3 lenses 24-70 f/2.8, 85mm f/1.4, 70-200mm f/2.8

[ROA44]

Thought I'd start a different Thread rather than Hi-jack Tannins thread on the AF-S 70-200mm.

I'm looking at the AF-S 24-70mm for a general carry around lens & the AF-S 85mm f/1.4G for indoor situations due to at times not being able to use a flash due to requirements. But in light of Tannins thread and some members use of the 70-200, for indoor work am now wondering about the 70-200 a bit more but would probably prefer to put that money toward some other component.

I am also interested in swfty's comment on selling his 85mm f/1.4 and my main reason for not considering the 70-200 was the size & weight but not ruling it out either in-light of reading others use of the 70-200 plus I haven't seen to many comments regarding the 85mm f/1.4.

I also know that I have yet way to much still to learn and this is probably part of my problem but thoughts appreciated.

[Granville]

I don't know about the other two much, but the 85mm 1.4 for indor use might be a bit long on a D5000. Without starting yet another long winded discussion on cropped sensors, I have the Nikkor 50mm 1.4 and I find that in some indoor situations the field of view is just a tad tight. This is normally experienced when I am against the long wall of a room and need to photograph more than two people sitting around a dining table or similar.

Having said that, that is a fairly spoecific issue, and when I am able to stand back a bit such as a wedding or a christening in a church or hall, I just love the 50.

[Lance B]

I would think that a 70-200 f2.8 VRII as it is more versatile having a zoom range from 70-200 and also for indoor work due to it having VR. The 85 f1.4 is a very specialised lens and it's purpose is more for getting superb bokeh and very shallow DOF for creative purposes. I rarely use my 85 f1.4 due to the fact it is a rather specialised lens. However, if you do much portraiture it might be a good option, but you can still get superb results from the 70-200 f2.8 VRII. I would go the 70-200 route as it is a gem of a lens.

[swifty]

I have to say my shooting habits tend to change frequently and I don't know if I migrated away from night portraiture/indoor events first therefore I switched to the 70-200 or I now only have the 70-200 therefore I tend to shoot less night and indoor stuff.

The two are very different lenses.
The 85/1.4 is more discreet and has a very significant 2 stop advantage. The bokeh is creamier (more dreamy) but IMO you can get essentially equal levels of subject isolation despite the 2 stop advantage on the 85mm by using longer focal lengths on the 70-200mm. But the look is different by virtue of focal length differences (more compression with the longer focal lengths).

The 70-200/2.8 is far bulkier and intimidating and hence is more suitable when the subject knows and wants/don't mind being photographed. Hence my comment in the other thread that I only use it for photography-centric outings and not casual outings. It is also more flexible to work with given the greater range of focal lengths since you can't always 'zoom with your feet'. Particularly indoors/studio or when working on a tripod, the zoom is far more convenient.

VR on the 70-200mm helps a lot, and you can often gain more than the two stop advantage that the 85/1.4 has by using much slower shutter speeds but only with stationary subjects. For event shooting where the subject isn't necessary holding a pose, the 85/1.4 is better IMO.

For indoor night events, regardless of 70-200 or the 85, I will usually combine with balance flash. Despite the 85mm's 2 stop advantage I find that its usually necessary to add a little fill flash to balance out the shadows on the subject. But the two stops aperture advantage brings out more ambient background light. The expense is more limited DOF so this can be problem when photographing more than 1 person at different depths.

AF is much quicker on the 70-200 compared to the 85 (AF-D version, not sure about the AF-S version). Tracking focus is much better and the ability to zoom makes the 70-200mm much better in situations like shooting a bride down the aisle.

I wouldn't consider bringing my 70-200mm on holidays again. I did it on two occasions where I was asked to help photograph weddings but it's a pain to travel with. If I still had the 85 I would consider it but I have migrated to m43 for travel photography these days.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh.. I forgot to add that I was using the AF-D version of the 85/1.4 and not the AFS G lens. I remembered one of the reasons I switched was the amount of CA on the AF-D version when shot wide open in high contrast situations, mainly outdoors. I'm sure this is a non-issue on the AFS G version and CA is generally well corrected in software anyways. It's just a bit of nuisance that's all.

[MissionMan]

Swifty is on FX so 85mm so that would be the same as a 50mm 1.4 on a cropped DX sensor.

If you have the option to go with both the 24-70 and the 70-200, then do it. I have both and they are incredible lenses. You could add a 50mm 1.4 at some point, but those two lenses are by far the most versatile lenses I have. It was the best investment I made and I honestly have not regretted anything about buying them, despite not being a pro photographer.

[ROA44]

Thank you everyone for your great input.

I really appreciate the information expressed in this and along with varying input on Tannins thread of which I haven't finishes reading through yet but will later, it has opened up and really created a lot of clarity between these lenses. So hopefully in the very near future I will be able to bite the bullet and make a purchase of at least 1 but hopefully 2 new lenses and a very long may be 3 from a more informed position. and hope this and Tannins thread will help others.

Cheers everyone