Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8E FL VR vs Nikon AF-D 85/1.4, 105 DC, 135 DC, 180/2.8

[Jedi]

Good morning, my English isn't perfect, however I would like to try to ask you a council. I have got Nikon D810, Nikon AF-D 85mm f/1.4, Nikon AF-D 105mm f/2 Defocus Control, Nikon AF-D 135mm f/2 Defocus Control, Nikon AF-D 180mm f/2.8, which are old champions for portrait, for their bokeh, their "old style" colours, their high but "not aggressive" sharpness for portrait: we know this aspects, all the members of this forum know them.
They are fixed lens and I'm thinking to buy a zoom for its flexibility and practicality (is this word correct?), but I wouldn't lose the high quality of those prime lenses and I want to buy the zoom, I have to sell those prime lenses. I would like to buy the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8E FL VR, for my Nikon D810, for portrait and mountain landscapes shoots. 70-200mm FL seems to be extraordinary, very, very, very sharp from edge to edge, also at f/2.8 and its bokeh seems to be wonderful. The weight isn't a problem for me, but the question is: I would lose quality for sharpness (mostly on the corner) and bokeh? To the infinity focus 85mm f/1.4 AF-D isn't good, it is a monster portrait lens, but I have got also the 105mm f/2 DC, which has got a double personality: at f/2 - f/4 is a portrait lens, at f/8 and f/11 is a razor, for landscape, such as the 135mm f/2 DC. My 180mm f/2.8 AF-D, also with Fine tuning AF of my D810 isn't very good for landscape, but is exceptional for portrait and street.
What I have to do? I sell the primes to buy the 70-200mm f/2.8E FL VR, to obtain an only one lens, which I could use for portrait and landscape?

Thank you!!!

[BEZ]

You seem to have mostly answered your own question already?

The 70-200mm would not be a suitable portrait lens for my use. I would consider keeping your favourite portrait lens/lenses, sell the rest, and look to purchase the less expensive 70-200 f4G zoom. What is the problem with your 180mm AF-D for landscape pictures. I am very happy with my copy for landscape use.

Cheers

[Jedi]

You seem to have mostly answered your own question already?

The 70-200mm would not be a suitable portrait lens for my use.
Cheers

It's also a portrait lens, in my opinion, see:

https://www.juzaphoto.com/recensione.php?l=it&t=nikon_70-200_f2-8e_fl#fotoesempio

[OCD]

You seem to have mostly answered your own question already?

The 70-200mm would not be a suitable portrait lens for my use. I would consider keeping your favourite portrait lens/lenses, sell the rest, and look to purchase the less expensive 70-200 f4G zoom. What is the problem with your 180mm AF-D for landscape pictures. I am very happy with my copy for landscape use.

Cheers

+ 1 

[Jedi]

You seem to have mostly answered your own question already?

What is the problem with your 180mm AF-D for landscape pictures. I am very happy with my copy for landscape use.

Cheers

It's very sharp only for portrait and middle distances. At infinity is very poor; with AF Tuning at +10 is a bit better, but it isn't great, no...., my 180mm.

[armando_m]

I was thinking what BEZ already recommended

[MILLIREHM]

The 70-200/2,8  FL lens is an extraordinary lens but I am not too sure whether it is a one-for-all-purposes solution. Maybe you should rent and test one how it fits your need. But I hardly believe it can replace all those other lenses.

Imho my impression is that the 85/1,4 D is a lens with aggressive sharpness, sometimes too much for portrais - but perfect If you want to go a different portrait approach while exactly using that kind of aggressiveness

[Jedi]

The 70-200/2,8  FL lens is an extraordinary lens but I am not too sure whether it is a one-for-all-purposes solution. Maybe you should rent and test one how it fits your need. But I hardly believe it can replace all those other lenses.

Imho my impression is that the 85/1,4 D is a lens with aggressive sharpness, sometimes too much for portrais

Excuse me, have you ever used this lens, the Nikon AF-D 85mm f/1.4??? Aggressive sharpness???

[MFloyd]

It's very sharp only for portrait and middle distances. At infinity is very poor; with AF Tuning at +10 is a bit better, but it isn't great, no...., my 180mm.

Do you have one ? I own one since last June. I'm using it also for longer distances; and this lens is tack sharp that it would even challenge fixed focus lenses. And for me it's also the perfect portrait lens:

portrait:

Nikon D5
Nikkor 70.0-200.0 mm f/2.8E FL
ƒ/7.1  200.0 mm 1/200s  ISO 1000

longer distance:

Nikon D5
Nikkor 70.0-200.0 mm f/2.8E FL
ƒ/5.0  98.0 mm 1/160  ISO 100

[Jedi]

Do you have one ? I own one since last June. I'm using it also for longer distances; and this lens is tack sharp that it would even challenge fixed focus lenses. And for me it's also the perfect portrait lens:


Nikon D5
70.0-200.0 mm f/2.8
ƒ/7.1  200.0 mm 1/200s  ISO 1000

Maybe I will check my 180mm...... 

[MFloyd]

This was a sharpness test taken with my old pre-AI Nikkor-P 180mm f/2.8 lens. I find it pretty sharp.


Nikon D610
Nikkor-P 180.0 mm f/2.8
ƒ/2.8  180.0 mm 1/800s  ISO 250

[Jedi]

This was a sharpness test taken with my old pre-AI Nikkor-P 180mm f/2.8 lens. I find it pretty sharp.


Nikon D610
Nikkor-P 180.0 mm f/2.8
ƒ/2.8  180.0 mm 1/800s  ISO 250

Yes. it is!

[Jedi]

Perhaps the 70-200mm is too aggressive for portraits? I am not convinced. I haven't got the 70-200mm, but can you look at these pictures, please? (they aren't my pictures).


https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?l=it&t=2611259


https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?t=2610042&l=it


They're wonderful for portraits, imho. Aren't you agree??

[MFloyd]

Jedi. I'm not too sure what do you mean with "agressive" for portraits.

[David H. Hartman]

I would not sell those prime lenses. I could not bear to. I'd eat rice and beans until I could save enough money to buy the AF-S 70-200/2.8E FL, etc. Nikkor.

Dave Hartman who unfortunately doesn't own any of the discussed lenses.