Is there a significant difference between these two lenses? Shooting with the D7000. I tried to do a little research and didn't come up with much other than the g is a little lighter, provides information that the d does not and the d has the aperture ring. I have a local photographer selling his D lens for $270.00 (good shape, but no lens hood)as he upgraded to the 1.4 and does not have the need for this lens. Some time this past year I saw the 85 1.8 g for $396.00 after Nikons $100 rebate. I am looking for this lens primarily as a portrait lens and also for some sports as I do not have a fast zoom/ex 70-200 f2.8. I also contemplated the first generation Tamron 70-200 f2.8 ($769.00) which obviously is a little more versatile. While most of my shooting is in good light (already have the Nikon 70-300 vr) there will be some shots in school gym etc. and I am not a professional photographer needing a "professional" 1400,00 to 2400.00 70-200 lens.
Any comments would be greatly appreciated.. Thanks and have a great day,
I've never used the 85/f1.8 AFS G, but reports are that it's excellent. The 85/f1.8 AFD is also excellent, with both of them approaching the legendary 85/f1.4's (which are $1000+). You'll likely find that the 85/f1.8's are delightfully smaller than any 70-200/f2.8. And lots of school gyms - most, in fact - are "light dungeons" that typically need all the aperture you can get. f/1.8 is a full one and a third stops faster than f/2.8, or the difference between 1/60th and 1/160. f/1.8 is almost three full stops faster than the 70-300 AFS VR at 85mm, so 1/60th vs 1/500th.
_____ Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member
My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!
Sun 03-Nov-13 06:19 PM | edited Sun 03-Nov-13 06:21 PM by briantilley
Well, I'm of the opinion that the differences between the two lenses may not be worth the higher cost (almost 50% higher by the figures you quote), and I'm not sure many users would be in a position to tell the difference. Both are, in general, excellent.
Check them out at Photozone (these are tested on DX):
I have the G version and got it because of the price I was able to get (when Nikon had it's rebate I believe it was - and also, the "D" was more used than you've found that one for). From most of what I've read about the two lenses, the only real 'noticeable' difference is the bokeh (shape) I think it was. I don't know that someone would notice it at first glance but has to really look for it in compared shots.
I think too, for the prices you're noting, I might too consider the "D" version to save some money... Then, if you feel you really use the lens a lot and want to upgrade, you can most likely sell the "D" version for most of what you're paying for it and then make a change.