Coming back to this after looking at some listings... honestly, it is a bit of a bummer. The Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 Di III VC VXD G2 for Nikon Z is actually sitting way above your 850 cap right now, usually retailing for around 1200. It's frustrating because the Sony version is so much cheaper. Even if you find a deal, I was kinda disappointed with how it renders for weddings. It's super sharp, but unfortunately, the transitions feel a bit clinical, almost exactly like the S-line glass you're trying to move away from. I've struggled with this same perfect but boring look. Here is how I see the options:

• Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 Di III VC VXD G2: Amazing for speed, but the bokeh can get nervous and busy in the background.
• Viltrox 85mm f/1.8 Z Mount: Way under budget and actually has a smoother, more dreamy falloff than the Tamron zooms.
• Nikon AF-S 105mm f/1.4E ED with a Nikon FTZ II Mount Adapter: This is the actual bokeh king, though finding both for 850 is a massive stretch. Check out the sample galleries on Dustin Abbotts website or The Digital Picture to see the rendering yourself. It really shows how the lens handles highlights better than a spec sheet. I'm sorry the native Z prices are so high right now, it totally sucks when you're trying to gear up for a big gig. Holler if you want to talk about some older F-mount glass instead!

> My budget is capped at around 850 bucks so the high end Z primes are out for now. Yeah that 850 limit is tricky for the newest native Tamron glass tbh. Since the 70-180 is out of reach, check out the Nikon NIKKOR Z 28-75mm f/2.8. I know you usually do S-line, but this lens is basically just the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 Di III RXD G1 optics in a Nikon body. Because its an older design, it isnt nearly as clinical as the S-line stuff, which is actually a win for that dreamy Austin wedding vibe you're trying to hit. You can find them used for like 700 bucks easily. It gives a really nice, soft falloff for portraits that feels a bit more organic. If you really need reach, the Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD is cheap but you lose that 2.8 bokeh... id probably just stick with the 28-75. Its a solid workhorse for the price.

Actually used that zoom for a shoot recently. The 2.8 aperture combined with the compression at the long end gave me that exact creamy look. My setup felt way less clinical, honestly.