D300 and Lenses for Portraits/Modeling?

IF D300 is good for portraits, what lenses would be best for in/outdoor shots for portraits, like modeling get-ups etc. Really lookin' into getting the D300, should i? or as a beginner should i start with something else?

And for landscape/macro/action as well...good lenses for the D300?

JK

what's your budget?

tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is a very good all around lens - will work perfect for landscapes as well as portraits... $400

85mm f/1.8 can complement the tamron for another $350-$400 and will be awesome for portraits

17-55 f/2.8 + 85mm f/1.4 nikkors are definitely a solid choice if you have more money.. but will set you back approx $900 each

instead of 85mm you can always get the 70-200 f/2.8 VR zoom and that'll get you covered for most of the sports/action/portraits, can't go wrong there... $1700

--
Vadim
http://www.vadimonline.com

VadimOm said:

what's your budget?

tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is a very good all around lens - will work perfect
for landscapes as well as portraits... $400
85mm f/1.8 can complement the tamron for another $350-$400 and will
be awesome for portraits
17-55 f/2.8 + 85mm f/1.4 nikkors are definitely a solid choice if you
have more money.. but will set you back approx $900 each

Click to expand...

Where can I find a 17-55 for under $1000 from a reputable store?

VadimOm said:

instead of 85mm you can always get the 70-200 f/2.8 VR zoom and
that'll get you covered for most of the sports/action/portraits,
can't go wrong there... $1700

Click to expand...

I'd add e.g. Nikon 105, Sigma 105, Tamron 90, Tokina 100. Combined portraits and macro. Even the Sigma 150.

Cheap is 50 1.8 AF-D. Or a 35 f2. It all depends on what kind of portraits and how close/far you are from the subject.

A 24-70 2.8 could also be good. Because if you don't like the D300 the lens pairs well with a D700 or D3, from what I've heard.

http://fling.zenfolio.com

You can kill 2 birds with one stone by using the 105VR micro as your macro lens AND your portrait/modeling lens. It works great for both. The VR is useful when shooting portraits handheld. Often, this lens is TOO sharp (rarely a problem with other lenses). Can be great for portraits. You can keep the eyes sharp and soften the skin if you want in post processing. Gives a very striking look.

If you want a lens just for portraits, the 85 f/1.4 is probably your best bet. If that lens is too expensive, the 85 f/1.8 is great, too.

If you are really cheap, you can use the 50 f/1.8 for portraits.

Landscape... depends how wide you want. I find the 18-200VR works great for landscapes (and I hate this lens for just about everything else). Stopped down to f/8 or f/11 I love it for landscapes at 18mm. A fair bit of distortion, but you can correct it in post. The 14-24 f/2.8 is supposed to be amazing, but it won't be as wide on a D300, and it costs a small fortune. There are a lot of DX wide angles (Tokina, Nikon, Sigma to name a few). All have pros and cons. I like my Sigma 10-20 a lot, and it is my most often used landscape lens.

--
http://flickr.com/photos/rcaron/

I own the D300 and a good bunch of lenses. Unlike many of the other reactions, for classical head-and-shoulders portraits I find 50mm and below too short and above 85mm too long. For me the sweetspot for the DX format is between 55mm and 75mm. Good choices would be 60mm f/2.8 Micro, 24-70mm f/2.8, 28-70mm f/2.8. Pleasant results can of course also be obtained with shorter and longer lenses (I also use 85mm f1.8, 105mm F2.8 VR and 70-200mm f/2.8 VR, but if your aim is to shoot a lot of portraits, a lens around 60mm cannot be missed.
Just my 0.02
--
Jur

One of my favorites for portrait work is my 55mm 1.2 manual focus lens. The subjects are usually not moving to fast, and the MF speed is not an issue. However, when you want shallow DOF, nothing beats wide aperture. For the rest, I use either a Tamron 28-58 2.8 or a 85 1.4 AIS. ...

Dave

D300 is great for portraits, I use the nikon 24-70, which I love and tamron 17-50. Both give great results.

http://www.onemodelplace.com/photographer_list.cfm?P_ID=155344

nikon 24-70 or a tamron 28-75 are excellent for modeling. Add in a 85 or 70/80-200 as well.

The 24 or 28-75 would do well with landscapes. Add in a wide like a 12-24 or 10-20

JK, some of the lenses being suggested to you cost a fortune and will not make you a photographer. Spend time with your camera and get a feel of what you like before you start buying professional gear.

An expensive Mont Blanc pen will not help you write better novels.
--
Art

My 2 cent would be longest glass you can use in the space you are going to be using the lense in. Most people would like the eyes in crisp clean focus, and great composition is way more important than fast glass even if you have the $ to spend. I have the 24-70 and the 70-200 with D300’s and D700’s and having said that I use my D40 with 18-200 all the time. The advantage of long glass is less back-ground being recorded in the picture so less distraction.

DAVELEE

DAVELEE said:

My 2 cent would be longest glass you can use in the space you are
going to be using the lense in. Most people would like the eyes in
crisp clean focus, and great composition is way more important than
fast glass even if you have the $ to spend. I have the 24-70 and the
70-200 with D300’s and D700’s and having said that I use my D40 with
18-200 all the time. The advantage of long glass is less back-ground
being recorded in the picture so less distraction.

Click to expand...

Is there an advantage with using the D40 instead of the D300?

--
http://photophindings.blogspot.com/

Contrary to all the marketing talk. A D80, or D90 will suit almost all your needs just fine. If anything, do spend more money on good glass--though the current kit lenses are all quite good.

What you definitely need, though, is a fast 50mm prime and a strobe (flash) or two. The 50mm is a good portrait lens on any crop-sensor DSLR and it'll give you that shallow depth of field that's all the range now. As for strobes, head to Strobist.com to learn, and don't spend more than $100 on your first strobes.

By the time you outgrow your kit, you'll know what's lacking and what you really need to spend money on.

Member said:

An expensive Mont Blanc pen will not help you write better novels.

Click to expand...

Sure beats the helll out of continuously poking your finger and scribbling with your own blood though.

Come on, the guy asked what lenses are good for portraits. Don’t be surprised that people suggest good portrait lenses. If he’s a big boy, he can look at the price tags and decide what he wants to spend himself. Suggestions have been anywhere from $100 to $1700. I’d say that gives him a fair bit of range to decide what price level he’s interested in learning more about.

-Suntan

The Nikon 50mm :1.8 is a must have IMHO for the price. I have also just started experimenting with adding the Olympus B300 (aka TCON 17) to the front of that lens. The result is a 50mm and 85 mm both in 1.8 f stop for around $200.

I also own the 70-200 2.8 VR and love it, but it is expensive. Other lens I own are the Sigma 30mm 1.4, and the 17-70 f3.5 kit lens that came with my old D70. But IMHO the 50 1.8 stopped down to 2.8 or better is the sharpest I have.
--
Alan

I know a lot of people always recommend the 50 1.8 as a lens you have to have, but for portraits I do not think it is the best option, even considering its low price. It can be very sharp, but for portraits, very sharp is not that ideal. Certainly not the first thing I look for in a portrait lens.

More important to me is how the lens renders the in focus areas as well as out of focus areas, and also the transition between the two. I think the 50 1.8 has characters that make it very good for product/item shots, but not the most suitable for portraits. Further, the focal length of 50mm can be effective for portraits, but is not ideal and can get very confining if that’s all you’ve got (too close for head and shoulders, too far for waist up/full body).

Personally, my current favorite recommendation for a relatively low cost portrait lens would be a used Nikon 35-70 2.8D. I prefer it over my 70-200vr for portraits, but use both depending on the focal length needed.

-Suntan