I have 85mm f/1.8G should I get 50mm f/1.4G. Or should I get 16-80mm f/2.8-4E?

nukuEX2

Any suggestions? I'd be buying at least one new lens soon.

Ironheart

What do you like to shoot?

heartyfisher

if your sig is valid then you also have a 40mm, I wouldn't get a 50mm too. What else do you have ? and yes what do you intend to shoot?

Pistnbroke

read the post 16-80 or 18-140...What camera is it for ?

heartyfisher

Pistnbroke said:

read the post 16-80 or 18-140...What camera is it for ?

Sig says d7200 .. but we need the horse ;-)

nukuEX2

Ironheart said:

What do you like to shoot?

I'm currently into headshots and Portrait, and yes I do have 40mm 2.8 which I use for macro and wide angle shot.

Rx4Photo

Although the choices you mentioned are for different purposes (IMO) , if you're into headshots and portrait work the 50mm f/1.4 sigma Art is phenomenal! I also have the 85mm albeit the f/1.4 it's tougher to shoot in tighter quarters. The 50 when used at f/1.4 to f/2.0 will still cream your background better than f/2.8.

Rx4Photo

The above being said, you can shoot some very creative portrait looks with the wide end of the other lens - but those might be looks that not everyone wants.

WestEndFoto

A wide (say a 35) is the go to lens for editorial portraits.

BVS

The 50 1.4 and 16-80 are two very different types of lenses. What are you're reasons for picking between these two?

nukuEX2

BVS said:

The 50 1.4 and 16-80 are two very different types of lenses. What are you're reasons for picking between these two?

I've found that on some occasion 85mm is just too long Whereas 40mm f/2.8 is too short and slow and I have DX body which means I'd have to multiply 1.5X I'm thinking about getting 50mm because it will give me 75mm on DX the "middle ground" and the bokeh. However, if I get 16-80mmf/2.8-f/4 I will only have to carry one lens with the focal length I shoot in most of the time, Albeit slower.

Ironheart

A 50mm is a 75mm on a crop, 85mm is 128mmm equiv. If @nukuEX2 is using a 40mm lens as wide-angle (60mm equiv) there is nothing wrong with that. It just means his style is to be further away from the subject matter. So asking for a "tighter" lens for "headshots and portrait" makes sense. Hence his question regarding 50mm (75mm equiv), which would be almost a classic portrait focal length. The 16-80 f/2.8-4 would be a logical extension, and allow him to explore all of those focal lengths. After a few 1000 photos he can go back and re-evaluate the most popular focal lengths to decide on a prime. There is a $500 price gap between the 50mm f/1.4 and the zoom however...
My usual advice to questions such as these (do I get a unicorn or a platypus?) is to rent both and see. In this particular case, I would say, neither! Get a 50mm 1.4D which is $150 cheaper. You can also grab these used/refurb'd for a song.

BVS

Yeah, renting is a good idea. $1,000 for the 16-80 just seems like a lot of dough for exploring focal lengths. Plus, the image quality will be somewhat worse than the 85 1.8, and it's quite a bit slower. I'm not sure how he shoots though, so it's possible the flexibility may be worth it.

On the other hand, the 50s are cheap enough that you could justify just buying one on a whim to play around with. The 50 1.8 is pretty good on DX too.

Going a little wider, the Sigma 35 1.4 Art is a really nice lens as well. I just could never justify the weight and flaky low light AF (on my D7100 anyway).

heartyfisher

One of my fav for portraits on DX has been the old 35-70 F2.8 really cheap, sharp and perfect for that function. also consider the old tamron 28-75 f2.8 .. another well regarded portrait lense is the old 18-70 F3.5-4.5. extremely cheap these days second hand but a gem. Of course the best choice these days is the sigma 50-100 f1.8

DX - FujiS5pro + Nikkor 35-70 f2.8

nukuEX2

Here is one example of 85mm f/1.8 on D7200.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5711/29792502414_c2febd80d7_b.jpg

Rx4Photo

@nukuEX2, that photo looks good shot at 85mm. It's just that face shots can lack creative energy. Consider the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art or your thought of the 18-80mm f/2.8. You can shoot your 40mm at f/2.8 and crop up to what a 50mm would pretty much be. If you were planning to upgrade to Full Frame soon then I'd say get a 50mm f/1.4 Art Sigma.

She looks like a cosplayer and if I know cosplayers, they like to be animated. So get a lens that allows you enough room to shoot most of, if not whole bodies, so that they can pose for your photos.

KnockKnock

I have both Nikon's 85mm f/1.8 and the 50mm f/1.4 AF-S G's and also find the 85mm a bit tight in normal conversation distances. Outdoors its great. I thought getting the 85mm would make me gaga for its image, and it is bitingly sharp, but I find I like the look of the 1.4.

It might not get a lot of love these days because it's pretty soft wide open compared to more recent lenses but for my topics the softness of the 50mm f/1.4 is beautiful - there's something about the look of it that I prefer to the 85mm - even when I'm shooting a piece of pizza. If I want it sharper, I go to about f/2.2 where it balances sharpness vs dreamy background nicely. At f/2.8 it's quite sharp. I guess I'm okay with not getting absolute pixel sharpness.