Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
Thread started 14 Jun 2015 (Sunday) 21:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Gear help? 85 or 14-24?

 
valdano
Member
Avatar
89 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Kingston, Jamaica
     
Jun 14, 2015 21:59 |  #1

Hey guys i'm seeking some advice on my next purchase. I'm slowly building my wedding kit and am about to make my final purchase (for a while) so I can go back to second shooting. My question is, should I complete the holy trinity of Nikon lenses (i already have the 70-200 & 24-70) or should I get an 85 1.4. For those of you who are not familiar with Nikkor lenses, the last piece to the holy trinity is the Nikkor 14-24 2.8.

I'm wondering which is a more practical buy. Both cost around 1,500 used. I persoanlly haven't shot less that 24mm but only because my lenses never gave me that flexibility. Do you think it would get much usage or do you think the 85 would be a more sensible buy?

Ps. Please, if you're gonna reply with "if you're asking this, then you're not ready to shoot weddings..." Then you don't have to. I've seen it too many times in gear talk forums and it's very annoying and of no help.

Thnaks in advance.


Updated: Nikon D700 || Nikon D700 || Nikon 35 1.8 || Nikon 50 1.8 || Nikon 85 1.8 || Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VRI

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
shadowdancer
Member
211 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Aust.
     
Jun 14, 2015 22:27 |  #2

Hi, I am a canon shooter, so reply is from the lens range rather than lens quality. I try to consciously shoot weddings from a range of perspectives and like the wide angle lenses to include more context and story to my images, but I do primarily shoot with my 24-70 and 70-200. However, one context in which I find the wide angle useful is for weddings where I am closer to the couple (mainly location weddings on beaches, etc). A wide angle lens gives me the ability in this situation to quickly ensure coverage of the entire wedding party (although you need to be careful of distortion at the edges). For shorter ceremonies (where you don't have a lot of time to move around much) and where you're single shooting, this ability to quickly change perspective is invaluable. Of course, you may find it less so when second shooting.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EchoShotz
Senior Member
Avatar
310 posts
Likes: 32
Joined Feb 2014
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jun 14, 2015 22:34 |  #3

I'd look at it this way: You already have 85mm covered, so getting that won't allow you to do much more than your 70-200 @ 85mm. The 14-24 will allow you to get shots not doable with your current setup.

My vote goes to the 14-24


5D Mark III, 70-200 f/2.8L, 24-70 f/2.8 L, YN560 (2x)
-Kenny

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
valdano
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
89 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Kingston, Jamaica
     
Jun 14, 2015 23:02 |  #4

shadowdancer wrote in post #17597263 (external link)
Hi, I am a canon shooter, so reply is from the lens range rather than lens quality. I try to consciously shoot weddings from a range of perspectives and like the wide angle lenses to include more context and story to my images, but I do primarily shoot with my 24-70 and 70-200. However, one context in which I find the wide angle useful is for weddings where I am closer to the couple (mainly location weddings on beaches, etc). A wide angle lens gives me the ability in this situation to quickly ensure coverage of the entire wedding party (although you need to be careful of distortion at the edges). For shorter ceremonies (where you don't have a lot of time to move around much) and where you're single shooting, this ability to quickly change perspective is invaluable. Of course, you may find it less so when second shooting.

Thanks! I live in the caribbean and many weddings here are beach weddings. It's definitly something to consider. I know I might find it less useful during my time as a second shooter, but i'm thinking long-term, so it might be very critical. I think I might end up buying this lens. I still have between now and August to make up mu mind, but the 14-24 has the lead. Unfortunatly, due to my lacation, I don't have access to test both lenses and form an opinion of my own so thanks much for your comment. Ultimately, that's what will influence my decision.

EchoShotz wrote in post #17597274 (external link)
I'd look at it this way: You already have 85mm covered, so getting that won't allow you to do much more than your 70-200 @ 85mm. The 14-24 will allow you to get shots not doable with your current setup.

My vote goes to the 14-24

And another :). Yea I thought of it that way too. It's just that I soooooooo love the shallow DOF of the 85 1.4. I've never done or seen a detailed side-by-side of the 85 and 70-200@85 but regardless, as you mentioned, the 14-24 will allow me to get shots that my current setup just won't allow.

Appreciated!


Updated: Nikon D700 || Nikon D700 || Nikon 35 1.8 || Nikon 50 1.8 || Nikon 85 1.8 || Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VRI

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
Senior Member
823 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 244
Joined Jan 2015
     
Jun 15, 2015 01:07 |  #5

Well I have an analogous Canon trinity of zooms, but they're all the slower f/4 ones. So when I was able to pick up the 85mm f/1.8 and the 50mm f/1.2 you betcher buns I love shooting them wide open. I'd probably go with the 85mm if I were you. There's nothing like bokeliciousness for wedding photos and the ultra wide shots are few and far between. $0.02. YMMV.


Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
valdano
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
89 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Kingston, Jamaica
     
Jun 15, 2015 06:33 as a reply to  @ Silver-Halide's post |  #6

I know what you mean Silver. That's my dilema. I would love to won the three lenses that give me the flexibility of as wide as 14mm to as long as 200mm all at 2.8 but at the same time I absolutely love the bokeh from the 1.4 lenses. Just superb!

I know these two lenses are miles apart and for different purposes but both are interesting choices.


Updated: Nikon D700 || Nikon D700 || Nikon 35 1.8 || Nikon 50 1.8 || Nikon 85 1.8 || Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VRI

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Jun 15, 2015 16:15 |  #7

I'm probably going to take some heat for this, but...

I'm a Canon shooter, and I don't do weddings. But I would look into getting the Nikon 14-24, and then looking into the Rokinon 85mm 1.4, for about 1/7 the cost of the Nikon. Sure you'll loose AF, but if the Nikon version is anything like the Canon version, you'll pick up a sweet lens.


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
valdano
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
89 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Kingston, Jamaica
     
Jun 15, 2015 19:40 as a reply to  @ KirkS518's post |  #8

No, no heat. I however don't think a non AF lens would be of much use to me though. AF is one of the MOST important things to me so I wouldn't want to compromise there. I'm also not a huge fan of third party lenses because it's not very easy to send stuff out to be repaired based on where i'm located. The money for shipping alone might cost more than the lens (if something is wrong with it) which I seem to hear a lot with third party lenses.


Updated: Nikon D700 || Nikon D700 || Nikon 35 1.8 || Nikon 50 1.8 || Nikon 85 1.8 || Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VRI

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,948 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2866
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jun 16, 2015 08:14 |  #9

2 totally different lens for totally different uses and looks. A fast 85 is a must have on my opinion. I use the 85 F/1.8 and have used and sold the 85L and Sigma 85 1.4.

I currently use a 10 yr old extremely sharp copy 17-35 and its no longer repairable from canon

so a 16-35 F/4 IS is on my list


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
Senior Member
823 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 244
Joined Jan 2015
     
Jun 16, 2015 13:52 as a reply to  @ umphotography's post |  #10

Why did you ditch the L in favor of the 1.8? Too much wealth tied up in one lens and the 1.8 was good enough? Didn't like the slow focus??


Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,948 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2866
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jun 16, 2015 14:43 |  #11

Silver-Halide wrote in post #17599409 (external link)
Why did you ditch the L in favor of the 1.8? Too much wealth tied up in one lens and the 1.8 was good enough? Didn't like the slow focus??

Slow focus. And just too many missed shots at 100%. The 85 1.8 never, and I mean Never, misses at 1.8. I found that i was taking 2-4 to be sure i had one sharp all the way. I had it calibrated, i troed improving my technique, everything. Too many misses. Maybe it was me. all i know is that all my lens dont miss. my 35L, 50L and 135L are perfect and have never been calibrated to any camera. Just put them on and shoot. Same for the 85MM 1.8.........the 85L and the sigma 85 1.4 gave me fits....the sigma was by far worse. needed 6-8 to get 1 good one. I got to where I treated the 85's like I do the 135L. I dont let the shutter drop below 1/160 when hand holding and firing a flash.........still bad results.......the 1.8 hits every single time


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
Senior Member
823 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 244
Joined Jan 2015
     
Jun 16, 2015 17:36 as a reply to  @ umphotography's post |  #12

Yeah and I get acceptably sharp results with my 85 /f1.8.


Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
Senior Member
823 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 244
Joined Jan 2015
     
Jun 16, 2015 18:08 as a reply to  @ umphotography's post |  #13

Yours was the 85 I or the Mark II?


Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MBB89
Senior Member
257 posts
Likes: 48
Joined Jan 2015
     
Jun 24, 2015 09:24 |  #14

Sigmas tend to be hit or miss but I absolutely adore my Sigma 85 f/1.4. Wonderful for portraiture and the AF is fast enough to keep up with movement (I have used it for Track events even).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agrandexpression
Senior Member
446 posts
Likes: 136
Joined Apr 2015
     
Jun 24, 2015 11:24 |  #15

How about renting one? Or both?

While they each have advantages...if they sit in your bag because they don't fit your "style", what did you gain?

It could be useful to try them each out to see how often you would actually reach for them.


Were you really getting that kind of feedback on a lens recommendation? Sorry you received responses like that.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,261 views & 0 likes for this thread
Gear help? 85 or 14-24?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is vttnguyen
1152 guests, 296 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.