Dream portrait lens for ~1000.00

Photometric

Any suggestions for a Nikon body

bdcolen

Photometric wrote:

Any suggestions for a Nikon body

Dream? Find yourself the 85 1.4 somewhere. In terms of performance, it is every bit the equal of the astounding Leica M 75 1.4 Summilux. Gorgeous out-of-focus handling. A really ideal portrait/short tele.

Joe Dukovac

Photometric wrote:

Any suggestions for a Nikon body

I think you can still get a 80-200mm lens for about $1000.00 USD. I bought the 70-200mm 2.8 lens which is more money, but I use it for portraits almost exclusively (unless I'm in a REAL tight spot). The 80-200mm is the predecessor to the 70-200mm lens, and is still a great lens.

I'm use there are other lenses out there for about the price of $1000 but I can't think of any. If you save up some extra cash, you could always consider the 24-70mm 2.8 lens, which would be great for portraits.

Anyhow, my two cents.

Take Care,
Joe

kidzmom

Joe, I'm thinking of the Canon 70-200L IS USM (2.8) and was wondering about the "tight on space" thing. How tight do you mean? I don't have a ton of indoor space to shoot but was really hoping this would work for me. Do you find it a bear to carry? It is titanium, right? Not light.

Joe Dukovac

kidzmom wrote:

Joe, I'm thinking of the Canon 70-200L IS USM (2.8) and was wondering about the "tight on space" thing. How tight do you mean? I don't have a ton of indoor space to shoot but was really hoping this would work for me. Do you find it a bear to carry? It is titanium, right? Not light.

Well, my 70-200mm 2.8 lens is a bit heavier (I shoulder carry it otherwise my neck would have permanent neurological damage I think !). But the weight is due to the all metal construction. It's built like a tank, and quite weather resistant. The picture is fantastic, the VR works good, so I love it.

As for indoor studio shoots, well, if you are shooting individuals, it works out nice. If I have to shoot more than 1, then it can be too tight. It all depends on your space available. Outdoors, it never comes off my camera, ok, 99% of the time it never comes off my camera

I'm not sure about the Canon and how it's construction is, but man, I bought mine and never looked back. Nikon just released their new 70-200mm 2.8 lens with VR 2 and I would love to have it, but my lens now does a great job, and when I end up getting my D700 the lens is also a full frame lens, so there won't be any compatibility issues with it.

My goal is to have the 14-24mm f 2.8 for wider stuff, the 24-70mm F 2.8 for a good mid-range/portrait zoom and my 70-200mm F 2.8 (which I currently have) for my portrait/telephoto lens. I have a 50mm 1.8 lens which is nice also. BD also mentioned the 80 1.4 which is on my list of lenses to get, eventually.

Like I said, so many things I want, so little money :cry

Llywellyn

The 50mm/1.4 or 85mm/1.4 are awesome. And as someone already mentioned, if you can spare a bit over $1,000, definitely the 24-70mm/2.8.

anonymouscuban

I'm not an expert but I have been shooting indoor portraits lately. I use my 28-70 f/2.8 which was replaced by the 24-70 f/2.8 that people have mentioned. I think performance wise they are very similar. I love this lens. Very nice skin tones, great bokeh and nice focal length for doing portraits indoors. I bought mine used for about $900. I shoot on a D300 so its actual focal lenght is 42-105. This works out well for single and multiple people shots in space as small as 5-7' from camera to subject.

My next lens is the 70-200 f/2.8. I've rented this lens in the past and it is on-par with my 28-70. Great lens. I think it would be a bit tight though for some of my indoor shots of groups of people. However, I plan on upgrading to the D700s when it is released so that would make it a bit shorter since the cropped factor is eliminated.

Hope this is helpful.

Alex

SLRdude

Nikon 135mm f/2 DC

Qarik

bdcolen wrote:

Dream? Find yourself the 85 1.4 somewhere. In terms of performance, it is every bit the equal of the astounding Leica M 75 1.4 Summilux. Gorgeous out-of-focus handling. A really ideal portrait/short tele.

+1

Mitchell

Qarik wrote:

+1

+1 on the 85mm, f1.4

This is Nikon's premiere portrait lens.

ivar

I've moved this to the camera forum

Jeremy Winterberg

SLRdude wrote:

Nikon 135mm f/2 DC

+1

I don't own this lens, but have seen portraits taken with it.... simply amazing. I'm currently shooting portraits with my D300, 17-55 2.8 with it set at 24mm most of the time. The 85 1.4 is good, and the 70-200 2.8 is good... as well as the 24-70 2.8... all of those are on my dream list. too bad I'm broke for the next several months due to my recent splurge on Alien Bees

Art Scott

Sigma 17-70f2.8-4 & Sigma 70-200 F2.8

Photometric wrote:

Any suggestions for a Nikon body

I love all the answers....but shouldn't we be asking this:

Which Nikon body do you have and use???

With my past and present crop bodies I still maintain that a great combo is : a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 and a 70-200F2.8 ....have not used the 17-70 but have read several reports taht give it great reference.....have been using several Sigma 70-210 f2.8 (predessor of the 70-200f.8) and love all that I have owned....narry one gave me bad pix.......I have used a 70-210 for portraits when my studio was in the front room of my rented mobull home....there was a couple of times I had to step out on the front deck to get back far enuff to get what i wanted but only a few.....oh that was with a full frame film camera.....and yes there were "crop" frame 35's in the film days (called 35mm aps........)