Portrait Lens Suggestions?

Dia

I've been picking up more assignments recently that are different from my norm (I usually do architecture, landscapes & event photography) These new shoots are 2nd camera on weddings, small informal beach weddings & beach portraits.

I currently have a Nikon D7000 & a D90, 11-16mm f2.8 Tokina, 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 Nikkor, 70-200mm f2.8 VR II (also have the kit lens 18-105).

I've been doing online research for a few weeks & I'm still not sure which lens I should purchase. I'm ok with a prime lens - but would prefer a more versatile lens. If the prime lens is the absolute best for portrait with the best bokeh that's fine too.

The standouts so far are:

85mm f1.8D
50mm f1.8 or f1.4
24-70mm f2.8
Sigma AF 17-70 f2.8-4.5 DC

Thank you!

divamum

Also not a Nikonian, but aren't the 85 1.4 and/or "The Beast" - the 24-70 - supposed to be the ultimate portrait lenses?

Nikolai

divamum wrote: »

Also not a Nikonian, but aren't the 85 1.4 and/or "The Beast" - the 24-70 - supposed to be the ultimate portrait lenses?

Just FYI: 24 is a bit on a short range for a portrait work. if you're talking portraits per se (headhots/upperbody) 70-200 is a much better range. Also consider 100/2.8 macro (or whatever analogue it has in N-world), as it has beautiful bokeh and you can get just an eyelash filling the frame:-)

divamum

Indeed, Nik - I've just heard Nikonians rave about both of those for portrait use. Bottom line, when it isn't Canon I should probably keep my mouth shut...

~ducks out of convo, tail between legs~ :giggle

ziggy53

For weddings and events I strongly suggest that you need a quality standard zoom in your kit. Nikon would like you to buy the

Nikkor AF-S 17-55mm, f2.8G IF-ED,

... but the

Tamron SP 17-50mm, f2.8 XR Di II LD IF

... in Nikon mount is a cost effective alternative. Add the Nikkor 85mm, f1.8 AF-D and you have, along with your Nikkor AD-S 70-200mm, f2.8 VR II, a rather excellent kit for most occasions and opportunities.

The standard zoom is usable for some portraiture and group shots, while the 85mm, f1.8 gives potentially better 1-2 head shots, if you have the space. The f1.4 is better still if you have the budget.

Your existing super-wide zoom is usable for establishing shots and such so it's handy in the kit too.

Nikolai

divamum wrote: »

Indeed, Nik - I've just heard Nikonians rave about both of those for portrait use. Bottom line, when it isn't Canon I should probably keep my mouth shut...

~ducks out of convo, tail between legs~ :giggle

I'm not nikonian either, but an optics is an optics is an optics....

Dia

I appreciate all of your responses!

I do use my 70-200 for events and at the weddings (works great in low light situations) But for the beach portraits/weddings I really need a lens that can do it all. The group shots, the close up portraits, and people with the beach/sunset/water in the background.

The photographer I shoot with uses Canon exclusively. Her goto lenses for weddings and portraits are the Canon 24-70 and 85mm.

Nikolai

Dia wrote: »

I appreciate all of your responses!

I do use my 70-200 for events and at the weddings (works great in low light situations) But for the beach portraits/weddings I really need a lens that can do it all. The group shots, the close up portraits, and people with the beach/sunset/water in the background.

The photographer I shoot with uses Canon exclusively. Her goto lenses for weddings and portraits are the Canon 24-70 and 85mm.

For the outdoor *portrait* shooting 70-200 would be by #1 choice hands down.
Having said that if my intensions are to include full body images (and for the outdoors it's often the case) I do use two extremes: 10-22 (on my x1.6 crop 7D body) and 100-400 (on 5DmkII FF).

ziggy53

Dia wrote: »

... The photographer I shoot with uses Canon exclusively. Her goto lenses for weddings and portraits are the Canon 24-70 and 85mm.

24-70mm may be fine on a crop 1.5x/1.6x body (DX in Nikon speak) if all you shoot is outdoor weddings and events. For any indoor use the range from 17-50mm-ish is more useful. A longer focal length also forces you to work at a longer distance from the subjects, which can be tough on flash power.

24-70mm on a FF body, like the Canon 5D MKII or one of the 1Ds bodies, is a standard lens and very similar to 17-50mm on a crop body.

Qarik

the 24-70mm

TheCheesehead

the 70-200 @ 140mm and up.

Dia

I'm going to rent the 24-70mm f2.8, Tamron SP 17-50mm f2.8 & the 85mm f1.8. I have a pro-bono shoot next weekend and will try out all the lenses.

Thank you all so much!

Zerodog

I recently got a 24-70 when I went FX. But I have found that it works great on my 300s too. It is just a really nice lens all around. You could not go wrong with it. It is just $$$.

On the flip side you need the 50mm1.8. It is wicked cheap, very sharp, and has a nice funky bokeh. I love that lens. It is a great walk around lens because it is so small light and cheap.

The 105VR is a very nice lens to have. But IMO it is a bit long on the DX body. You have the 70-200 and are covered in the longer focal range dept.

Bruce I

for studio work the guys on the nikon cafe seem to like to use either the 85 1.8 or the 85 1.4mm (cream machine as it's known there) but the 24-70mm (the beast) seems to be the choise for event photography .... I use the 50 1.8 for portraits ..but then again I"m just doing it mostly as a hobby here !

zoomer

For outdoor portraits I almost always use the 70-200 2.8, also some with the 85 1/4.

Indoors I use the 24-70 2.8 or 85 1.4.

These three lenses are also my weddings combo.

With the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 you would be well served for any kind of people shoot.

Art Scott

for over 20yrs my only lens was a 70-210......then i got a 28-70 + the 70-210....now i shoot most generally again with my 70-200f2.8 [A] (all previous lenses were the fastest available at the time purchased)...I do for small portrait setting oft times use my 18 - 70 Nikkor, but then 99% of my shooting is with flash of some sort and in manual mode..so the variable aperture is not a huge thing only a minor inconvenience....still my most used lens is my 70-200f2.8 .......simply because I do not like to crowd my subjects, I prefer some working distance (min 6ft) between me and them.......the 18-70 is used mostly for groups or if I know I will be shooting full lengths.....

angevin1

zoomer wrote: »

With the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 you would be well served for any kind of people shoot.

x2!

Photometric

Dia wrote: »

I'm going to rent the 24-70mm f2.8, Tamron SP 17-50mm f2.8 & the 85mm f1.8. I have a pro-bono shoot next weekend and will try out all the lenses.

Thank you all so much!

Lens comparsion shot on my camera @B&H photo on a D90 crop body shot on 02/14/2010 this year.

<table id="settingsContainer" class="formTable" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr class="gallerySettingRow applyMultipleNotAllowed"><tr class="gallerySettingRow applyMultipleNotAllowed"> <td colspan="2" id="urlPreviewTD">http://www.djdimages.com/Other/LensShootout/11243760_o3aaR/
</td></tr></tr></tbody></table>
The tamron, hunts ALOT and also came out much darker than any of the other lens's in the test. In low light conditions, you will miss approx 33% of the shots with it.

divamum

Photom, was there something wrong with that Tamron? I'm baffled why it would show such a different result in exposure at the same settings .

I use a Tam 17-50 and have found it an excellent lens - certainly nothing like the anomalies your samples show! It's not as fast to focus as Canon's USM and it will hunt a bit sometimes, but it's not bad by any stretch of the imagination (Canon's 50 1.8 is far worse!) and has even coped in NO light (when I was doing a manual "paint by light" project).

hollybaumann

Nikkor 50mm f/1.4...absolutely the best. Just watch that focus when you are wide open or you'll have one eye in focus and the other not. Unless that's what you are going for.