18 - 200 flexibility or 85mm 1.8g quality?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

18 - 200 flexibility or 85mm 1.8g quality?

(37 posts) (16 voices)

Started 1 year ago by JSP
Latest reply from mirtos
Related Topics:
1. Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 Quality Issue

Tags:

d800 85mm 1.8 35mm 18-200

12 Next »

JSP

junior member
Joined: Apr '12
Posts: 9
offline

Hello everyone, I'm currently waiting for my D800 to arrive and considering my best lens options.

I don't have much money so for the moment I'm going to use my 11-16mm 2.8 and 35mm 1.8 in dx mode (I mainly shoot weddings and at the moment it doesn't really bother me whether the camera is in dx or fx mode as without two 64gb cards I'll have to shoot reduced size fx anyway) but I was wondering if it's worth changing my 18-200mm for a 85mm 1.8g, would the quality be worth the hit in flexibility? .

Any opinions would be great, thanks!

Posted 1 year ago #
spraynpray

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,514
offline

If you mainly shoot weddings, you should cancel that D800, sell your DX glass then buy a D700 and quality glass with the money as that will give you better results. What body have you currently got?

Posted 1 year ago #
warprints

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 769
offline

I have the original version of the Nikkor 18-200, and it is a great walk around lens (ready for just about anything). However, it is too soft a lens for what I would consider critical imaging. I don't have the 85mm (yet), but the 18-200 is no match for the much sharper "pro" glass. The glass has more bearing on the final image than the camera body - at least when you are talking non-consumer bodies. Get the quality glass you need, and a body you can afford.

Posted 1 year ago #
JSP

junior member
Joined: Apr '12
Posts: 9
offline

I will be buying all pro glass asap but the £2400 hit means I'm going to have to wait a little while. I currently have a d300s and will be using it as a second camera, another reason for keeping the 35mm and 11-16mm and both are actually very sharp anyway.

Realistically is the 85mm 1.8 worth the hit in flexibility of 18-200?

Thanks for the responses

Posted 1 year ago #
tcole1983

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,553
offline

How are we supposed to tell you which lens is better for you? They are two totally different animals. You have a fast, sharp prime which is probably pretty good for portraits and then you have a slow zoom walk around lens that is OK at just about everything, but not really great at anything.

I can't imagine shooting a wedding without a zoom and I also can't imagine shooting one with the 18-200, but that is just me.

Posted 1 year ago #
El_Pickerel

preferred member
Joined: Jul '11
Posts: 581
offline

I am with tcole... shooting with a zoom would be very helpful, but I think if you ran into clients / clients' friends that were photographers and they saw you shooting an 18-200, they could be very put off by that.

I feel like having something in the 24-35mm range (16-24mm lens on a crop sensor) and something in the 75mm+ (50mm+ on a crop sensor) would be ideal if you were shooting two primes. Even older glass would do you well, especially if you are using a crop sensor or otherwise cropping. If I were using two older lenses , keeping price down, with one full-frame and one crop-sensor body, I would probably use the AF 20mm f/2.8D and AF 85mm f/1.8D. Shoot, you could even throw in the AF 50mm f/1.8D because it is so inexpensive and easy-to-find. (Or just use the 35mm f/1.8G on the crop sensor.)

Maybe you could also look for the AF-S 28-70mm f/2.8D or try the Sigma or Tamron f/2.8 midrange zooms or Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G VR?

Posted 1 year ago #
SquamishPhoto

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,076
offline

Get rid of the zoom and slap the 85mm on the D800 and keep the 35mm and the wide for the D300s. Keep both cameras at hand and you're stylin. You'd be robbing yourself of your best portraits if you left the 85mm out of the equation.

Posted 1 year ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

Weddings are all about catching the "decisive moment"

I cant imagine shooting a wedding with out a mid range zoom

I would go for the f4 24 -120

but we all have our own individual styles, which is why we cant tell you what to get

I have two friends, who do a lot of weddings

one would go for the 18 -200

the other a 24mm f1.4

at the end of the day, you are the only person who can decide

Posted 1 year ago #
El_Pickerel

preferred member
Joined: Jul '11
Posts: 581
offline

If I had two bodies I would use the 70-200 f/2.8 and 24mm f/1.4, or if I had a full frame camera, I guess I could consider the 35mm f/1.4. I'd be happy having 24mm and 70mm plus the extra spiffiness the 24mm f/1.4 has instead of getting the 24-70mm f/2.8

Posted 1 year ago #
ATX Photog

junior member
Joined: Apr '12
Posts: 5
offline

Apples & Oranges.

Posted 1 year ago #
elvishefer

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 496
offline

Having owned the 18-200mm, and having owned pro glass after, I would never advise the purchase of the 18-200mm over any 'pro' lens. For me, the quality difference was enough to never look back.

Might not fit your wedding needs, but you're the only one who will know if you can adapt to shooting a wedding with primes.

Posted 1 year ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

Here is the large size 85mm f/1.8 1/100 sec f/4.0 ISO 200 on the D4 The two camera two lens combo is what I use a lot. And this lens is great combined with a 24mm, 28mm, 35mm on the other body. There are others on Flicker with this lens although some may not be marked.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7035006095/sizes/o/in/photostream/

Posted 1 year ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

If you are really strapped for cash, I would go used lenses. This is a great time for some good glass at fire sell prices as many have been updated recently. To stay with DX seems like a real waste. The 11-16 may actually cover the FX frame and although you will have to crop it may not be as much.

FX wedding set-up on the real cheap - A 24-120mm 3.5-5.6 VR (version 1 used about $250) and add the older 50mm 1.8 AFD ($80), and you may have enough left over for the older 85mm 1.8 AFD ($300).

24-120 VR I - Not reviewed well and is not as tack sharp as others, but for portraits, group shots it does really well and for people, what it lacks on tack sharpness actually helps smooth skin out. With a flash and stopped down to F8 it is just as sharp on prints as anything else. I have had a love hate relationship with this lens from the get go. Another option is the 24-85mm 3.5-4.5 ED. Old Upgraded kit lens, it is really good and works well for a stand in macro.

Older 50 & 85 1.8 AFDs - they were not redesigned for almost 20 years for good reason - they are great lenses! And still are.

When it comes down to it, and if you have been using a 18-200 for weddings, older lenses VS new releases - brides will not be able to tell the difference.

Posted 1 year ago #
JSP

junior member
Joined: Apr '12
Posts: 9
offline

Hi, thanks everyone for the replies, it looks like I need to decide which is right for me, I'll keep the 18-200 for this next wedding and consider how much of it I could have got away with with an 85mm, thanks.

Posted 1 year ago #
tcole1983

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,553
offline

To me there would be two parts of the weddings. I would use a zoom during the ceremony and the reception, but use a prime during the portrait sessions when everyone is setup and positioned. The zoom would give you flexibility to get the different shots when everyone is moving and things are constantly changing, but the prime would give you better portraits and nice bokeh and sharp images.

Posted 1 year ago #
ScottNLaguna

junior member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 8
offline

I have the 18-200mm VR original and the D800. I put the lens on the D800 to see what it looks like. It's pretty sharp in DX mode but a waste of the camera at 15mp. No contest. Get the 85 for FX. To me DX is dead now. Saving up for better lenses. I have 2 FF that will hold me until I get better. 18-200mm is fine for DX but the "reach" on D800 is silly.

Posted 1 year ago #
ScottNLaguna

junior member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 8
offline

ScottNLaguna said:
I have the 18-200mm VR original and the D800. I put the lens on the D800 to see what it looks like. It's pretty sharp in DX mode but a waste of the camera at 15mp. No contest. Get the 85 for FX. To me DX is dead now. Saving up for better lenses. I have 2 FF that will hold me until I get better. 18-200mm is fine for DX but the "reach" on D800 is silly. Post above about renting quality lenses is the way to go. That's what I do. In this way you see the difference in your shots instead of guessing.

Posted 1 year ago #
warprints

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 769
offline

As I noted above, I would not purposely use my 18-200 for any critical work. It is just too soft. Maybe your lens came out better than mine. If someone showed up to shoot one of my daughters' weddings with an 18-200, I think I'd have words with him. But that's me and my experience with the 1st gen 18-200 (which I bought shortly after it was released).

ScottNLaguna - DX is not dead. Maybe for weddings and such, but I still love it for nature/wildlife, motorsports, etc., where the lighter weight and the smaller lense for the same "reach" is really worthwhile.

Posted 1 year ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

warprints said:
If someone showed up to shoot one of my daughters' weddings with an 18-200, I think I'd have words with him.

My thoughts exactly. If you cannot afford the lenses you need right now, either let your client know you cannot faithfully fulfil your contract or rent lenses as needed.

Posted 1 year ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

One thought.... if I were shooting weddings, I might think about two cameras. One a 24mm on DX or 28mm on FX, and another with an 85mm on DX or 105mm on FX. Something like this. And because I kinda got ht clean up shot on PAD (March 34th) I am posting this again with a link to the larger file. Look at it and see if this is what you want out of your short telephoto shots. An inexpensive 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor G for $500.00

Large File:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/6898186416/sizes/o/in/photostream/

Posted 1 year ago #
mirtos

preferred member
Joined: Sep '11
Posts: 159
offline

Before everyone admonishes him for using an 18-200, it's also important to remember there are all sorts of different levels in wedding photography. If he is shooting more budget weddings, I don't think an 18-200 is that sacrilegious (though I agree there are better zooms). If they are paying for the delux weddings, then I agree with you that a bride might be annoyed.

Still, the glass upgrade is going ti get you much better wedding shots than the body upgrade ever will.

Posted 1 year ago #
JSP

junior member
Joined: Apr '12
Posts: 9
offline

Faithfully fulfill your contract? That's ridiculous, the 18-200 isn't even bad. I get my bookings from photos taken with it so they know exactly what to expect and are without exception very happy with what they receive. If your daughter booked me because of my photos, she wants my photos whether they are razor sharp or not.

People get too obsessed with pixel peeping over taking good photos and your argument proves it, I can afford the 85mm if I sell the 18-200 but many agree it's a close call because the flexibility may mean I actually get better photos with the 18-200.

Posted 1 year ago #
JSP

junior member
Joined: Apr '12
Posts: 9
offline

Ok to clarify I am indeed cheap as I only started properly a year ago. Over the past year my biggest annoyances have been blurry photos due to lack of light (need better ISO) and blurry photos due to slow auto focus. The D800 will solve both of these problems and as I use the VERY sharp 35mm 1.8g most of the time anyway I am sure the camera upgrade will out way whatever glass I could have put on a dx. I agree that I need to upgrade the rest of my glass, hence why I am here and I will be as soon as I can afford it.

Soooo the general consensus is swap the 18-200 for the 85mm and upgrade to an FX zoom when I can?

Posted 1 year ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

Well, rarely being out of an opinion I would share my thinking here. I am confused as to why one would purchase a D800, rather than keep the D300s or wait and get a D400. Or one of the other DX bodies the NRF members can testify to. If higher ISO is desired, the D800 is maybe not the way to go as it only gives you 6400 basic ISO. One stop more than your D300s. And if the money were put into the glass, or even some strobes, it would improve the wedding shots.

I have been pushing the 85mm because I do not find it necessary to use all the zoom stuff. Unless of course you bought the 24-120mm f/4.0 VR or the 24-70 f/2.8.

For my money, get the glass, wait for the D400, maybe some lights, this is a better plan than the D800 which will only show its difference with the expensive lenses. You have an excellent camera body, get the glass.

Posted 1 year ago #
mirtos

preferred member
Joined: Sep '11
Posts: 159
offline

I tend to agree with msmoto. As someone who has a d300 (not even an 's'), I think that glass is the way to go. You can even buy FX pro glass, get the glass first then upgrade the camera.

I disagree that the camera upgrade would outweigh whatever glass you could get for the same amount.

Basically, you said that the camera upgrade (~3000.00 USD) would outweigh the 3,000 in glass (or as pointed out strobes)? If you're major issue has been blurryness due to ISO, the d800 wont help you much.

Sometimes we have a tendency to think the newest body is what is going to save us. If I were in your case, I would have kept the d300s, and spend the money in glass.

Also, for weddings, if you can (probably not in the church/reception, but certainly for posed, and since the posed shots are often in the church, depending on the bride's wishes), get a lighting kit. It helps big time.

Posted 1 year ago #