Which is better for portraits: 16-50 S or 45mm 1.8?

noncho wrote:

M43ForMe wrote:

Lucy P wrote:

Image quality wise I think it is a toss-up. My most used lens is my 30mm (in spite of it's focus problems) and the reason is because it is so small & light and doesn't intimidate subjects who I want to photograph when doing walk around photography.

When doing an assignment (wedding or other event) my lens of choice is the S 16-50mm which I feel is probably the best all around zoom lens ever in that range. Sure it's big and heavy (on my NX1), but I don't want to stop and switch lenses when doing something like a wedding, & I know it is going to give me top quality images.

Interesting. You don't find 2.8 (let's be honest it moves away from 2.0 rather quickly) a little slow for the work you do? Granted, I know nothing about wedding photography so there's that.

Most of the people are fine with 2.8 stabilized zoom.

I prefer 1.8 for 2 things - speed and background separation.

Sometimes I need to shoot moving performers in bad light conditions(rock concerts), on the edge of possible ISO for the camera. In such conditions 1.4 and 1.8 lenses make a real difference versus 2.8. And in those cases stabilization does not help.

Oh, and I like the bokeh and background separation of the 45 1.8 and I can put it in my jacket pocket with my NX500. For me is a winner for ART photography

What Noncho said.

I usually have the 16-50S on the NX1, the 45mm on the NX500 and the fish eye on the NX3000 for just a few wow shots. For video I have the same setup, but I leave the NX3000 out and I use a second NX1 for the 45.

All in all, the S is an exceptional workhorse lens with the added benefit of 2f for wide shots, so I do not use any other wider lens, or the 30mm, for general work.

I was resisting the 45mm for some time (too many 50/55/58 legacy lenses) but since I got it, became my favorite lens, two steps in front, portrait, two steps back, medium, or a double portrait!