I am an amateur, only for the reason, because I have no creative streak ... but good technical understanding.
I notice this advice many of photographers (Golden Cut etc.), nothing private.
I think it's just fair if someone else like me, before you buy, wrestles with itself and can not really decide ..
0. Why?
1. It costs a fortune ... it's really worth it?
2. the 70-200 or 2.8 VR2?
3. 85mm 1.8G?
4. but a 50s?
5 but a 35ger?
6. I do not want to drag so much ... I just do?
Well, my creativity is no question why the faces of your subjects have to serve, therefore, a portrait lens. The rest does not interest me, I want to see isolated objects and points of my choice in the foreground.
it costs three times more than 85mm 1.8g, I have almost all read on the Internet to place reviews. Any letter that the 1.8 is the better, but they remain at the 1.4er (a few exceptions), why?
So I trust anybody more, going to a photo shop and make some pictures with the two lenses of 1.8 and 1.4.
the 1.4 simply makes better pictures, it is not only the sharpness essential for me, is a bit tight: no lens more without Nano remuneration. I suppose that the Nano produces these great colors. They are just beautiful in the 1.4er as 1.8er. Very subjective, but makes the comparison under different lighting conditions (I have been three hours in the shop ...)
I have the 70-200 2.8 VR 2 possessed, but which weighs 1.5kg and has a minimum focusing distance of 1.5m. My main model is my daughter, now 2 years old. I can not get behind to walk with such a weight (inc D700), which dangles back and forth and almost knocks me. '85 weighs the third, which is acceptable. D700 camera.
There are few drawbacks, focus motor is slow, unfortunately, no VR and flexibility (zoom 70-200, well 135 near ...)
But the benefits outweigh: the bokeh is breathtaking. sharpness I can not judge, both are so good (I Wear at the advantages a)! the weight is super, the minimum focus distance is at 85mm.
Following the sale of 70-200 I was really sad, I thought I would have sold the best lens. But now, after few days with the 85er ... forget everything!
The king is dead, long live the king 85er!
50s 1.4 or 1.8 are too lax, not as sharp, worse Bokeh, it's just not for me. I also have the 50mm 1.2, which has no AF. Nightmare my daughter flitting "capture"
35s .. yes the Sigma ART 1.4 is already a world lens, the two complement each other very well! but the colors are not fed up so beautifully at the Sigma. for the Nikon I have not been able to struggle through, because I almost never use 35mm.
I made my Father's Day gift yourself and ... am happier than ever, I shoot more photos and am happy with you.
Actually, that's for the family, I possessed no camera before founding: D
ah yes, the two images with the Bears, are mine. Watch out for the water bottle, which is approximately 1.5m behind the bear and is illuminated.
