Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Deuce808" data-source="post: 473184" data-attributes="member: 39784">I have a 24 2.8 nai, 35 1.8g, 10-24,&nbsp; 18-140, and a 70-300. I shoot with a d7000 for the zooms and a d3200 for the primes.&nbsp; Since getting the 10-24, the 24 2.8 never gets used and the 35 lives on the 3200 as a fast, light, all around shooter. I was was looking into a few options...I could get a 50 1.8g special edition for a cheap price.&nbsp; &gt;$170 (but need a new set of filters)I could get either a 50 1.4g or 85 1.8g at retail. $500ish&nbsp; (the 85 uses filters I already have)I could just save a little more and get a d7100 body that has 1.3 crop mode, opening up more options.&nbsp; I would end up selling the 24 and d3200 at this point (or buy a host of old manual lenses to fuel NAS, lol)&nbsp; $700-800ishDoes anyone out there think the 50 is too close to the 35 making it unnecessary? I hear some people are in the 50mm only camp and some are in the 35+85 combo camp.&nbsp; In body crop on the 7100 will make the 35 close to 50 (46.5) but 50 won't be close to 85 (65).&nbsp; I've shot the 35 at all distances to subject and need it mainly for low light.&nbsp; I think I could do just as well with a 50 but won't know until I use it. &nbsp;I know the 85 has the best bokeh of the 3 and I would like to be able to better isolate a subject without coming in way close or cropping a lot, does anyone shoot products with a 85? I do a lot of buying and selling.&nbsp; I guess another option would be the 60mm macro but it's not as wide of a aperture. I crave bokeh. I should point out that I am also in the market for a 400mm+ zoom but the 7100 might add enough crop to my 300 that I could get away with not adding a big a$$ zoom lens to the already heavy bag.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Deuce808, post: 473184, member: 39784"] I have a 24 2.8 nai, 35 1.8g, 10-24, 18-140, and a 70-300. I shoot with a d7000 for the zooms and a d3200 for the primes. Since getting the 10-24, the 24 2.8 never gets used and the 35 lives on the 3200 as a fast, light, all around shooter. I was was looking into a few options... I could get a 50 1.8g special edition for a cheap price. >$170 (but need a new set of filters) I could get either a 50 1.4g or 85 1.8g at retail. $500ish (the 85 uses filters I already have) I could just save a little more and get a d7100 body that has 1.3 crop mode, opening up more options. I would end up selling the 24 and d3200 at this point (or buy a host of old manual lenses to fuel NAS, lol) $700-800ish Does anyone out there think the 50 is too close to the 35 making it unnecessary? I hear some people are in the 50mm only camp and some are in the 35+85 combo camp. In body crop on the 7100 will make the 35 close to 50 (46.5) but 50 won't be close to 85 (65). I've shot the 35 at all distances to subject and need it mainly for low light. I think I could do just as well with a 50 but won't know until I use it. I know the 85 has the best bokeh of the 3 and I would like to be able to better isolate a subject without coming in way close or cropping a lot, does anyone shoot products with a 85? I do a lot of buying and selling. I guess another option would be the 60mm macro but it's not as wide of a aperture. I crave bokeh. I should point out that I am also in the market for a 400mm+ zoom but the 7100 might add enough crop to my 300 that I could get away with not adding a big a$$ zoom lens to the already heavy bag. [/QUOTE]

Verification