Portrait lens for D700

A

amyliz

Suspended / Banned
Messages
179
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

After getting a refund on the 5d that i bought (tons of dust in the viewfinder and generally not in as good condition as it was described i have been on the look for another full frame.

I can get a Nikon D700 for £1450 which would leave me £400-£500 for a decent portrait lens (zoom preferably)

Any ideas on the best lens for that amount of moeny?

I would be happy wioth something in the region of 24-120 (although i dont want nikons 24-120 as ive heard its rubbish)

Amy
 
For portraits you really want f/2.8 (in a zoom) or faster (with a prime). But you'll really struggle to pick up any kind of decent f/2.8 zoom, even second hand, for that kind of money. Maybe a used Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8?

I know I said this before, but I really think you should allocate a bigger chunk of your budget to the lens. In a controlled environment such as portrait shoots, a good lens on a so-so camera will give you better results that a so-so lens on a good camera.
 
Can I ask where on earth you are sourcing a D700 at that price?

Having researched these extensively there is nothing under £1700 that I would touch with a bargepole as they are either grey imports or in a couple of cases I've come across I would not like to vouch for the validity of ownership. ;)
 
Hi Stewart,

So getting a non full frame camera such as 50d/d300/e30 etc with a good lens will still give me a much better result than say a nikon d700 with a nikon 24-120?
 
BouncyMelons said:
Can I ask where on earth you are sourcing a D700 at that price?

Having researched these extensively there is nothing under £1700 that I would touch with a bargepole as they are either grey imports or in a couple of cases I've come across I would not like to vouch for the validity of ownership. ;)
Click to expand...

I was passed the chaps details off a friend. I have asked him if i do buy i would want to look at the serial numbers and call nikon to verify they are uk stock and he was absolutely fine with that.
 
amyliz said:
Hi Stewart,

So getting a non full frame camera such as 50d/d300/e30 etc with a good lens will still give me a much better result than say a nikon d700 with a nikon 24-120?
Click to expand...

i would say it is, even though youve got a good offer i would go for a d300 instead because with portraits you need to try and get a good reach which the crop factor may come in handy.

as for lenses i would still go for a 50mm f1.4, 35mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8 these three lenses will beat pretty much any zoom (and marginally a 24-70mm) not to mention that they are pretty fast apertures.
 
Nikon D300s Body £1149.99
Nikon AF 50mm f/1.4 £211.99
Nikon AF-S 35mm f1.8 G DX £169.00
Nikon AF 85mm f/1.8 £280.99

Total £ 1811.97

So that would be a better package? And the primes would definitely give me better IQ than say a Nikon 18-105VR?

Wouldnt changing primes all the time create dust?

Amy
 
As Stewart has said, a zoom is not usually the way to go for portraits. The Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 he mentions wouldn't be a bad choice, but the range isn't really suitable for traditional size portraits - better suited for full body rather than head shots unless you don't mind crowding your subject (they probably will though!). If you won't be working in low light, some people recommend the 18-200mm VR for flexible portrait work (well, Ken Rockwell does - see his review), although I personally wouldn't use it for professional work. I've been using 35mm and 85mm primes on a DX sensor, although now that I've finally got a 70-200mm VR f/2.8, I'll be trying that on the full frame.

Can I also ask where you can get the D700 for £1450? If new, it's a brilliant price!

EDIT: I see you've answered the question above
 
No it would not be a better package for portraits, stick to the D700, full frame sensors beat the pants off crop sensors in that environment. Crop sensors with that extra "reach" are good for wildlife and sport, leave tham doing that.

Don't stress about dust, you get it in every camera, learn to clean it instead.

And ahhh private sale, snap his hand off! :)
 
The normal range for portraiture is 85-135mm isnt it?

So would a 70-200mm (35mm equivalent) get used the most do you think?
 
amyliz said:
Nikon D300s Body £1149.99
Nikon AF 50mm f/1.4 £211.99
Nikon AF-S 35mm f1.8 G DX £169.00
Nikon AF 85mm f/1.8 £280.99

Total £ 1811.97

So that would be a better package? And the primes would definitely give me better IQ than say a Nikon 18-105VR?

Wouldnt changing primes all the time create dust?

Amy
Click to expand...

them lenses are unbeatable (apart from the f1.4 versions) but as bouncymelons says FF will beat a crop sensor in anyway apart from reach but it is down to budget, if you could afford the d700 and them three lenses then do it but if you cant then stick with the d300.
 
amyliz said:
The normal range for portraiture is 85-135mm isnt it?

So would a 70-200mm (35mm equivalent) get used the most do you think?
Click to expand...

depends really, if people do close up shots they might use a 70-200mm but its best the see what you need not what others need. most people would probably just keep an 85mm if they could but some clients might want really wide shots (35mm) and a small 2/3 person group shot (50mm).
 
Only you can answer that. It depends on the photo you want to take. Do you want just headshots or do you want 3/4 or full length or even ones where the subject is only a small part of the environment?

Personally I use everything from 50mm to 200mm but rarely use the 200mm end. Most of mine are around the 70-130mm range.

It also depends very much on your own style, do you use lighting or do you prefer to shoot in natural light? One requires wide apertures and the other does not and that should have as much relevance in your choice as the focal length.
 
Would the 35mm and 50mm be the wrong size on a FF? Why is photography so difficult? :)

In an ideal world the best package for the d700 would be a 24-70mm, 70-200mm and a few primes in the middle wouldnt it? say 85mm and 105mm?

So what could i buy now and make do and then buy the others in the future?

If i buy the 24-70 , i'll be so close to the models and if i buy a 70-200 i cant get full body shots.

Amy
 
amyliz said:
The normal range for portraiture is 85-135mm isnt it?

So would a 70-200mm (35mm equivalent) get used the most do you think?
Click to expand...

well, if you can afford the lens (approx £900-£1k used for VI) then I'm sure you could produce stunning images. But you haven't told us the environment you'll be working in or what type of portraits you'll be doing. If this is non-pro work, then I doubt you'll want to stretch to that sort of price for a single lens...
 
BouncyMelons said:
Only you can answer that. It depends on the photo you want to take. Do you want just headshots or do you want 3/4 or full length or even ones where the subject is only a small part of the environment?

Personally I use everything from 50mm to 200mm but rarely use the 200mm end. Most of mine are around the 70-130mm range.

It also depends very much on your own style, do you use lighting or do you prefer to shoot in natural light? One requires wide apertures and the other does not and that should have as much relevance in your choice as the focal length.
Click to expand...

It will be studio based so lighting.
 
PhotoTalk said:
well, if you can afford the lens (approx £900-£1k used for VI) then I'm sure you could produce stunning images. But you haven't told us the environment you'll be working in or what type of portraits you'll be doing. If this is non-pro work, then I doubt you'll want to stretch to that sort of price for a single lens...
Click to expand...

Hi,

Its non pro work (im sure you guessed by the amount of q's :) )

Just want to take my time and learn how to take lovely portraits
 
My maximum budget is £2000 so do you recommend anything else? I have no stuff to carry over so im open to any brand.
 
little out of left field, and I havent used it myself, but how about Sigma 50-150 f2.8? on FF it gives you small groups to reasonable close up, on Crop its almost a 70-200 equiv (75-220)-
Ahh on further research, its for crop only

as I said, not used it but have considered it
 
I have a AFS 50mm 1.4 Nikon lens and it is wonderful. Less than £300 and perfect for portraits on my D300, although on a D700 you would have to get closer to subject.

Zoom wise the Tamron 28-75 2.8 is a cracking lens. Did a basic comparison with my Nikon 17-55 2.8 and there was very little difference, not quite as good at 2.8 but marginally better at f4, difference was tiny and many people use this lens rather than the Nikon 24-70. The nikon is one of the best lenses out there, but that Tamron can be had for a quarter of the price (go for the older model with no motor).

At around £270 for 1.4 50mm and £230 for Tamron, you have a decent lineup for £500.
 
amyliz said:
The normal range for portraiture is 85-135mm isn't it?

So would a 70-200mm (35mm equivalent) get used the most do you think?
Click to expand...

Really you need to no the size of the studio and what you will shoot - Any 70mm is no use to you if you need a full length shot and the studios not big enough for you to frame a shot
 
Studio based I'd recommend an 85mm all day long. Depending on the size of the studio it will do headshots to full length without too much of a problem with distortion. You will find it seriously limiting if you want to use the camera for anything else though but you will get maximium image quality out of the prime.
 
Arguable the BEST portrait lens would be Nikons 105 or 135 Defocus Control f2 lens, see Ken Rockwell for more info. Not the easiest to get, maybe around £500 second hand.
 
amyliz said:
Hi,

Its non pro work (im sure you guessed by the amount of q's :) )

Just want to take my time and learn how to take lovely portraits
Click to expand...

If I were you then - and assuming you don't need a camera for fast action shots - I'd get hold of a Fuji S5 Pro and pair it with an 85mm prime and a superzoom (18-200mm VR for everyday use and to practice various types of photography with, including portraiture). You could pick up this package for about £1000, less if you are lucky.
 
How about the 24-120mm that Nikon do. I've seen it as a kit but discounted it because it's not fast enough for me but for studio work it might be OK for you? Aperture is 3.5-5.6 so it's 3.5 at the 24mm end of the zoom and 5.6 at the 120 end.
 
BouncyMelons said:
How about the 24-120mm that Nikon do. I've seen it as a kit but discounted it because it's not fast enough for me but for studio work it might be OK for you? Aperture is 3.5-5.6 so it's 3.5 at the 24mm end of the zoom and 5.6 at the 120 end.
Click to expand...

Hi,

Jessops do a kit D700 with this lens for £1200 i think.

Ive read a few reviews of it and its supposed to be Nikons worst lens?
 
amyliz said:
Hi,

Jessops do a kit D700 with this lens for £1200 i think.

Ive read a few reviews of it and its supposed to be Nikons worst lens?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the consensus. Even Uncle Ken marks his review in caps with NOT RECOMMENDED...

and surely you mean a D-something else?
 
Worst lens for what?

I tried it last week and I would not have it for love nor money but then I need it for low light shooting so f3.5 to f5.6 is about three stops away from where I need to be.

For what you are doing which is a very narrow application it might be just the job.

In the studio you may well be shooting around f8 most of the time which should be the best bit of the lens.

Also depends on the output, what size do you intend to print at?
 
Hi,

Sorry i should have been more clear in the original post. Im not doing this professionaly at all , just for a bit of fun and see where it takes me. If i enjoy it enough and want to pursue it then i will put the time and money into it. If not then im still left with a decent camera that i can use.

Amy
 
The D700 is a quality camera, grab a Zeiss 85mm f1.4 for your portraits and a 24-70 for daily use then think about the 70-200 later.

I use a Canon 1Ds2 and the 85mm f1.2 for most of my portrait work it is a great combi and well within your reach.. I saw a 1Ds2 on sale in this forum for !200 I think
 
I'd go to the used market. You might be able to pick up a Nikon 28-70mm f/2.8 with your budget (just), especially now that everyone is lusting after the new 24-70mm.

That will hold its value better than a new lens so that if you decide you'd prefer something different (85mm f1.4?) or a longer lens you aren't over committed.

I believe pros do use the 70-200mm VR for portraits and that too has been superseded (by a MkII version) or you might prefer a DC lens if you're serious about portraits. By the time you've tried your first lens the budget may have recovered a little to make these an option.
 
If you want the 24-135mm range, look for the discontinued Tamron. The old Nikkor 28-105mm is easier to find.

If you started with a DX format camera and the Sigma 50-150mm, you could still use that lens (perhaps paired with a Tamron 17-50mm or 28-75mm) on a full frame, switched to DX. Add FX primes when you can e.g. 85, 50 (or 60 micro), 35, 24mm.
 
I dont want to sound stupid but exluding the possible IQ increase of FF is ther any difference between FF and crop camera in a studio. For instance the aperture values in the lighting , say f11 in the hilite and then f8 on the softbox in front. Would all this still be the same whether it was 4/3, aps-c or FF?
 
Yup, that'll be the same, but other factors come into play:

the accuracy of the ISO setting (some cameras tell porkies)

the accuracy of the lens aperture, wide open

the accuracy of the camera's metering, especially at low ISO with wide aperture.

If you play with a depth of field calculator and compare, say 50mm on the D700 with 35mm (the "50mm equivalent") on the S5 Pro, you'll see that you have to open up the 35mm lens aperture by a stop to match the narrower depth of field of the 50mm lens on a FF camera.

Bear in mind that non-photographers may not actually like a very narrow depth of field and one eye of their loved one being out of focus!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top