PDA

View Full Version : Quality of 105mm 2.8D vs 24-85mm 3.5-4.5G



Blob
12-11-2005, 09:33 AM
I use a 24-85mm 3.5-4.5G as a walk around lens. A friend loaned me a 105mm 2.8D micro lens which I've been using as a portrait lens. Unfortunately the resultant 158mm focal length is too long for comfort as a portrait lens so I was wondering if I would get similiar results from the 50mm 1.8 prime lens? I can always tell the photos taken with the 105 vs the 24-85. I'm not sure how to describe the difference but the overall quality of the 105 is much more pleasing to the eye and to me look more professional than the 24-85.

Is there a walk around zoom that would provide a similiar level of quality as compared to the 105mm 2.8D?

D70FAN
12-11-2005, 10:05 AM
I use a 24-85mm 3.5-4.5G as a walk around lens. A friend loaned me a 105mm 2.8D micro lens which I've been using as a portrait lens. Unfortunately the resultant 158mm focal length is too long for comfort as a portrait lens so I was wondering if I would get similiar results from the 50mm 1.8 prime lens? I can always tell the photos taken with the 105 vs the 24-85. I'm not sure how to describe the difference but the overall quality of the 105 is much more pleasing to the eye and to me look more professional than the 24-85.

Is there a walk around zoom that would provide a similiar level of quality as compared to the 105mm 2.8D?

The difference you are seeing is in the color, contrast, and bokeh. Subtle, but when taken as a whole it makes a difference. Unfortunately there is no cheap answer as the lens you are talking about is the Nikkor 28-70 f/2.8. I suppose that the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is considered almost as good for a lot less money. You would probably want to give them a try.

I generally rent the Nikkor 28-70 f/2.8 when I know I will need its unique qualities, and maybe someday will have the extra cash to actually buy one.

There are several other lenses that might work, but for what you are doing the Nikkor 28-70 f/2.8 is the best that I have used.

Blob
12-11-2005, 11:32 AM
Thanks George, I'm going to look more closely at the Tamron. As a prime lens will the 50mm 1.8 provide similiar quality to the 105? I'd like a shorter focal length for portraits.

coldrain
12-11-2005, 03:44 PM
Thanks George, I'm going to look more closely at the Tamron. As a prime lens will the 50mm 1.8 provide similiar quality to the 105? I'd like a shorter focal length for portraits.
The 50mm f1.8 will give you a very good lens, yes. The f2.8 60mm micro D from Nikon is even a better macro lens than that 105mm, and maybe you should consider that one too (it will give you a great macro lens also).