Decisions, Decisions..if you were me

[autofocus]

...what direction would you go in? Here's my plight. On our crop sensor D300 we recently started shooting in a small studio setup (maybe only 10% at the current time) using our 50mm F/1.4 most of the time but, it's often not quite wide enough. I've been wrestling with what lens to get since before Christmas knowing that a 35 F/1.8 could be the answer. Then I got all hot and sweaty over Nikon's new 24-120 F/4 thinking that it includes the wider focal lengths within it's range with the added benefit of 120mm on the other end, and has the latest IS and lens coatings. But a slow F/4 was bothering me. Then I read Ken Rockwell's review on it, and although he didn't bash it, he did say there may be better choices out there, and for possibly less money...that got me thinking. Here's where I'm at now...buy two considerably faster lenses for less money albeit with a downside of a little less flexibility. Here's what I think(?) I've decided:
Nikon's 35mm, F/1.8 and
Nikon's 85mm, F/1.8
Both of these lenses combined can be purchased for nearly half the price of the 24-120

Any thoughts on this group??

(For this camera along with the 50mm mentioned above, we currently own a Tokina 11-16 F/2.8, a Nikon 18-70 (variable aperture) and a Tamron 28-300 (variable aperture) VC lens.)

Thanks for your thoughts

[RLucas]

Even though I am still pretty green, I am loving my 85mm 1.8. I also bought the 35mm f/2D at the same time. I haven't used the 35mm quite as much as the 85, but I am very impressed with it too. I think it may be a little sharper than the 1.8, but don't hold me to that. .
I feel like it is one of those little talked about lenses that are almost like a pleasant secret to use.

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by RLucas

Even though I am still pretty green, I am loving my 85mm 1.8. I also bought the 35mm f/2D at the same time. I haven't used the 35mm quite as much as the 85, but I am very impressed with it too. I think it may be a little sharper than the 1.8, but don't hold me to that. .
I feel like it is one of those little talked about lenses that are almost like a pleasant secret to use.

You know Luke, both the 35 and the 85 have been rated very well, and I don't think I'd regret buying them. The problem I'm finding is nobody has the 35 F1.8 in stock, not even Nikon direct...being such a bargain at <$200 bucks, they must have sold like crazy at Christmas time. But I'm in no rush

[jml79]

You already have zooms to cover the range but chose the 50mm prime for your studio work either for the better IQ or shallower depth of field so why buy another zoom. I would get the primes. Changing lenses in your studio is not a big deal.

Maybe getting one as a slightly slower macro lens might add to your options as well. I would get something close to the 85mm range f/2.8 if its made.

[sk66]

Ok, I'd also consider a Tokina AT-X pro 165 f/2.8 (16-55mm), Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 (used, at B&H)

Tokina is discontinued but available new thru Amazon.
All are about $500 and rate well on FM reviews..

A used nikon 28-70 f/2.8 would be an excellent choice, but a little more than the zoom you are looking at.

But for strictly studio use I'd probably go with the two primes for cost/speed/DOF.

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by jml79

You already have zooms to cover the range but chose the 50mm prime for your studio work either for the better IQ or shallower depth of field so why buy another zoom. I would get the primes. Changing lenses in your studio is not a big deal.

I pretty much agree, but as I mentioned our studio work only represents about 10% of our work(maybe) We also do a lot of outdoor portrait shooting and some weddings where zooms can be real handy

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by sk66

Ok, I'd also consider a Tokina AT-X pro 165 f/2.8 (16-55mm), Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 (used, at B&H)

Tokina is discontinued but available new thru Amazon.
All are about $500 and rate well on FM reviews..

A used nikon 28-70 f/2.8 would be an excellent choice, but a little more than the zoom you are looking at.

But for strictly studio use I'd probably go with the two primes for cost/speed/DOF.

Thanks SK, but once again, maybe we're only 10% studio work where a fast lens is not particularly critical. Concerning the studio I'm mostly concerned with the field of view. There are a ton of choices (and maybe that's not a good thing) but for the most part primes are inherently sharper with better overall optical qualities...that's why I'm now leaning that way. BTW, I already own the Tamron 28-75, F/2.8 for our Canon...a decent lens and a worthy contender.

[sk66]

Well, you mentioned the primes...If it were me I'd find one of the Nikons used...both fast, both excellent. The 28-70 was just recently replaced by the 24-70 ('97) and still sells for a pretty penny, and the 35-70 is a steal.

[SusanH1970]

Vinnie, I'll make the decision super-easy for you. Just buy the Canon 85 1.8 for me. I know I want that as my next lens. Done! You've satisfied your buying want, and I get the 85. Win/win situation.

[digirebelva]

Why not rent the lenses in question and see which one works out best for what you want to do..it will be cheaper in the long run than buying & selling until you find the right fit.