Lens for protrait shots on a D3100


I bought the 35mm 1.8 DX for portrait too on my 3100. Much better results than kit lens and it's cheap. But still not gd enuff ...faces look fatter for some reason. So I got the same question...should I get

- Nikon 50mm 1.4G ( wh gives me abt 85mm on FX scale)
- Nikon 85mm 1.4 ( gives me 135mm but angle seems too narrow)
- other brands like Sigma?

What is the best focus length on a DX for portraits ? I think tt my question

Looks like you found the same thing as I did when I had my D3100 (which is now with my wife).

For full length or 3/4 portraits, the 35/1.8G is a decent choice, with very little distortion. For half body shots, I found better results with the 50/1.4g stopped down to f1.8, while the 85/1.4D is an excellent choice for shots from shoulder up. There really isn't a 'best' focal length since it really depends on which of the above types of portrait you want to shoot. Bokeh is pretty much splendid across all three, esp (and obviously) if you put some distance between your subject and the background.

What comes into play is how close you get to your subject - the closer you get, while keeping background distance further, the better the bokeh, but get too close and you'll start seeing some distortion on your subject or fall within the MFD, and that's when you know you either need to compromise and step back, or get a lens with a longer focal length
 

Ahhh. Thanks for the advice. U solve the puzzle for me.

One other reason I get the 1.8G is so that I can take handheld night shots and it works pretty well so far.

Net net, I like bright lens and probably only invest there. What good alternative brand models are there for APSC ? I feel that 85mm may limit the use due to the "narrow " angle.
 

Just my opinion, but I don't think that 85 will have limits. It pretty much gives you around 120mm FoV on an APS-C (which pretty much spanks the 135/2DC, which is legendary in its own right, and in the hands on someone who knows how to set the DC ring correctly), and that gets you some awesome close-ups. Also good as a telephoto prime.

If and when you decide to upgrade/add an FX body to your bag, the 85/1.4 is an awesome lens, and you can consider a 105/135DC if you want to continue shooting headshots (or just keep using the 85/1.4 on the DX body - I know a lot of pros who do that), otherwise, stick to DX and get a 50/1.4G for half-body shots or as a general purpose medium telephoto lens.

Personally, I like the 50/1.4D over the 1.4G since I've had history with a problematic SWM on the G lenses in the past, and my FX bodies are able to focus the D lenses more quickly than the G lenses.

If DX is how you want to go, get the 35/1.8G, 50/1.4G or 1.4D, and the 85/1.4D and you're all set.
If you think you might go FX in future, get the 35/2D instead of the 1.8G. Or skip the 35 altogether and save for the 105 or 135/2DC
 

That sounds like a plan to me. Thanks!
 

Hey guys.

Just wondering what is ur recommendation for a beginner lens for taking portrait shots.
Or is the kit lens good enough ?

And will the lens be good enough for day to day shots ?

Thanks.

Well...Guapo, the best that I'd think of right now is based on an "affordable-to-buy-a Bright-yet-inexpensive-lens and still able to use on FX and rather Good enough-as -Portrait-lens or even Products"==>> AF-50mm-f/1.8D...:thumbsup::heart:;)

Btw, there's only "Benefits/Advantages"-to-learn MANUAL-Focus and NOT the other way round("afraid/scare of too cumbersome...and the list goes on...:nono:)
One should look at it - "when in times of need...eg. AF on your lens FAILED/Malfucntion..."How-ahh-huh...during an important shoot...???"==>> :hung:situation...?!?!
 

I guess Nikon's intention for the entry-level models was for them to be mainly used with the 'kit' lenses (eg. 18-55, 55-200).
Hence the body has been 'handicapped' by removing the AF motor to save $ and weight.

Walking around tourist spots, I still see many people (the vast majority) using entry models and 18-55 lenses.

If you're more serious and want to start buying prime lenses for arguably better image quality and thinner DOF, it would make better economic sense to sell off the entry level body and buy a mid-tier one like D90. The extra cost in buying the body will pay off in the long term when choosing AF instead of AF-S lenses :) Besides which the D90 gives you a lot more control at your fingertips. Many more functions accessible with button press + turn of the dials.
 

irvind said:
For D3100 you can't do auto focus with AF lens. There is no motor in camera body for auto focus if your camera model below D90. So you need to look for AF-S (auto focus silent wave motor) lens, this AF-S lens have motor built in for auto focus.

hey guys, I have a question and I don't know if it was already been discussed, u mentioned the diff between AF and AF-S lens, so what is the suitable portraiture lens for D3100? I'm talking about with auto focus silent wave motor (AF-S) which u already mentioned, is it the 50/1.4g? again.. so sorry.. I'm very new to this kind of hobby.. appreciate ur response.
 

Good point - AF-D lenses will not AF on the 3100. Metering and aperture control is just fine. You can either focus manually, or go for the relatively inexpensive 50mm f1.4G. Your other option is the 85mm f1.4G, which is crazy expensive (but good). If you know how bokeh can be generated using camera/subject/background distancing, you should be able to get away with it using the kit 55-200 as well, but your options are somewhat limited there
 

the 50mm/1.8 is the bang-for-the-buck lens for almost any situation.

do not think about the inability of the 3100 to AF this lens as a handicap. think of it as proper training. while the AF of todays cameras are pretty good, the human eye is still too advanced for any optics to emulate. it sounds philosophical, yes, but if you are not willing to spend (and believe me, you will - given enough time and resources) on the hobby, you will find yourself scratching your head a few times. besides, before AF was integrated into cameras, how do you think the old dogs did it?

;)
 

correct. Old dogs did it by understanding the principles of photography.

But that said, I've also learned to get the best I can afford - If I get a 1.8D today and realize the bokeh isn't as smooth as what I could have got on a 1.4D, I'd wish I bought the 1.4D or 1.4G in the first place cos selling a 1.8D isn't that easy.

I know people who have no issues buying the previous-gen 70-200 VR I because they are shooting with a D3s and while they lose a theoretical one-stop advantage between VR I and VR II, they get it back from the D3s's high ISO performance, and when you buy a couple of lenses this way (e.g. if you don't need crazy DoF, a 28-300's 'limited' aperture size becomes less of a problem since higher ISOs can be used without penalty. This way, they put the 'savings' on lenses towards an extra body, speedlights, pocket wizards, etc.

No right or wrong approach as long as one doesn't look back and regret
 

Thanks for all replies.
It's still mind boggling to disseminate all the technical mambo jumbo hocus pocus advices given here.

I think i would have to make my way down to a local store and try out the diff lenses which adheres to my budget.
Or maybe i'd just get the cheapest lens to begin with and hon my techniques ?

Thanks again for all replies.

PS : Can i ask another newbie question here or do I have to open a new thread for that ?
 

AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G
This is about $399 on Nikon.SG

&

AF 50mm f/1.8D
This is about $229 on Nikon.SG

I read most advices on getting a manual focus to train on shot taking.
Which i feel is a pretty good idea.

AF-S or AF based on the prices above ?
 

AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G
This is about $399 on Nikon.SG

&

AF 50mm f/1.8D
This is about $229 on Nikon.SG

I read most advices on getting a manual focus to train on shot taking.
Which i feel is a pretty good idea.

AF-S or AF based on the prices above ?

Street prices (last I know of):

AF-S 35/1.8G = $330
AF 50/1.8D = $190
 

Manually focusing with the D3100 viewfinder is a pain. The viewfinder is horribly small and dark (go look through the viewfinder of a film SLR for comparison) for manual focusing, and nothing indicates where you are focused at other than a rather useless arrow that points towards where you need to turn your focus ring to. If you want to focus manually with a D3100, either buy a focusing screen (I'd rather sell off the D3100 and buy a D90 since they are quite expensive), or use live view (very inconvenient and you can't hold the lens stable - so you want to put it on a tripod).

In this day, I see no reason not to use AF as it is more accurate and faster than you can manually focus. This is because modern viewfinders do not come with a focusing screen which you can confirm your focus, and modern lenses are designed with focus rings that aren't even designed for precise manual focusing (other than the macro lenses). I only use manual focus when shooting macro. Otherwise it's on autofocus.
 

Brapodam,
Now ur post got me thinking again.
Damn this has been going on and off the entire time. Hehe.

Guess my only option is to narrow down to the 2 choices and make my way down and try out the lenses to get the feel.

Thanks again for all replies.

I need another noob question answered regarding DriCabs...
Do i open a new thread or can i ask it here ?
 

Well...Guapo, the best that I'd think of right now is based on an "affordable-to-buy-a Bright-yet-inexpensive-lens and still able to use on FX and rather Good enough-as -Portrait-lens or even Products"==>> AF-50mm-f/1.8D...:thumbsup::heart:;)

Btw, there's only "Benefits/Advantages"-to-learn MANUAL-Focus and NOT the other way round("afraid/scare of too cumbersome...and the list goes on...:nono:)
One should look at it - "when in times of need...eg. AF on your lens FAILED/Malfucntion..."How-ahh-huh...during an important shoot...???"==>> :hung:situation...?!?!

I read this I dizzy siol. hahaha
 

I own both the -g and -d series ... seriously think that the -d series are able to AF faster (probably due to the lack of internal SWE).
*camera on spot metering all the time during portrait taking*

I like to work on 35mm focal length ... feels much more comfortable when judging the distant.
50mm f1.8d is good for head shots ... 35mm for shoulder up. (on DX body)

for TS with d3100 ... i feel its better to invest in the AF-S 35mm f1.8G.
else ... upgrade to a body with AF motor built in, then get the 50mm f1.8d.
else ... use kit lens and wait for D400 bah.
 

Just get the 35/1.8 then. You dont have many choices anyway. :)
 

Just get the 35/1.8 then. You dont have many choices anyway. :)

I guess so.
Where is the best place to get it cheap ? No grey sets pls.

Thanks.