Portrait lens.....

Bobsyeruncle

Bobsyeruncle

Suspended / Banned
Messages
17,422
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
I was thinking about a nikon 85mm 1.8G but worried it may be a bit too long on my D7000.
I read some good reports on the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 which although not as fast, would be more versatile being a zoom, and MBP have 2 of them for £199.
Anyone have any thoughts?
Thanks
 
Depends on what type of portraiture you want to do? If you're doing studio stuff stopping the lens down to get ultimate sharpness then the speed of the lens is less important. If you want to shoot with as much background blur as possible then the faster the lens the better.

The Tamron is soft in the corners and edges but this doesn't matter so much with portraiture. Centre sharpness is more important and the Tammy is pretty decent.

The Nikon 85mm f1.8g is a great lens, sharp wide open and really lightweight. Focal length is very personal, but a lot of folk like 135mm eq and even 200mm eq for portraits so depending on preference 127.5mm eq might be fine.
 
The 85 1.8G is very hard to beat tbh, for the price, the quality, the ease of use. It's light and cheerful, a fun lens to shoot with. And the results can be amazing, considering it's pretty cheap. I think it's right up top on DXOmark's lens ratings. I wouldn't say it's too long on DX, like snerkler says, many people use 135mm lenses for portraiture. I use a 150mm on FX, which is longer again, some use 200mm. If you're really concerned about the focal length, another amazing lens for portraits is the 60mm 2.8 D macro. Plaus with that you have the added bonus of, well, a proper macro lens :)
 
Tamron 28-75 is more suited for full frame. The DX version is the 17-50.

Otherwise it's been a brilliant lens for the portraiture shots I've done.
 
Thanks for the replies. I'd be doing a mixture of shots, indoors and outdoors, head and shoulders, and possibly waist upwards. hence my consideration of the 28-75mm.
 
Hi Bob I had one of these for a while on my d90 but in the end sold it on as it was too long went back to using my nifty fifty and 35 mm 1.8 instead
 
The D7000 has a mechanical AF drive so you could always look for a used AFD lens. I have an 85mm 1.8 D which is, in my opinion, better built than the newer model and razor sharp; arguably too sharp for portraits. The new 50mm f1.8 is a decent lens, dirt cheap in relative terms and will give you a 75mm equivalent on the D7000 which is about right.
You will have to move your feet or tripod with a prime lens, but you may find the extra speed useful on many occasions.
 
Back in the day when I shot film the go to "portrait" lens was a 135mm which is about the same FoV as an 85mm on crop (in Nikon approx 128mm in Canon land 136mm). It depends what your intention is as I've seen some excellent portraits shot with 35mm on fx for example.
 
Clactonian said:
The D7000 has a mechanical AF drive so you could always look for a used AFD lens. I have an 85mm 1.8 D which is, in my opinion, better built than the newer model and razor sharp; arguably too sharp for portraits. The new 50mm f1.8 is a decent lens, dirt cheap in relative terms and will give you a 75mm equivalent on the D7000 which is about right.
You will have to move your feet or tripod with a prime lens, but you may find the extra speed useful on many occasions.
Click to expand...
The 50mm f1.8 is a great little lens, but not so good wide open and does need stopping down a bit.
 
Thanks for the replies guys. my problem is this....in an ideal world I'd have a 35, 50 and 85mm 1.8, but I can't afford that. I've had a 35 in the past,and sold it as it was sometimes too wide, had a 50 in the past and sold it as it sometimes wasn't long enough, hence the thoughts about the 28-75. I know it's not as fast as the primes, but 2.8 is still OK.
I may go for one and see how I get on. I'm sure the 85mm would be great, but on occasions would be too long.
Not sure what to do.....
 
85 on a crop would be too long IMO (but some people prefer this).

I am now starting to use my 50mm for pretty much anything (FX) so would work well as a protraint on DX but would be quit long for anything else! Actually find mine pretty good at 1.8!

@snerkler got it spot on with focal lengths. I was sold by the internet that 35mm would be my perfect lens, but after trying it, trying it again, and then thinking the f1.4 version would suddenly make it all ok (it didn't) I have now stuck with a 50 and some zooms. I still think about sticking with it.. but Im done lol
 
Have got a Carl Zeiss fixed 50 planar 1.4 manual focus that takes very nice portrait shots. Can be on the soft side at wide aperture though.
 
Hi Guys,

I've just sealed a deal on here for a sigma 28-70 2.8 fir a good price I'll give it a go and see how I get on.
Thanks for all the replies.
 
If money isn't a factor I would suggest the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art. Beautiful lens, and on DX is great for portraiture. It will be sharper than any mid-range zoom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top