FX Lens Ideas - Portraits and Events

lifeinfocus

I recently upgraded from a Nikon 90 (DX) to a used Nikon D700 (FX) (2,000 clicks). I have one FX lens 70-300mm. I will keep it for occasional sports and longer distance nature shots.

But I most often shoot school and church events. Some photogs have suggested 18-200mm for that but that is DX and I want to stay with FX. Any suggestions - any brand suggestion is welcome.

I want to do more portrait - indoors and outdoors - this could be small groups to individuals. I recognize that 105mm and 135mm are excellent choices for individual portraits.
What about groups of up to 10? Prime or telephoto choices?

I recently did my first wedding and I rented 24-70mm - good range and expensive. I dont' plan on doing weddings - while it was fun I don't plan on advertising for this type of event.

As an event example, I have an opportunity to shoot an indoors 75th wedding anniversary. I would like to do these types of events - combo portrait and journalistic.

I would like to keep costs down until I make a few bucks, but certainly would consider making a good investment now instead of buying and selling.

Any and all comments are welcome.

Phil

ziggy53

For clarity, what do you have in lenses now (DX and FX)?

Do you still have the D90?

jmphotocraft

Nikon 24-120/4. I find 70mm too short for portraits.

lifeinfocus

ziggy53 wrote: »

For clarity, what do you have in lenses now (DX and FX)?

Do you still have the D90?

Yes, I do, but am planning to sell if possible.

ziggy53

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Yes, I do, but am planning to sell if possible.

I suggest holding onto the D90 until you make your transition to a complete FF kit of body and lenses. Holding onto the D90 will allow a much longer time for the transition and the different size formats even give you some extra system flexibilities that a single format and single body do not allow.

Start your FF acquisition by purchasing the particular lens you intend to use the most.

When you mention "Portraits and Events" the typical needs are the same as for weddings.

Basically, I use:

1) A standard zoom for event candids and group portraits.
2) A telephoto zoom for large events when it's difficult to cover the area with a standard zoom.
3+4) A couple of fast primes for more formal individual or 2-shot portraits.

(One longer prime for head shots and head-and-shoulders and one standard prime for full-length and 3/4 length)

5) And a super-wide-zoom for tight quarters, unusual angles and establish shots.

Assuming that you already have a competent DX system I would start the FF acquisition with the standard zoom and a longer prime. The traditional sizes are a Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED for the standard zoom and either a DC-Nikkor 105mm f/2D or a DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2D. (Even a Nikkor 85mm, f1.8D or G series lens will do for this purpose.)

Yes, the 24-70mm, f2.8 zoom is a chunk and it's costly, and so are the other recommendations. FF bodies and high-quality FF optics are generally like that.

I do recommend lenses of f2.8 aperture or faster to speed autofocus in lower light. Slower aperture lenses may struggle in typical indoor event lighting. The D700 does help by using its built-in AF illumination light. A suitable flash with an AF Assist light is also helpful, as is the SU-800 Wireless Commander (even if you don't use it as a Commander and only use it as a focus assist light).

lifeinfocus

jmphotocraft wrote: »

Nikon 24-120/4. I find 70mm too short for portraits.

Thank you for your comment. That may be a good combination lens for both the type of photos I would like to take.

My intent in this posting was for separate lens for event and for portraits (groups and single individuals). So, I would like to see more comments if possible.

Thanks again,
Phil

Matthew Saville

Zooms are for "covering your ass" as a professional at work. If you're shooting for yourself, or if you're just shooting general candids and portraits even as a pro, I'd go for a prime. Sounds like you'd thoroughly enjoy the new 85 f/1.8 AFS-G. Give that a try, and if you really need a zoom, cover that base with something like the 24-120 f/4 VR, or maybe a 70-200 2.8 mk1 if you're more into portraits and photojournalism. The 24-70 range is more of a up-close photojournalism type lens, great for wedding stuff like cake cutting and boquet tossing.

But honestly, as a general / candid shooter on an FX body, in my opinion and for my style it doesn't get any better than a mid-priced 85 prime...

=Matt=

lifeinfocus

Matthew Saville wrote: »

Zooms are for "covering your ass" as a professional at work. If you're shooting for yourself, or if you're just shooting general candids and portraits even as a pro, I'd go for a prime. Sounds like you'd thoroughly enjoy the new 85 f/1.8 AFS-G. Give that a try, and if you really need a zoom, cover that base with something like the 24-120 f/4 VR, or maybe a 70-200 2.8 mk1 if you're more into portraits and photojournalism. The 24-70 range is more of a up-close photojournalism type lens, great for wedding stuff like cake cutting and boquet tossing.

But honestly, as a general / candid shooter on an FX body, in my opinion and for my style it doesn't get any better than a mid-priced 85 prime...

=Matt=

Thanks Matthew. I was hoping you would respond.
I will check that out and give it serious consideration.

Phil

lifeinfocus

ziggy53 wrote: »

I suggest holding onto the D90 until you make your transition to a complete FF kit of body and lenses. Holding onto the D90 will allow a much longer time for the transition and the different size formats even give you some extra system flexibilities that a single format and single body do not allow.

Start your FF acquisition by purchasing the particular lens you intend to use the most.

When you mention "Portraits and Events" the typical needs are the same as for weddings.

Basically, I use:

1) A standard zoom for event candids and group portraits.
2) A telephoto zoom for large events when it's difficult to cover the area with a standard zoom.
3+4) A couple of fast primes for more formal individual or 2-shot portraits.

(One longer prime for head shots and head-and-shoulders and one standard prime for full-length and 3/4 length)

5) And a super-wide-zoom for tight quarters, unusual angles and establish shots.

Assuming that you already have a competent DX system I would start the FF acquisition with the standard zoom and a longer prime. The traditional sizes are a Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED for the standard zoom and either a DC-Nikkor 105mm f/2D or a DC-Nikkor 135mm f/2D. (Even a Nikkor 85mm, f1.8D or G series lens will do for this purpose.)

Yes, the 24-70mm, f2.8 zoom is a chunk and it's costly, and so are the other recommendations. FF bodies and high-quality FF optics are generally like that.

I do recommend lenses of f2.8 aperture or faster to speed autofocus in lower light. Slower aperture lenses may struggle in typical indoor event lighting. The D700 does help by using its built-in AF illumination light. A suitable flash with an AF Assist light is also helpful, as is the SU-800 Wireless Commander (even if you don't use it as a Commander and only use it as a focus assist light).

Thanks for your comprehensive review.

Based on your response and Matthews, I am leaning toward an 85mm as one of the lenses. I have rented the 24-70mm and it is an excellent lens. A little more reach would be helpful for capturing kids in school events though.

Thanks again,
Phil

jmphotocraft

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Thank you for your comment. That may be a good combination lens for both the type of photos I would like to take.

My intent in this posting was for separate lens for event and for portraits (groups and single individuals). So, I would like to see more comments if possible.

Thanks again,
Phil

Oh, well in that case get a 24-70/2.8 for events and group portraits, and a fast 85 or 105 or 135 for individual portraits. Easy, right?

Matthew Saville

jmphotocraft wrote: »

Oh, well in that case get a 24-70/2.8 for events and group portraits, and a fast 85 or 105 or 135 for individual portraits. Easy, right?

On Nikon the best deal right now is the new 85 1.8; the 105 and 135 from Nikon are ancient and due for an upgrade. I'm hoping that one or both of those two classic f/2 tele portrait lenses get updated to AFS-G this year, and maybe even VR. We'll see. Until then, I recommend the 85 1.8 AFS-G for the casual shooter, or the 85 1.4 (either Nikon or the Sigma) ...for someone who is truly obsessed with portraiture...


=Matt=

lifeinfocus

I suspect the new Nikon 24-85mm 3.5-4.5 is not worthy of consideration for events and outdoor group portraits?

Phil

ziggy53

lifeinfocus wrote: »

I suspect the new Nikon 24-85mm 3.5-4.5 is not worthy of consideration for events and outdoor group portraits?

Phil

Early reports on the new Nikkor 24-85mm, f3.5-4.5G ED AF-S VR look pretty good. It appears to be similar in design and optical quality to the older version with the same aperture ratings, and better than the f2.8-f4 version. That puts the lens at upper end consumer or "prosumer" quality.

Yes, you can probably produce very nice (even professional) results with the lens, especially if you use the best lighting techniques and best post-processing techniques. No, it is not the equal of the Nikkor 24-70mm, f2.8G ED AF-S and my main concern would be autofocus in lower light with the new Nikkor 24-85mm, f3.5-4.5G ED AF-S VR.

Qarik

look at this way. if you get the 24-70mm, then you are done for the rest of your life. no more upgrading, no what if's, no regrets. the standard zoom is the single most important lens to have in your bag imo.

Matthew Saville

lifeinfocus wrote: »

I suspect the new Nikon 24-85mm 3.5-4.5 is not worthy of consideration for events and outdoor group portraits?

Phil

I owned that lens before, and in my opinion it is more of a Galen Rowell type lens. Light, small, cheap, and delivers it's best value when stopped down... I'm sure it'd be great for general events and portraits, but f/4.5 at 85mm would definitely necessitate an 85 prime to go with it, for when you really need to rock DOF or low light. It's a great lens, just optimal for different uses IMO...

=Matt=

lifeinfocus

Thank you all for you comments. I am leaning toward buying the 24-70mm. Just going to have to save some bucks.
Phil

angevin1

Phil, one thing no one mentioned was taking a look at the exif data over your 24-70 photos and seeing where the majority landed in the zoom range. a prime lens based on that data could be a smart move.

Also you mention events and outdoor portraits. The potential-lens choice difference between dark-ish inside event coverage and outdoor portraits is huge. For instance you might get away with a cheap-o nikkor outside stopped down and the same lens indoors would be a pain to try and use.

Nikon does have some older offerings that can be found used AND are still good lenses; 35-70mm f/2.8, (about $300), 28-70 f/2.8 (about $900), 80-200mm f/2.8 (ranges based on model $500-1100) to name a few. But in my opinion nothing trumps what Daniel (Quarik) has in his sig line. Though for my own shooting style I could take the 70-200mm VRII and call it a day, well almost. Adding a Tamaron 17-50 f/2.8 to the bag would satisfy.

Good luck~

Zerodog

If I had to have only one FX lens it would be the Nikon 28-300. I have used one (not mine) several times and it is fantastic for what it is.

But with that said. The 2 lenses I use constantly and are always mounted to my 2 bodies are the 24-70 and the 70-200

lifeinfocus

Thanks Angevin! and Zerodog. Lots of good choices.
Thanks to all for your time.

I am going to look at buying a used Nikon 24-70mm, although I felt better buying a used camera body than a lens.

Phil

perroneford

The guys here are absolutely correct. Quite honestly, you could probably do everything you are talking about with three things:

1. 24-70/2.8
2. 70-200/2.8
3. 1.4x teleconverter

Yes the 85 is lovely. I have an 85/1.4 and LOVE it for portraits. The 24-85 is surprisingly good as well. I've got one and have even used it on my D800 to good effect. But you are talking about shooting professionally. If you plan on booking shoots and taking people's money, you owe it to yourself and to your clients to get some good gear capable of giving pro level results. And using $75 lenses like the 24-85, or bargain lenses like the 28-200 is not the answer.

Just my opinion...

lifeinfocus

perroneford wrote: »

The guys here are absolutely correct. Quite honestly, you could probably do everything you are talking about with three things:

1. 24-70/2.8
2. 70-200/2.8
3. 1.4x teleconverter

Yes the 85 is lovely. I have an 85/1.4 and LOVE it for portraits. The 24-85 is surprisingly good as well. I've got one and have even used it on my D800 to good effect. But you are talking about shooting professionally. If you plan on booking shoots and taking people's money, you owe it to yourself and to your clients to get some good gear capable of giving pro level results. And using $75 lenses like the 24-85, or bargain lenses like the 28-200 is not the answer.

Just my opinion...

Thank you. I had not thought about using a teleconverter. I wonder how many are used with the 24-70mm as that would seem to be a good walking around range - 34 to 98mm. Yes/No?

Phil

angevin1

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Thanks Angevin! and Zerodog. Lots of good choices.
Thanks to all for your time.

I am going to look at buying a used Nikon 24-70mm, although I felt better buying a used camera body than a lens.

Phil

Phil, if you mean you felt more confidence, don't despair. Just buy from a reputable source and you'll do fine with used gear.

ziggy53

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Thank you. I had not thought about using a teleconverter. I wonder how many are used with the 24-70mm as that would seem to be a good walking around range - 34 to 98mm. Yes/No?

Phil

I don't believe that a Nikkor teleconverter will fit the Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S. The third party teleconverters that might fit would not produce desirable results.

Nikon Teleconverter Compatibility Chart

Teleconverters are most useful on longer focal length prime lenses, but the Nikkor 70-200mm zooms are an exception and "do" allow the use of a teleconverter with reasonably good image quality results (at least for the 1.4x and 1.7x teleconverters.)

perroneford

ziggy53 wrote: »

I don't believe that a Nikkor teleconverter will fit the Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S. The third party teleconverters that might fit would not produce desirable results.

Nikon Teleconverter Compatibility Chart

Teleconverters are most useful on longer focal length prime lenses, but the Nikkor 70-200mm zooms are an exception and "do" allow the use of a teleconverter with reasonably good image quality results (at least for the 1.4x and 1.7x teleconverters.)

OMGoodness... yea it won't fit. I forgot that. Sorry. And I even pulled out my 1.4x and the 24-70 to double check. But it will fit the 70-200... so that still gives an effective range of 24-280mm at a max of F4 with only two lenses and essentially a pancake. That's a totally pro level solution, VERY compact, and very effective.

lifeinfocus

perroneford wrote: »

OMGoodness... yea it won't fit. I forgot that. Sorry. And I even pulled out my 1.4x and the 24-70 to double check. But it will fit the 70-200... so that still gives an effective range of 24-280mm at a max of F4 with only two lenses and essentially a pancake. That's a totally pro level solution, VERY compact, and very effective.

No problem!. Thanks Ziggy for the catch.
Phil

jonh68

Shooting fx for a few years now, I have found the 16-35, 50 mm, and 70-200 vr cover any situation from event, sports, to fashion photography.

lifeinfocus

jonh68 wrote: »

Shooting fx for a few years now, I have found the 16-35, 50 mm, and 70-200 vr cover any situation from event, sports, to fashion photography.

Thanks for the info. Most helpful.
Phil