50 1.4 instead of 24-70 2.8?

Joined
May 2, 2009
Messages
19
Location
Indiana
I shoot mostly portraits, head & shoulders, with some full body shots mixed in. Mostly outdoors, but starting some indoor stuff occasionally.

I currently have a D700 with two lenses, 80-200 2.8, and 24-70 2.8

I love the 80-200 and use it whenever my space allows. Occasionally, I have to pull out the 24-70 to get that full body shot, but I usually only have to go down to 50mm to get the shot that I need. Both lenses are flawless.

I am wondering if I should replace the 24-70 with a lighter, more economical, 50mm AF-S 1.4G. What do you think? Would I be happy with the results?
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
2,431
Location
Scottish Highlands
I think that, unless you really need the flexibility that the zoom range gives you, the 50mm 1.4 would be the better choice.

Sounds like you've probably got quite a lot of control over the shooting circumstances, so I can see little benefit in the zoom, although it is a very fine lens and has one enormous advantage over the 50mm: you already own it!
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
7,500
Location
Los Angeles, CA
It depends on what you shoot, Matt. I shoot plenty of landscapes with occasional street/portraits and I find that the 16-35, 50, and 70-200 setup works best for me. I had the 24-70 at one point - very good lens, but I don't shoot a lot in this range. It's either I'm at the very wide or very long end, therefore I sold it.

If you shoot a lot in this range, then the 24-70 is indispensable.
 
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
259
Location
Portugal
The 24-70 f2.8 is a great lens and it doesn't deserve to be sold.
The 50 f1.4 AFS is so inexpensive that you don't need to think much to add it to your gear.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
300
Location
Los Angeles
i would just save up and get the 50 instead of selling the zoom lens. you never know when it might come in handy
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
1,956
Location
St. Paul, MN
Give the 50 1.8 a shot, and see if you really need the 1.4. If you can get away with the 50 1.8 (or the new 50 1.8 expected in June) then no need to sell the 24-70, though for that range I agree with the above, and just don't see the need for a zoom, especially if you aren't in a situation where you NEED the versatility of a zoom.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,959
Location
Australia
I am wondering if I should replace the 24-70 with a lighter, more economical, 50mm AF-S 1.4G. What do you think? Would I be happy with the results?

i rekon you'll be very happy with the results and the extra speed.

i'm slowly moving back to primes after years of zooms. i've been regularly using a 105 instead of my 80-200 for a while now and havn't really felt like i was misisng anything.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
1,747
Location
San Diego
You will regret selling it. As said above get the f/1.8 and keep the zoom until you are sure.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
385
Location
Milwaukee, WI
I think I'm going to go the other way - if you only use the 24-70 at 50mm, I don't think you'll miss it. The 50mm is a nice, small, lens. I think you'd be happy with it, assuming you're currently only using the 24-70 at 50.
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
306
Location
Victorville
I would either save up and get the Sigma 50mm ƒ1.4 and see if you like the focal length, then decide whether you wanted to sell the zoom.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
1,496
The 24-70 f2.8 is a great lens and it doesn't deserve to be sold.
The 50 f1.4 AFS is so inexpensive that you don't need to think much to add it to your gear.

+1. Or get the 50/1.8 instead. Just don't sell the zoom.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2010
Messages
95
Location
Sewickley, PA
My personal opinion is you should keep the zoom lens, and buy a 50 1.8, I love mine and at just over $100 you can't go wrong.
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
12,515
Location
near Montreal, Canada
I have the 28-70 f/2.8 and I also feel the need to add a 50mm (probably the f/1.4D, once I see one at a reasonable price).
But I will definitely hold on to the 28-70. No way that a 50 could replace that one.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
4,043
Location
Missouri
Although I never suggest 50mm as a portrait lens, I'd much prefer it to the 24-70. Having said that, my recommendation is the Sigma 50 ƒ1.4, not the Nikon. You may have FF issues, but they can be corrected.

My real recommendation? A Sigma 85 ƒ1.4.
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
12,515
Location
near Montreal, Canada
I have the 28-70 f/2.8 and I also feel the need to add a 50mm (probably the f/1.4D, once I see one at a reasonable price).
But I will definitely hold on to the 28-70. No way that a 50 could replace that one.
Update: I'll have a Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4G in the house tomorrow (local deal). I have read good things about it on the D3x - we'll see :smile:.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom