85mm, the perfect portrait lens on a DX body?

[0ptics]

Hello all,

I am about to purchase the D7100 (currently shooting with the D3100) and interested in the Nikon 85mm f/1.8G, I want to get better at portraiture photography and the 85mm prime seems like a great option. But, my biggest concern is that a focal length of 85mm becomes 127.5mm when attached to a DX body. I currently have the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 which I use constantly for indoor/low-light shots, "walk-around" lens, and for indoor/outdoor portraits. I also have the Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 which I've used for outdoor portrait shots because it blurs the background more than my 35mm. But, it can be quite heavy after shooting with it for a while and reading the reviews, the 85mm will produce sharper images as well as creamier bokeh than the 70-300mm.

I want to use the 85mm as a "bridge" between the 35mm and the 70-300mm, I most likely will be use the 85mm for outdoor shots only and as a "walk-around" lens, but again the focal length of 127.5mm seems quite long. I was considering the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8, but having a 35mm and 50mm seems less effective, atleast to me. And I don't have the money to buy both the 50mm and the 85mm :meh:.

But ya, your opinion/experiences of the Nikon 85mm on a crop sensor body would be much appreciated!!
Thank you :]

 

[jaomul]

For outdoor where you have room 85 is very nice

 

[Braineack]

But, my biggest concern is that a focal length of 85mm becomes 127.5mm when attached to a DX body.

The 85mm stays a 85mm when attached to a DX body. It just happens to frame a shot like if you happened to be using 127.5mm on an FX body. Keep everything in relation to your current DX equipment. Stating the FX equiv. is pointless here.

Set your 70-300 to 85mm and use it as you expect the use the 85mm and see if it's a focal length you can work with.

IMHO, it's an awesome lens if you have the room to use it. It will render much better images than the 50mm alternative--if you have the space to use it. I don't believe it makes it makes a good walkaround lens on a DX body; 85mm is a telephoto lens.

 

[Derrel]

An 85mm lens on a 1.5x Nikon is fairly "tight" in many of the situations where one would traditionally use an 85mm lens. Indoors in normal-sized rooms, using an 85mm lens on a crop sensor forces you to back up into the next room--often. The crop-sensor's narrowed acceptance turns an 85mm from a short telephoto lens into a medium telephoto lens. Like Branineack suggested, try using your zoom at 85mm and see how the focal length works for you, in your world.

See: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...JntyP-csL0CFVBffgod5LMAcQ&Q=&is=REG&A=details

 

[Designer]

I want to use the 85mm as a "bridge" between the 35mm and the 70-300mm,

So what's approximately half way between 35 and 70? IOW, the 50mm fits right in there.

I'm glad Braineack pointed out the flaw in your thinking re; the focal length changing.

I have both the 50 and the 85, and both are very nice, but to get a standing full-body shot with the 85, you're going to need to be about 25 feet from your subject. That makes for a very nice POV with little distortion.

 

[bigal1000]

Use a 50mm ie., Nikon 50mm 1.8 AFS 1.5 crop will give you a 75mm view much better.........but buy whatever you won't ............

 

[KmH]

There is no 1 'perfect' focal length for portraits.

My favorite was a 200 mm prime, but I also used 24 mm, 35 mm, 50 mm, 85 mm, 105 mm, 135 mm, and 180 mm.

 

[Gavjenks]

85mm is the perfect portrait lens on a crop body, if your portraits are chest and head portraits. And if you have a proper size studio or are outdoors.

If either of those qualifications is not the case for you, it probably won't be hugely useful. Since you want to stand away from the person no matter what type of scene, tighter portraits call for even longer lenses than 85, and contextual portraits call for wider lenses. Or if you're in a cramped space, and are forced to get closer, wider as well.

And I don't have the money to buy both the 50mm and the 85mm :no smile:.

50mm 1.8 is only like $100

 

[ruifo]

The Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G lens is the classical for crop cameras (FOV equivalent to 75mm on crop).
Also, the Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G Micro lens can be another alternative (FOV equivalent to 90mm on crop), and it's also a macro lens as well.

 

[mswiech]

I am sure that you can find a used 50mm F1.8G. You are spending more for the 85mm F1.8G then you would buying the 50 brand new. I'd suggest getting them both used and then you could have both the 50 and 85mm. I just bought the 85mm last night, no real time to play with it yet, but I have your same range with the exception to the 35mm and I use the 70-200 VR2 over your 70-300.

 

[PaulWog]

This just depends on who you are shooting, what you're shooting, and your style (the kind of distance or closeness you like when shooting).

I absolutely love my 85mm 1.8G. I can use it indoors and outdoors and get excellent shots. It's not just a head-and-shoulders lens. For some, it might be. Each lens, paired with your camera, is going to serve as an artistic tool. Everyone works with tools differently. There's the intended purpose of the tool, but a lot is left up to you to decide. Stepping outside the box is really easy. Just keep in mind the focal length and how far back you have to be to get whatever amount you want in the frame.

I think the 85mm 1.8G is an amazing lens on DX. With that said, DX is definitely a format which is increasingly odd in terms of how it functions with lenses. FX is just better for everything that isn't telephoto work when it comes down to it. You want to do portraiture? FX is better. You want to do landscapes? FX is better. You can get the job done with DX, and often for cheaper, so the argument goes both ways.

I think if you enjoy portraiture, the 50mm 1.8G and 85mm 1.8G pair well together on DX.

 

[robbins.photo]

I use both the 50 and the 85 myself, both are great lenses. From my experience I would agree with a lot of the other comments already posted, the 85 is a fantastic lens but if your working indoors in smaller rooms it might be difficult to get the kind of shots you want. The 50 would probably be a better choice in these situations. Me I love having both, gives me a ton of flexibility and both lenses produce remarkable results. The 50 1.8 is dirt cheap even brand new, the 85 is a little more expensive but well worth it when you have the space to make it work.

 

[Flipper24]

I have the 35mm and the 50mm on my D7100. I love the 35mm but I'm giving serious thought to selling my 50mm f1.8G and buying the 85mm f1.8G...the fifty just does nothing for me.

 

[cgw]

I guess the need for an effective 85mm(+/-) APS-C/DX portrait lens explains the Voigtlander Nokton 58/1.4 and Fuji's 56/1.2 for the X cameras. Then there's the Nikon 58/1.4G...

 

[otherprof]

In a previous century, I used a Nikkor 85 f1.8 on my Nikon F (just "F", no automatic anything, no in-body meter (I used a Weston Ranger 9 with the Ansel Adams Zone System dial added) and it was considered by me and people who knew a whole lot more a perfect portrait lens for 35mm. But that was on a "full frame" camera, which was then considered compact, compared to "medium frame" cameras like Bronicas and Rolleis. Your question started me on a nice Sunday morning trip down memory lane.