upgraded my 3200 to a 7100, which lens would you buy next


New member
recently upgraded my nikon camera

have the 2 kit lenses 18-55 55-300 and a 35mm 1.8

sometimes i get roped into weddings and i often take pictures of my sons events, soccer, swimming, tennis, orchestra, drama, etc ...

these are the lenses i am considering:
Nikon AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED Lens
or the Nikon 70-200mm f/4G ED VR s
or the Nikon 85mm f/1.8G AF-S

anyone have any thoughts or feelings on those lenses or anything i might want to consider buying? thanks in advance, kim
Now that you have a focus motor, you can consider screw type lenses...

If you want an 85, the 85 1.8D is excellent. Get one used, before 2010 they were made in Japan.

Also the 50 1.4D, though Raz posted pics of the 50 1.8G and it seems very good.

Play with defocalisation, you will love it!

Also, if you want to spend on a 20-300 F4, get the original 70-200 2.8 VR1,
it is an amazing lens that still suprises me, even today...
For your target events, a 3rd party 70-200 f2.8 for sure. You are going to want that 2.8 for indoor events. Especially on a crop sensor which can struggle a little in low light. 2.8 will also work very nicely for some creative isolation work.

I'd recommend the Tamron, it gets much praise.
All of my son and daughters' events on my crop sensor Canon 20D and now 70D I've shot with the 70-200, sometimes with a 1.4x. So I double Tyr-Sog's recommendation for an awesome 70-200 range.

I've shot several weddings, crop sensor Canon 70D. Primarily, I use my 24-70 f2.8L for portrait and reception; 70-200 f4L for ceremony. It'd be difficult for me to select one lens as 18-55 doesn't get telephoto enough for facial isolation and a sharper low light lens would be beneficial indoors. However, the 70-200 range is not recommended because reception shots are tight quarters and you need wide for group photos, which you have all the time with couples, families posing with the bride and groom. Those are very important, even more than the ceremony often. I know people cream over a sharp telephoto prime lens for portraits but you're all over the place in weddings and zooming with your feet is often not an option. If you get roped into a wedding again seriously consider a faster 24-70 or something lens. Indoor reception is dim light and although modern DSLRs like the D7100 go to ISO 6400 easily and stretch further (but don't unless absolutely necessary), you need fast. I hate the flash light cone; I almost always bounce of a ceiling if I can, but ambient lighting is very nice to capture if you properly white balance. Anyway I'm babbling. First the 70-200.
looks like i can get that lens for a touch under 1K with a 6mo warranty, i wish i had one of those ebay coupons

that lens is huge, im imagining at weddings you arent using a tripod with it ...


i was thinking of getting the 85mm 1.8 ... i had tons of success taking pictures of one of the kids in a hs drama production of les mis with my 3200 and 35 1.8. with the extra reach i could have had some great pictures. if that gets down to the 399 range new ill grab that.

im really tempted to grab that 70-200

thanks for the advice ... any must have accessories? i have a decent ball head tripod, a couple of junky tripods, a bunch of monopods, the wireless adapter (which i need to remember to move and setup on the new camera) a couple of nice camera bags. with the new camera, i have dual card slots, ill be watching slickdeals for a deal on 2 class 10 cards.

edit, just re-read the ebay listing, dust in lens ... ill keep looking
Last edited:
You seem to be forgetting the badassness associated with having something as big as that 70-200. The 85 f1.8 doesn't have the same sex appeal. Talking about the important things here! Also, I AM using a tripod with my 70-200 for ceremony shots for shot stability and endurance. It's very important to keep from shaking and having the lens completely level shot to shot. For sports and other kid productions levelness isn't as important as capturing the moments and it's crowded so no tripod. I know 1.5 stops is a lot more light; heck I have and like my 85 f1.4 even though it's manual because light rules. But zoom is more important for anything other than art/portrait, IMO. Other people would disagree, so do what you want; I would do the 70-200.

Edit: I wouldn't let dust in the lens totally dissuade you. It's "moderate" and will be out of focus causing some slight light and contrast loss but it's not like you see the dust pattern since it will be defocused.
Last edited:
lol, i will keep my eyes posted for a 70-200; there was one on CL, the vrII for 1400 used.

im not going to front on the badassedness quotient until i go full frame

thanks for all the words of advice