needed.

I don't think the 105/2 and 135/2 DC lenses are outdated at all, but they are specialty lenses, and I really hope Nikon will come up with something like a 135/2 AF-S VRII for genral use soon. Today, I think the 105/2 DC is the worthiest successor to your excellent 50/2 macro in the Nikon lineup.

Click to expand...

No problem. I wish I had advise when I started lol! Man, I bought a lot of gear I didn't need. Now I buy exactly what I need. Sometimes it's expensive, but in the long run it makes me money and saves on what I didn't need.
--
http://www.paphotographics.com

Xian C N said:

A couple of things seems clear to me after reading everyone's input:

1. There is no consensus.

Click to expand...

Well, I guess you did ask for opinions and guess what..?

Xian C N said:

2. It seems that Nikon has a bit of a whole in it's lens line up right now. Based on everyone's responses it seems that there really isn't a modern ED, AFS FX portrait lens right now.

Click to expand...

Fortunately, until now, no one has mentioned to AF-S 200mm f/2 prime!

Xian C N said:

Maybe I'm mistaken, but it seems that both the 135 DC and the 85 1.4 are truly LOVED lenses, ..

Click to expand...

For sure the 85 f/1.4 is an incredible lens. I have a very very good friend who trusts me with his copy. I don't recall having problems with focussing speed as reported in your responses, but this has been stated elsewhere before too. Even though its design is 12+ years old, the IQ and specifically the bokeh are terrific.

Xian C N said:

... I'm now thinking about a 70-200 VRII... or even a 105 VR micro!

Click to expand...

I have the 70-200 VRII. It costs a lot, but is worth it, particularly on your FX body. No one has mentioned how heavy it is though. If your subject (daughter) is moving about a lot, you will receive the best forearm workout ever. Go try it and consider.

Xian C N said:

Lastly, I'd like to just go ahead and state that the sole purpose of the camera isn't just shooting my little girl; it's just that while building a suitable lens collection (which takes time) I want to be sure that I can still do certain high priority things. Chief among them? Capture my first born's ever-changing world.

Click to expand...

So back to my original post then, which was towards the AF-S 50 f/1.4 G. If you use any lens with aperture of 1.4, 1.8, 2.0 for portraits, you will get superb bokeh. In your final images this will make a difference. The f/2.8 aperture of the 105 VR micro and 70-200 VRII is also good, but you will realise the need to increase subject to background distance to achieve the similar effect, which may not always be possible. With 1.4 aperture and profile portrait, you can achieve the effect of tack sharp focus on the closest eye and creamy OOF on the eye further away, which is just beautiful! All lenses discussed will also work for your other subjects.

Also, consider your flash gun options.

The pictures of your family are excellent by the way.

Enjoy!
--
PRL

It seems that from the info you provided, that the answer is simple. You are accustomed to a field of view that is equal to 100mm in a FF; you like to get close and for now money is an issue. The answer: Nikon 105 VR 2.8.

I just read through all your responses and you have made a very good choice.
Please be sure to post images when you tested your new lenses.
--
PRL

prl,

Thanks, I'll do that!

prl105 said:

I just read through all your responses and you have made a very good choice.
Please be sure to post images when you tested your new lenses.
--
PRL

Click to expand...

so, which one is better the VR2 or the 85 1.4D, I am a dual system user Canon and Nikon and looking for an ultimate portrait lens , I prefer prime but I think the VR2 is sharper and the new Canon 70-200f2.8IS2 is even sharper but at the cost of bokeh.

any way , congrats on your choice , you can't go wrong with the VR2 any way, I am not so sure about the 85f1.4D though.

Panda,

enjoying both lenses very much. There's no denying: the 85 is softer than the 70-200 VRII. But of course it is! Right?

The 85 so far has been great. Don't know if its what you're looking for, but the images are just beautiful and I'm very happy.

The focus is a bit faster than I'd expected (was prepared for the worst. It's not.), and I'm enjoying the creative options available at 1.4. However, under 2.8 it's softer than I'm used to that's for sure.

pandalee said:

so, which one is better the VR2 or the 85 1.4D, I am a dual system user Canon and Nikon and looking for an ultimate portrait lens , I prefer prime but I think the VR2 is sharper and the new Canon 70-200f2.8IS2 is even sharper but at the cost of bokeh.

any way , congrats on your choice , you can't go wrong with the VR2 any way, I am not so sure about the 85f1.4D though.

Click to expand...