- This topic is empty.
"best" portrait lens
-
okay, i think i should be sent to the front of the class for not paying attention.
all these numbers are just confusing me.
now, i mostly take portraits, indoors and outdoors. i prefer natural light but have a speedlight.
i know i need a fast lens, 2.8-ish. if i can only buy one lens, what would be best?
a prime- 85, 105?
a zoom- 70-200mm F2.8and what is a lens like 24-70mm F2.8 mostly used for? landscapes?
what range should i be looking for in a portrait lens?
little help?
thanks!
Depends a lot on your camera. If you are using a 1.6 crop sensor, go for a 50 mm 1.4. Nikon and Canon do both. These are excellent portrait lenses on 1.6 crop sensors. – 80 mm equivalent and are not too expensive. If you are using Canon the 50 mm 1.2 is sublime but costly. If you are using a full frame sensor consider 85 mm but get the fastest one you can afford.
i have a nikon d80 and i’d like to be able to use the lens when (and if) i move up to the D3 or whatever’s out at that stage.
is there really a 600e difference between an 85mm 1.8 and 1.4? quality wise, i mean.
i’m finding that a lot of my photos lately are soft, not a sharp one among them, so maybe i should be checking out why that is
instead of obsessing about a new lens :)Yes there is a difference but wether it is worth the extra cost depends on what you can afford. Nikon and Canon know that some people are prepared to pay for the best even though though the benefits may not be directly proportional to the extra cost. Spoil yourself, there are no pockets in shrouds!!
You might be better off working your way backwards- literally-
What is a comfortable distance to the sitter?
and will you want to be able to get close up on the face?50mm on a 1.5 crop is just too short for me-
and the perspective is much too close for close ups-85mm works for me- 135mm on full frame-
I’ve used 100mm on full frame, and if you’re concentrating on the face, it’s too short- again, for me-
The zoom you mentioned (70-200) would give good results for most subjects, I’d say-
j
If you can afford it, go for the 70-200 vr. its a brill lense for portraits.
Its perfect for most shots as said, and you are not on top of the clients, which make them feel uneasy.
Sean.
I’ve only ever heard good things about the Nikkor 85mm 1.8. I’ve used it once and it was a joy to use. As Joseph said..it’s a nice length on a 1.5 crop sensor..it’s fast and it’s as sharp as you’re going to get.
For regular portrait shooting using flash or natural light, I personally don’t see any need for forking out extra for the 1.4. Low light should not be a problem in a controlled environment.
The 70-200 VR would be great..but there’s a BIG difference in price.
Cheers
Robbie
8)There is no right or wrong answer here and to be honest, you’ll eventually find the answer to the question yourself, once you start shooting portraits. None of the advice here is bad advice. A 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is a great lens to use for portraits. But so too are 50mm, 85mm, and 135mm. With the exception of the 85mm, I have the all of these (albeit in Canon EF fit) and use them all to varying degrees. Lately however, I’ve become less inclined to use my 70-200mm, preferring instead to use prime lenses and am playing around with the idea of getting rid of my 70-200mm altogether and replacing it with a range of lenses covering that focal length range. My favourite lens is my 135mm f/2.0 L, in spite of the fact that I’m using it with an APS-C sensor. But then, I like to shoot from a distance.
So, ultimately, your choice of lens will come down to your individual style of shooting and how you yourself like to shoot. Any suggestions on which lens to get that others give you here will usually be due in no small part to their preferred style of shooting, so one could argue that all the suggestions are completely wrong just as much as they are completely right. I would even suggest using a 24mm lens for portraits! I know that goes against all the advice you will ever hear, but if used correctly or to achieve a particular signature style, why not?
Having just read over what I’ve written, I suppose the best option would be something like a 70-200mm zoom as it will give you the flexibility of several lenses in one and over time you will probably find yourself shooting more at one particular focal length than another and can then make a more informed choice as to what would suit you best.
i think with the advice here, i will keep saving for the 70-200 2.8 til I develop my own style and find what focal length suits my work.
and for the money i’m going to spend, i will go with someone reputable as opposed to ebay. calumet in belfast is at the moment only $300 more expensive than B&H photo and €300 cheaper than a place in dublin.
thanks for all the advice guys!
While the 70-200 is an excellent range, the 2.8 versions might be a bit on the heavy side.
f4 versions should be lighter and cheaper, but obviously won’t give the same shallow dof.Just for the record, there are the 80-200/2.8 lenses, too (af-d and af-s), which are almost as good optically as the 70-200vr, but they don’t have the vibration reduction feature. You can get one around €4-700 used or €7-900 new.
Of course, the best lens for portraiture, for your camera, is the lens Zoltan (randomway) uses-
Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 105mm F/2D
I’m surprised he didn’t mention it-It comes in 135mm as well-
probably the perfect length for full frame-I don’t have one, but I used his for a few minutes once-
not nearly enough to find out what it does-Maybe, if you’re lucky, he’ll tell you something about it-
j
Here’s a pretty good comparison, listing most of your options, go to the next page for written descriptions of the lenses…
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=27790753
I very rarely use my 105/2 dc for portraits, so my opinion is not really useful here. I certainly enjoy the lens, it is extremely sharp and very well built. Generally you can’t go wrong with the 85/1.4, 105/2 dc or the 135/2 dc if you want primes. I use a 50/1.4 and the 105/2 dc for most of my digital photography now, and I think it’s a good combination for what I do… maybe a 35/2 – 85/1.4 (or 1.8 ) would be even better on a dx sensor camera like the nikon d80.
Zoltan is right about the 80-200 f2.8. I have it, bought it instead of the 70-200VR at the time and haven’t regretted it.
Super sharp lens…Well I originally started off with the 50mm 1.4 as my portrait lense which isn’t normally as good as some people might say as the 70-200mm, but for me (personally) I set it out as a challenge, because with the 50mm lense you have to get up quite close to the person (model) to photograph them, and to do so comfortably, well that’s a skill to learn in itself. I know for myself getting a 70-200mm (in my eyes) would be just too easy in a way. I like to get up close with people and just break down that barrier between the photographer and the model instead of standing 10-15 feet away with something like a 70-200mm. Recently though I use a 28-70mm but only use it at the 70mm end, but wouldn’t dare go past the 70mm…
this was done with the 28-70mm
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
