Nikon Z 135 or Nikon Z 85 f/1.2. Do you use them for anything other than portraits and astrophotography?

[RDD]

I am a hobbyist in wildlife and travel photography. I have shed all my DSLRs and substituted a Nikon Z 9, a Z 8, and several Z lenses identified below. I rarely take portraits of people, but I need to photograph some young family members and do the best possible job. I want an excellent lens that I could also use for nature and wildlife photography.

I was ready to place an order, but I wanted your opinion first. Should I purchase a Nikon Z 135mm f/1.8 or a Nikon Z 85 mm f/1.2? I am interested in others' experiences. Putting aside the cost and weight, I think the Z 135 might be more useful.

I currently shoot with lenses on my Z 9 and a Z 8 for various purposes (mostly travel and wildlife). The lenses include Z 14-30 mm, Z 24-120mm, Z 50mm f/1.8, Z 100-400mm, Z 180-600mm, Z 400mm f/2.8 TC, and Z 600mm f/4 TC. The Z 24-120mm, Z 50mm and Z 100-400mm can all be used for portraits, but they lack the quality of either the Z 85 or Z 135.

This group has been very helpful before, and I am interested in your thoughts.

Thank you.

 

[Whiskeyman]

How much room is in your shooting environment? IOW, what is your camera to subject distance?

 

[RDD]

Interesting point: outside of family portraits, I had hoped to use the lens for nature and wildlife, like flowers, bees, and dragonflies.

 

[wotan1]

I like the Plena for flowers, foliage, even weeds. I have used it for wildlife if I can get close enough. I have also used it photographing yachts. Buildings. Parks. Marinas. People in crowds. Parades. Public events.

 

[Nimi]

Both for automotive.

 

[beano]

People and pet portraits, as well as product photography. But it will also be a very handy Astrophotography lens, due to corner to corner sharpness. I’ve not yet seriously tested it on Astro, but will soon order a ZWO AM5 tracker and go from there.