Reading mode: Light Dark

Portrait shooters..lens advice question

Go to last post
S

stimmer

Veteran Member
Messages
5,219
Reaction score
297
Location
US
I'm an Olympus shooter and I have been doing some research on other systems. I do this every year with my equipment to see where I'm at and where I want to go.

My question is that if I went with a D300s, what type of lenses would you recommend for doing portrait shooting/weddings, and what is their cost?

Maybe a dual list of top of the line, I can't afford it to ones that are great but also don't break the bank.

Currently I shoot with a 12-60m F2.8 to 4.0 (24-120 full frame equivalent) and a 50-200mm F2.8 to 3.5, and also a 50mm F2.0. All of these are fully weatherproofed and very sharp. Image Stabilization is built into my camera body so it's not on the lenses, but I have it.

What would I need to get to cover these focal lengths and also to get the most out of a D300s?

Thanks in advance.
 
stimmer said:
I'm an Olympus shooter and I have been doing some research on other systems. I do this every year with my equipment to see where I'm at and where I want to go.
Click to expand...
If you did research, you would have surely read about the subj. In particular, 85mm for portraits (50mm is used sometimes as well) and 24-70/17-50 for weddings.

70-200 produces amazing portraits and you don't have to be standing next to the person, thus have more chances of getting "natural" poses and shots.
 
I posted on here because I don't know anybody else who would know the answers with some experience attached.

Anybody else have some experience with it?

(Ouch, 70-200 is 2000 bucks)
 
you can find it for much less than $2,000 if you chose not to go with the brand new lens.

it hasn't lost its value since it was released and even with the update (VRII, etc.), it still holds its value very well.
 
Hi I'm quite happy with my sigma 18-50 2.8 macro and 50-150 a very nice people lens. both quite sharp wide open with the 50-150 needing to be stopped down at 135 to 3.5 to be really sharp. Very honestly I've seen little to make me want to spend more on the more expensive lens but vr would be nice.
 
Most probably the best lenses would be, what I also have used and now as I'm changing systems will purchase again are the Nikkor 50mm F1.4 (D or G), 85mm F1.4 (though this is the pretty expensive one and so maybe could start off with 85mm F1.8) and 105 or 135mm lens, Nikkor ones for Nikon are the best but in other hand, to get the 85mm and 105 or 135mm good Nikkor lens, it's pretty expensive and so I'm thinking of myself to buy the 50mm F1.4 but as I need two flashes too, I'm not sure of getting the 105 just yet, oh and the 85mm I'll probably pass because 50 and 85 are close enough to eachother, so don't need that expense.

But if I wont have money for the 105 or 135mm just yet, I'll try Sigma and Tamron and Tokinas simiral focal length fixed lenses.

The main thing is - for portrait you need 50-150mm focal lenght and fixed lenses are the best for this, not zoom lenses.

Also the wedding photography uses almost the same lenses, only for group shots and something similar, you may need a wider end, lets say 24, 35mm? Those aren't so expensive either if you buy the average ones, because you probably wouldn't be using them that much anyway.

Sincerely, Tormi
 
Respectfully disagree. IMHO 50mm f1.4 DOF is too shallow for portraiture except in very specialized styles. You'll end up stopping it down to get more DOF so why the f/1.4.

The 70-200 f/2.8 will serve you better in the long run instead of 85, 105 and 135. It is a workhorse of a lens, will take the place of 2 or three others and will accompany you to FF should you ever decide to go there.

Less than 200 bucks will get you the new 35mm f/1.8 for groups or you can splurge and get the wedding pros choice 17-55 f/2.8.

The only non Nikon lens I own is the Tokina 12-24 so I can't speak to Sigmas or Tamrons.
Peskov said:
Most probably the best lenses would be, what I also have used and now as I'm changing systems will purchase again are the Nikkor 50mm F1.4 (D or G), 85mm F1.4 (though this is the pretty expensive one and so maybe could start off with 85mm F1.8) and 105 or 135mm lens, Nikkor ones for Nikon are the best but in other hand, to get the 85mm and 105 or 135mm good Nikkor lens, it's pretty expensive and so I'm thinking of myself to buy the 50mm F1.4 but as I need two flashes too, I'm not sure of getting the 105 just yet, oh and the 85mm I'll probably pass because 50 and 85 are close enough to eachother, so don't need that expense.

But if I wont have money for the 105 or 135mm just yet, I'll try Sigma and Tamron and Tokinas simiral focal length fixed lenses.

The main thing is - for portrait you need 50-150mm focal lenght and fixed lenses are the best for this, not zoom lenses.

Also the wedding photography uses almost the same lenses, only for group shots and something similar, you may need a wider end, lets say 24, 35mm? Those aren't so expensive either if you buy the average ones, because you probably wouldn't be using them that much anyway.

Sincerely, Tormi
Click to expand...
 
stimmer said:
I guess I do!
Click to expand...
Well, of you want to know anything. Ask away. Drop me a PM if you want. Despite what some zealots think, I'm actually totally honest, and really do tell it like it is.

or at least how I perceive it to be. But if I think that view might be skewed for some reason, I'll say it is :-)
 
(1) If money is not an issue:

AF-S 17-55mm f/2.8G DX as your standard zoom (26-80mm equivalent)

AF 85mm f/1.4D as your long portrait telephoto prime; or (127mm equivalent)

AF-S 50mm f/1.4G (somewhat redundant, arguably, given the 55mm end of the zoom but it has its benefits). (75mm equivalent)

AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G VR as your telephoto zoom (105-300mm equivalent)

There's the AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G as well if you want a longer standard zoom without the wide angle (36-105mm equivalent).

The two zooms are weather-sealed with magnesium allow barrels. I'm not sure if the primes are weather-sealed.

(2) More budget conscious (still not that cheap):

AF-S 16-85mm DX VR as your standard zoom (25-127mm equivalent)

AF 50mm f/1.4D or AF 50mm f/1.8D

AF 85mm f/1.8D

AF-S 105mm f/2.8G VR (as a more expensive general purpose alternative to the 85mm f/1.8--macro, VR longer reach). (150mm equivalent).

AF 80-200mm f/2.8D ED (non VR alternative to the 70-200mm).

There's also the slower 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6G VR if you want the vibration reduction feature.

I have no experience with third party lenses so I cannot comment on them but surely if you want most of the performance without the price tags of the pro-Nikkors there are plenty of choices.

--
Mike

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mking/
 
I went to a camera shop and actually held a D300s. It seemed like a very nice camera. I was looking closely at the build and I didn't see where it was weather sealed, at least completely. The compact flash door didn't have them anyway. But I really like the ergonomics of the camera. Very much like my E3, which fits me perfectly. And unlike a lot of people I like that size of a camera, at least for professional usage.

I really wanted to also check out the Canon 7D to have a good comparison of build quality and features. I'm a little worried with the 7D having so many megapixels and it being really noisy at lower isos. Maybe it's an unfounded fear but some early samples I saw looked really noisy at low isos.

I also need to check out the movie modes on these cameras to do a comparison. I probably will use that more than I thought I would originally. I'm seeing lots of good applications for that lately, especially with wedding photography.

I think no matter what I will end up getting a GF-1 / or EP-2. I really need some good highly portable quality photo machines for my personal use.

Back to the original topic though, from what I am seeing I can get Canon and Olympus lenses of equal quality for less money than Nikon. I guess it all depends on which body I want to use them with ultimately.
Big Ga said:
stimmer said:
I guess I do!
Click to expand...
Well, of you want to know anything. Ask away. Drop me a PM if you want. Despite what some zealots think, I'm actually totally honest, and really do tell it like it is.

or at least how I perceive it to be. But if I think that view might be skewed for some reason, I'll say it is :-)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top