Nikon 60 mm f/2.8 Micro vs. Nikon 85 mm f1/8: Yes, an apples vs oranges question BUT budget is currently limited (previous camera bag w/all gear stolen at airport).
141676
Wouldn't we all. If budget is limited, go with previous 60mm micro; it's outstanding. Not a huge saving, but a saving nonetheless.
560626
Thanks Kin.Actually, I'm looking for something smaller than a reflex on which I could occasionnaly use my nikon lenses.After using a bit an oly e-p2, i'm a bit confused ; it's better than I thought, and has the IS build in.Does anyone know if nikon will release a micro 4/3 camera soon ?
963336
2 trips, 4000+ shots on D7000 and another 2000 on D3x and any problems I had where my fault! Lens is a great lens, saves carrying more lenses than I need. From action to kids, just cannot be beat. I've had literally every lens made by Nikon, even a $36000 f4 160-600mm zoom lens weighting approximately 15+#'s and now I just carry the 28-300 everywhere above the water. Wish the len's was a f2! Then I'd be really be Camera Happy! Alaska, Eastern Caribbean, cannot insert any pictures, shot everything from Whales to Bears and Eagles to Moose. Getting another one for my wife.
369535
I own the D80 with 18-135 lens and love it. Yes, you sacrifice a tad of fabulousness by picking the lens with the broader range, but I wanted bang-for-buck versatility first. I recommend getting at least *one* of the Nikon-Nikkor lenses, since they have proprietary circuitry that (I believe) the after-markets don't. The one thing you'd gain by starting with the 18-55 lens is that it *is* quite a bit smaller. I hate to mention it here, but I found - post-purchase - my local (Atlanta) membership w'house had a kit with *both* lenses for less than I paid for the body + lens.
241544
I have the 85 f1.8D and 35 f2D and they are fantastic. The two lenses you mention should be even better. The 35 is such a versatile focal length, I have been using as my all purpose lens.
608748
I have both for my Nikon D300s. Sigma 17-50 2.8 is a much better choice. Range in slightly narrower but indoor performance, portrait photography, and bikes are better.
46360
May I ask what lens you went with? I am debating the same issue. Thank you.
1818662
Or the 35mm F1.8 AF-S which is closer in price to this lens. (I have the 35mm and its fantastic for what that is worth).
204311
85mm for a newborn? For children running and playing; yes, but for babies the 60mm mac is perfect imho.
408
Lori, thanks for the update, I think you'll be very happy with the 85mm f/1.8, let us know how it works for you.
2054216
The 50mm is actually more "zoomed out," and is therefore probably more functional for indoor family stuff. The 85 is awesome but isn't going to give you anything other than close-ups if you are standing inside of 15-20 feet from the subject. If versatility is your goal, I would strongly suggest something like Sigma 17-35 zoom. I think that's about F/1.8 as well. Same price range. That gives you the flexibility of zooming way out for wide-angle group shots and then back in for relative close-ups.
405
Thanks everyone for your help. You've explained a lot and it really helps. After your explanations, I looked at my past photos. I'm thinking that maybe the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 will fill my needs. Thanks again.
1130016
I have both. The f/4 has only two advantages: it's much more portable, and it's much cheaper. But if you can afford the f/2.8, and if you can bring it where you want to use it (it's big, and you will probably want at least a monopod)--well, it's an amazing lens. Haven't regretted buying mine for an instant.
2054212
The 85mm is more zoomed in than the 50. You may want to look into getting a 35mm lens.
838887
In my experience with the 85Mm f1.8 is that these lenses are not fast compared to others. This is a portrait lens, not a sports lens...
1346890
These are 2 different focal lengths and on a crop camera it makes a big difference. I have both, and find the 50 f1.4 works best for indoors, portraits, etc. I use the 85 outside but must admit the 50 is a lot more used. Both wonderful--probably should get the 50 first.
1130012
What are you going to be photographing? I would be the f/2.8 but I concentrate on low light and sports.