Gear help? 85 or 14-24?

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.

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.

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

shadowdancer wrote in post #17597263
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
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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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??

Silver-Halide wrote in post #17599409
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

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

Yours was the 85 I or the Mark II?

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).

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.