£1000 ish to spend on best portrait lens for D300

L

lukewoodford

FYI, I am Luke Woodford.....by Luke Woodford
Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,320
Name
Luke Woodford
Edit My Images
No
I have just got some money through and my main focus is portraits (check out my shoots in the portraits forum for the direction im going). My 50mm is great for my gigs and close ups blurring the background but lacks sharpness in situations. My 18-200mm vr is great but have the money to invest so was wondering what would be right for me. was looking at the 70-200 but i like the below 50's for when im in tight situations. Any advice?
 
I'd say either the 85/1.4, 105/2DC or 135/2DC
I have no direct experience with any of them however there are great samples all over the web
 
"below 50's" messes it up a bit, sounds like you're looking at a zoom.
I think the best portrait lenses are fixed focal length, so whatever you get will be a slight compromise.
Head and shoulders ought to be a long lens = 70 or 80-200
Whole body standing 50-105 focal length, so, I dunno....24-70 AF-S....:shrug:

Soon as you want to zoom, the best portrait lenses go out the window.

17-55...maybe...:thinking:
 
towershot said:
Get a prime and use you,re zooming feet.;)
Click to expand...

Its actually having the small wide angle that im interested in, its suprising the amount times times i find myself at 18mm, im quite often in cramped locations, choices oh choices!
 
lukewoodford said:
Its actually having the small wide angle that im interested in, its suprising the amount times times i find myself at 18mm, im quite often in cramped locations, choices oh choices!
Click to expand...

Just to check, you want to use a wide angle lens for portraits? :thinking:

You realise that your subjects will end up looking like Roland Rat?
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Just to check, you want to use a wide angle lens for portraits? :thinking:

You realise that your subjects will end up looking like Roland Rat?
Click to expand...


OK im being a bit confusing, recently ive been going to lots of strange locations, using 50mm for proper portraits but keep having to change lens for tight situations like the abandoned hospital, its just gets a bit fustrating when your constantly changing lens, if i had a studio no doubt i would just use primes.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Just to check, you want to use a wide angle lens for portraits? :thinking:

You realise that your subjects will end up looking like Roland Rat?
Click to expand...

I often use the 18mm end of my 18-70 for portraits, not had too many RR comments though :D

Sure, used up real close, it can give an odd effect on a face - but I use it sometimes just for that effect too with kids - but from just a few feet away it's okay if the plane of hands/arms/face is perpendicular to you shooting

And anyway, this 'portrait' lens stuff where it should be 85mm (FF equivalent) is all a bit old-hat. Not everyone wants a shot where their eyes are in focus but their nose & eyes aren't, certainly few parents seem to hereabouts

:)

DD
 
lukewoodford said:
if i had a studio no doubt i would just use primes.
Click to expand...

Nope - not at all

Not unless you had all the time in the world and a bloody big studio m8 - in the 'real' world, mid-range zooms are best

:thumbs:

DD
 
You can use a wide angle for the sort of shots you're doing, but you would need to incorporate the distortion into the design of the image.

If I was you I wouldn't be rushing into throwing a grand away on a lens until I had done some reading on the subject and knew exactly what each different lens would bring to the shots i was planning to take.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
If I was you I wouldn't be rushing into throwing a grand away on a lens until I had done some reading on the subject and knew exactly what each different lens would bring to the shots i was planning to take.
Click to expand...

Now THAT I :agree::agree::agree: with

:thumbs:

DD
 
I use primes on a crop body (D300). From what I've found:
50mm for full length portraits or waist up at a push.
105mm for head and shoulders
300mm for head only.

The 300mm gives a long working distance, but gives an excellent background and sense of perspective. Probably something to experiment with and see how you like it.
 
300mm would be the opposite 'problem' to using a wide angle, in that the perspective would be so foreshortened as to make their face's look flatter than is natural

They are good for 'Lifestyle' shooting though - which means Shooting kids at play so they are less aware of you

DD
 
Blapto said:
Dave, I try to bring the features back with the lighting, and enjoy the amount of control it gives me.
Click to expand...

Didn't doubt it for a sec m8 - just that as we'd had a comment on a 'problem' when using wide-angles I thought to mention the opposite issue with powerful teles

:thumbs:

DD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top