Nikon 85mm f1.8g for sports?

JJ!

JJ!

Messages
5,822
Edit My Images
No
So thinking of buying a 85mm f1.8g to complete my prime trio - the only downside being it will be instead of a 70-300 VR.

I don't do many equestrian shoots anymore so the need for the 70-300 VR is becoming less and less, but on some occassions I like to take photos of my wife riding her horse. I have tried this with th 35 and 50 with ok results so was wondering if the 85 would work? I never am far away from the action, although the 35 was a bit too close!

My main concern is some reports of average focus speed.... I'm sure it must be able to match the 70-300 VR for that?

Ideally I would have it all, but for now, choices need to be made!
 
•
That would not be a good choice! To shoot sports, yes you need a fast lens
but ƒ 2,8 is quite enough! Since the action is moving constantly, a zoom is
a better bet… like the 70~200 or whatever in that range of focal length.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
•
That would not be a good choice! To shoot sports, yes you need a fast lens
but ƒ 2,8 is quite enough! Since the action is moving constantly, a zoom is
a better bet… like the 70~200 or whatever in that range of focal length.
Click to expand...

The 70-200 is on my short list of future lenses when I can afford one! Just looking for an intrim solution for now until I can afford a faster zoom. Maybe I will keep the 70-300 and put the 85 on hold.
 
Last edited:
Thought you sold the 70-300 JJ?

If you got a 24-120 f4 instead of a 24-70 then you could use that at the tele end in a pinch
 
JYC said:
Thought you sold the 70-300 JJ?

If you got a 24-120 f4 instead of a 24-70 then you could use that at the tele end in a pinch
Click to expand...

I did, but picked up another one as it was good value lol. But I'm so enjoying the light primes its making photography fun for me again so I'm not sure whether to keep it yet.
 
I have the 85 F1.8 G and while it is a fantastic lens for portrait and occasional landscape, the lens is bit slow compared to the 24-85 and the 7-200 F4 I have.
 
anibap said:
I have the 85 F1.8 G and while it is a fantastic lens for portrait and occasional landscape, the lens is bit slow compared to the 24-85 and the 7-200 F4 I have.
Click to expand...

Slow is not ideal! Worse than the 70-300 I guess.
 
I too had a 85mm f1.8 and found if to be a bit too slow for wildlife. AF was slower than the 70-200 f4, I was hoping it would make a cheap low light wildlife lens but it didn't. I ended up buying a 70-200 f2.8 again for when the light drops and selling the 85mm f1.8.the 70-200 f4 is a good lens even in low light AF is still good, it was just sometimes you need that extra stop to reduce the high ISO and keep shutter speed up.
 
Last edited:
minnnt said:
So don't get the Tamron then. Get the Nikon and go to the gym. On a sling it's a doddle. Even climbing up a hillside with it.

Stop being a wimp.

:D
Click to expand...

Ha ha! You know I would love one, but the Nikon is a big financial commitment and I'm not sure I would justify spending that much on a lens that I am not 100% sure on. The one in the classifieds is terrific value and I cant say I have not been tempted, but I'm still not sure what direction I'm going in photography so I'm finding it hard to make a decision.
 
Last edited:
As previously mentioned, the Nikkor 85mm 1.8G is a bit slow in AF. Have you considered the 1.8 AFD version?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top