lens recommendation needed.

[bluecrayfish]

hi all,

I have done some research prior to posting here.
on lens for portrait photography. couple or family photography and also other general usage.

some sources recommended me tamron/nikon/sigma 70-200 f2.8.
on the other hand, some suggested 50 f.14d/ f1.8 d is much better.

I know max aperture, produces nicer bokeh.
But i am rather mixed up with the part that says:

70-200 f2.8 produced better subject isolation at focal length above 120mm.
vs 50 f1.4D/F1.8D

so does that mean, i have to go for lens with abv 100mm and f2.8 for outdoot portrait photography (for couple or family)??

Hope someone could help me with my doubts. i am using nikon d300 body.
Thanks alot guys!.
have a great day.!

 

[SilentSeth]

I think both lens will do..

Correct me if I'm wrong, but even IF a 70-200 f2.8 produce better subject isolation (smaller DOF which produce more background blur, I assume) at 120mm, will you always have the space to go all the way to 120mm?

Also, don't forget that smaller DOF means you have to arrange your subjects (such as many family members) to stay in the same line so that they can be in focus..

 

[Rashkae]

hi all,

I have done some research prior to posting here.
on lens for portrait photography. couple or family photography and also other general usage.

some sources recommended me tamron/nikon/sigma 70-200 f2.8.
on the other hand, some suggested 50 f.14d/ f1.8 d is much better.

I know max aperture, produces nicer bokeh.
But i am rather mixed up with the part that says:

70-200 f2.8 produced better subject isolation at focal length above 120mm.
vs 50 f1.4D/F1.8D

so does that mean, i have to go for lens with abv 100mm and f2.8 for outdoot portrait photography (for couple or family)??

Hope someone could help me with my doubts. i am using nikon d300 body.
Thanks alot guys!.
have a great day.!

Bokeh has to do with the lens design. A large aperture lens can give you a thinner depth of field (thus helping with subject isolation) but may still have bad bokeh.

You obviously don't understand focal length, what focal length is better for what situations, and depth of field. I do suggest you learn a bit more about that first.

In the meantime, you can RENT those lenses and test them first to see which suits your needs better.

 

[Octarine]

Did you already consider that 50mm has a wider FOV? Half body portrait is easier with such a lens, where you will need lots of space to walk backwards when using 120mm and above.
Subject isolation can also be achieved by composition (watch out for the background) and distance between camera, subject and background. It doesn't always need 1.4 or 2.8 lenses - because in a group arrangement the thin DOF will be come the challenge.

 

[catchlights]

when using 70-200 on a crop body, do you know how far away you are shooting from your subjects? you may need to use monopod and loudhailer.

go full frame, you will get closer with your subjects, have much narrower depth of field effects with the same lenses.

 

[inflammation]

when using 70-200 on a crop body, do you know how far away you are shooting from your subjects? you may need to use monopod and loudhailer.

go full frame, you will get closer with your subjects, have much narrower depth of field effects with the same lenses.

DX vs FX portrait lens comparison » Tony Correa Studios | Tony Correa Studios

I read this web, and I don't get the part where they say a 58mm f1.4 dx is eqivalent is 85mm f2.2in FX.
I thought, the apertuare stay same in FX and dx and only
Dx is like cropped ~1.5x??

hmm..or did I unstd wrongly.

 

[inflammation]

when using 70-200 on a crop body, do you know how far away you are shooting from your subjects? you may need to use monopod and loudhailer.

go full frame, you will get closer with your subjects, have much narrower depth of field effects with the same lenses.

DX vs FX portrait lens comparison » Tony Correa Studios | Tony Correa Studios

I read this web, and I don't get the part where they say a 58mm f1.4 dx is eqivalent is 85mm f2.2in FX.
I thought, the apertuare stay same in FX and dx and only
Dx is like cropped ~1.5x??

hmm..or did I unstd wrongly.

 

[silvermoon1407]

DX vs FX portrait lens comparison Tony Correa Studios | Tony Correa Studios

I read this web, and I don't get the part where they say a 58mm f1.4 dx is eqivalent is 85mm f2.2in FX.
I thought, the apertuare stay same in FX and dx and only
Dx is like cropped ~1.5x??

hmm..or did I unstd wrongly.

From what i know, aperture size is expressed as a ratio to lens focal length. So in this case, both lens has same max aperture size. Bcoz of crop factor, fov now becomes same for both lenses. So when mounted on their respective systems, u get same fov (due to effective fl) and same depth of field (due to same aperture size, 58/1.4 and 85/2.2). The only difference would be amount of light gathered. Under same conditions, the fx with 85/2.2 would be less exposed compared to dx with 58/1.4.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[catchlights]

DX vs FX portrait lens comparison » Tony Correa Studios | Tony Correa Studios

I read this web, and I don't get the part where they say a 58mm f1.4 dx is eqivalent is 85mm f2.2in FX.
I thought, the apertuare stay same in FX and dx and only
Dx is like cropped ~1.5x??

hmm..or did I unstd wrongly.

the aperture value stays the same on different lenses and different formats, but the results their are rendering is not the same.

for this example

when you shoot with 58mm on a DX body, to get the same effects as what you will see on a FX body, you need to use a 85mm lens with a slightly smaller aperture.

so if you would to use same aperture on this 85mm lens as would use on the 58mm lens on DX body, you will get much narrower depth of field, which mean more blur on the foreground and background.




if you would to use a same lens on different formats, eg, 50mm lens on DX, to fill the frame with 50mm lens on FX, you will need to move closer to your subject, on a same aperture you will get much narrower depth of field as well.

 

[James Poon]

go prime for portraits...


The blind busker by JuzeJames, on Flickr

Taken with D7000, 50mm F1.8 lens... I think its reasonably decent.

 

[Rashkae]

go prime for portraits...

not necessary. Many professionals shoot with a 70-200 for a good reason.

 

[rhino123]

go prime for portraits...

No need to go prime. Although I am not a professional, but I shoot most of my photos using Siggy 17-70mm and 70-200mm f4L.

 

[James Poon]

not necessary. Many professionals shoot with a 70-200 for a good reason.

on a crop sensor? seriously?
rooted to a tripod maybe.

 

[Rashkae]

on a crop sensor? seriously?
rooted to a tripod maybe.

Yes, seriously, and no, not rooted to tripod. Just basic skills and knowing what they want from the shot.

 

[James Poon]

Yes, seriously, and no, not rooted to tripod. Just basic skills and knowing what they want from the shot.

Trying to shoot portraits with 140-300mm lens due to fx lens on dx body...

I have no basic skill of this kind. Sorry. I think you maybe more experienced than I am. I will have loads of motion blur if I try.

 

[rhino123]

Trying to shoot portraits with 140-300mm lens due to fx lens on dx body...

I have no basic skill of this kind. Sorry. I think you maybe more experienced than I am. I will have loads of motion blur if I try.

I don't see a problem here.

I did the above at 100mm (160mm taking into consideration of 1.6x crop factor for Canon) and I am using a 100mm macro lens without IS... and no I didn't use tripod at all.

I shot this at 70mm (112mm with crop factor), and yes, this is with a lens that have OS and no I didn't use tripod too.

I shot the above at 200mm (320mm with crop factor) and this is with the 70-200mm f4L, and no I didn't use tripod at all too.

Oh... and for 70-200mm including of crop factor (for Nikon, it is x1.5) so the lens is effectively, 105 x 300mm and not 140x300mm.

I am not saying that my shots was anywhere as good as anyone in CS. It is just that even with me, I could take these shots in the range of 70-200mm and with a crop camera, imagine what the pro could do.

 

[James Poon]

Sure

 

[James Poon]

Try the same indoors or under shade without cranking your iso enough for grains to show on a f4

My shot was done on low iso in the shade. I'm not too sure if it's achievable with a zoom lens at f4. It maybe possible, just harder

 

[James Poon]

Sorry double post due to lag on hp

 

[rhino123]

Try the same indoors or under shade without cranking your iso enough for grains to show on a f4

My shot was done on low iso in the shade. I'm not too sure if it's achievable with a zoom lens at f4. It maybe possible, just harder

My last photo was done indoor... No need to crank up your ISO, use a flash.