Instruction: Answer the given question using the supporting document.

Input:
Question: Good "professional" lens for nikon d5000? I'm looking for a "professional" lens but budget is a bit of an issue for me as I dont make money for this but I plan to so I want to have a nice lens for portraits
Document: This allows me to get some candid shots when needed. It's fairly heavy at 2 lbs and huge when you put on the hood so I almost never use this lens when I'm on the street because it attracts a lot of unwanted attention. I wouldn't want this hanging on my neck or shoulders for a long period of time. * AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 vr2 : This is one of my favorite lens only because I can use it for portraits as well (with some lighting support) and I can get really good candid shots since I can be much farther away 10-20ft from my subjects and able to get a nice picture.
I bought this lens to go with my Nikon D3 which I use to shoot weddings and portraits professionally.This lens is solid as a brick, fast, water resistant, tack sharp at all apertures and focal lengths, fast focusing, has great color and contrast, and it's heavy! I consider it the price you have to pay to make consistently brilliant professional images. I think the image quality of this lens is equal to my prime lenses.It really is waterproof. I shot for nearly an hour in a total downpour, and the lens and the D3 were tight as a drum with no water leakage.After a day shooting a wedding with this lens, however, you will want to go to a massage therapist to work on your aching arm muscles.
A DX body with an 18-200 will feel like a point-and-shoot by comparison (not that I'm recommending the 18-200).Third is the VR issue others have brought up. Yes, it's nice to have that f/2.8 for low-light, but it would be that much better if you also had a workable VR system. Thing is, unless you're willing to make religious use of a tripod, again, you might not be getting as sharp images as the guy with that 16-85 DX on his camera, since his is smaller/lighter and has an effective VR system to boot.None of this takes away from what Nikon has built here, which is absolutely the benchmark in performance for zoom lenses in this range, no matter what the price.
One immediate issue you might notice is that my prime overlapped the focal length of my zoom. That meant the 60mm Macro didn't get much use. Also, shopping for lenses became a chore. I realized quickly I'd be paying 100% for a new lens even though I was only getting 75% new capability. I didn't have a lens system. I'd just bought lenses that got good ratings and reviews.Good News! Nikon was nice enough to make lunch for us. TheNikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lensis the meat in a pro-lens system sandwich with theNikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S Nikkor Zoom Lens For Nikon Digital SLR Camerasand theNikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lensbeing the bread.
I bought this lens for my  D800. I thought I could use the lenses I had at home (e.g. an old 24-120mm by Nikon) but the camera is simply too good to be used with &#34;cheaper&#34; lenses. This lens is very good in terms of sharpness at the edges. It is still a bit soft at large aperture but it is noticeably better than all my other lenses. The lens is also extremely fast to focus and quiet. I am not a professional photographer and perhaps the cheaper Tamron would have been more than enough for me but I thought it was a bit stupid trying to save some money on a lens after spending so much the body of the camera.
A lot of "professional" photographers say they don't use mid-range zooms. Well la-dee-flipping-dah. I have found this zoom to be pretty much amazing, and having mostly used prime lenses, I love the ability to change from the moderate wide all the way to head-shoulders portrait range. There is some distortion at the 24mm range, but goes away quickly as you zoom. Personally, I like the opportunity to use perspective at that range anyway. I've heard there is some issue with "light leak" at 55mm and long exposures with the cap on and a bright light shining on the focus ring, but I have not found it to be an issue, though I've only had this lens for a month now.It is:Amazingly fast and accurate (especially on the D700);Sharp, sharp, sharp;A little heavy, but I am a fairly strong guy, so it doesn't bother me, even on long assignments;Expensive - I can't imagine purchasing this if I didn't make money with photography, but hey, that's where I come from (cheap Asian family)A "game changer" - combined with the D700, is disgustingly fast, and the colors are AMAZING.It doesn't have VR, but since I only use it on the D700 with the Auto ISO threshold up to 6400 and minimum shutter speed at 1/60, I haven't really missed VR on this thing yet.
I dont miss the extra wide nor the extra zoom. It's worth the money and if you can, skip the crap zooms and go straight to the real thing! The only problem that I have now is that there's too many good pictures that I want to keep!If you have a dx and are debating, here's one more vote for the 24-70! !
Is the optical quality of Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 as perfect as professional prime lenses (e.g. 24mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.4 from Nikon or Zeiss)? NO.Do you want to bring three or four lenses with you? NO!The Nikon 24-70m f2.8 make best compromise between convenience and photo quality. It is as good as standard zoom lens gets.The Nikon 24-70m f2.8 all you expect from a professional lens.
It will still be useful when I have to have a fast lens at this focal length range, but it is a bit disappointing after getting such fantastic results from the 70-200VR. Great reviews made me believe that it was going to be comparable, but that is unfortunately not the case. Build quality is good (and the weight is hefty, too), so it should be built well enough for very demanding users. I may investigate other brands and sell this one down the road if I find a less expensive and equally good or better performing one, but will put up with it's weaknesses for now.Update Aug. 2010: Still getting mostly the same results, with a bit of a bright spot...outdoor portraits look really nice at f4 and up.
This is an excellent lens and up to the usual high standard of Nikon professional glass. I gave up my workhorse 28-70 for this lens and I think it is incredible! The Nano Crystal coating really does make a difference in terms of color fidelity and crispness of an image. I use this lens for at least 70% of my professional photographic work. Some people may think the lens is a bit heavy but you get what you pay for and the robust construction is part of the reason it is so durable.
Answer: A wide range of styles fit into the term "portrait" but lets assume you are referring to the formal style where the head and possibly shoulders are filling the frame with not emphasis on the background or scene.The 24-70  is an excellent portrait lens but is expensive for just using the longest portion of its range for portraits. A lower cost but excellent and very light sensitive 85 1.8G is a prime lens, allowing much more light it at its widest apertures and is 1/4th the price. Often an important feature of a true portrait lens is not its sharpness but how well the area not in focus is blurred. That characteristic distinguishes the best portrait lenses. The classic pro lens for this is the 85 1.4, but the 105 2.0 DC and 135 DC are also highly regarded. All these are fixed focal lengths and are less expensive than the more general purpose 24-70 which is very good on many subjects, from landscapes to portraits.  The lower cost 85 1.8G is low priced, almost as good as the 85 1.4G but 1/3 the price and is very popular on the D3200, D5000, 5100, 7000 and even the super resolution D800. If you are not interested in the classic head and shoulders portrait but want environmental shots where the scene and background are part of the image, the 24-70 is better suited because it is can be set for a wider field of view. Other very popular environmental portrait lenses include the low cost 50 1.8G which is only $220, and for groups, the 35 1.8G for about $200. For tighter head shots or where there is more working distance between camera and model, the short telephoto lenses are great. The most popular and one of Nikon's best all round lenses is the 70-200vrII, in the 100-130 range. That gives a slight telephoto compression look that is very flattering for portraits. That lens is probably the most popular single lens with professionals. It is great for sports, near wildlife, portraits, full body images if there is operating distance, candid photos. It is expensive, about $2400 but like all great lenses retains its value for years, far longer than more hobbyist lenses or camera bodies.  I do a lot of candids, club and event shooting and portraits, and some fashion and ballet theater shooting and the first lens I pick up is the 70-200VRII 2.8 in any of those environments. The other lenses I use are the 24-70 2.8, 85 1.4 and 105 DC. For close in work, the Sigma 50 1.4 or Nikon 50 1.4G are tried.