Better lens for macro/portrait use?

[Rafterman]

Hello all. First-time poster here and I've got a question.

I'm in the process of taking my photography from being just a hobby into a part-time money-making venture. I'm looking for a great portrait lens that maybe could also work well as a macro, since I like that area of photography as well, but it's not a requirement. I've just read that macros are commonly used for portraits and do very well in that role.

I've narrowed down my choices to the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G micro, the Tokina 100mm f/2.8 AT-X, and the Nikon 85mm f/1.8G. I'm aware the 85mm won't do macro very well, but I'm not interested at all in the 85mm DX micro.

I have a D7000, so my concern is that the 100mm Tokina and the 85mm Nikon might be too close for portraits at 150mm and 127mm respectively after the 1.5x crop factor is taken into consideration, especially if I'm shooting indoors in cramped quarters. Obviously, the 60mm would be fine as a 90mm equivalent and that 90mm length would work well as a macro too.

Do any of you have success or preference using a mid-range tele as a portrait lens? Is there a commonly-known focal length "range" that portrait lenses should fall in?

For what it's worth, I also have a Tokina 12-24mm f/4, a Nikon 35mm f/1.8g, and a Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR.

Thanks in advance.

 

[greybeard]

Take your 55-200 and practice some portrait work with it. Find the focal length that works the best for you with the type of portraits you intend to do. That will at least give you a better idea of the focal length you are looking for.

 

[KmH]

I would suggest looking hard at the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens.

The lens has a 1:2 Macro capability from 35 mm to 85 mm, and extremely fast screw-drive AF .
FM Reviews - Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF AF
Nikkor AF 24-85mm f/2.8-4 D IF - Review / Test Report

 

[Rafterman]

Take your 55-200 and practice some portrait work with it. Find the focal length that works the best for you with the type of portraits you intend to do. That will at least give you a better idea of the focal length you are looking for.

Nice suggestion, thanks. No idea why I didn't think of that before. Using my wife as a test subject, I did sample indoor portraits of a head shot, waist-up shot, and full body at 55, 75, 90, 135, and 150mm.

I had to stand REALLY far away to do full body shots at 150mm. I'm talking 25-feet away with her seated in a chair. Considering that I'd like the ability to do indoor shots using natural window light, 150mm is far too much zoom if I'm in a small room and can't back up. That pretty much rules out the Tokina 100mm f/2.8. The Nikon 85mm f/1.8G also gets dropped because 127mm is too much zoom as well. The Nikon 60mm micro is still on the list though (barely).

After broadening my search a bit, I'm also going to consider the brand new Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 DC Macro, which is the latest from their "Contemporary" line. It's $500, offers a macro ratio of 1:2.9, and the 25-105mm range sounds great for portraits and as a general walk-around lens. Sigma also offers an older version of this lens for just $375, which is very tempting as well. There really aren't any fast standard zooms in the Nikon line that can be had for under $500, so it looks like I'll end up with either the Sigma 17-70mm or the Nikon 60mm.

I would suggest looking hard at the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens.

That lens is currently $670 on Amazon. I'd really like to stay under $500. Sorry I didn't mention that in my original post. If I could get it used from a reputable seller for under $500, I'd consider it though.

 

[Mach0]

Nice suggestion, thanks. No idea why I didn't think of that before. Using my wife as a test subject, I did sample indoor portraits of a head shot, waist-up shot, and full body at 55, 75, 90, 135, and 150mm.

I had to stand REALLY far away to do full body shots at 150mm. I'm talking 25-feet away with her seated in a chair. Considering that I'd like the ability to do indoor shots using natural window light, 150mm is far too much zoom if I'm in a small room and can't back up. That pretty much rules out the Tokina 100mm f/2.8. The Nikon 85mm f/1.8G also gets dropped because 127mm is too much zoom as well. The Nikon 60mm micro is still on the list though (barely).

After broadening my search a bit, I'm also going to consider the brand new Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 DC Macro, which is the latest from their "Contemporary" line. It's $500, offers a macro ratio of 1:2.9, and the 25-105mm range sounds great for portraits and as a general walk-around lens. Sigma also offers an older version of this lens for just $375, which is very tempting as well. There really aren't any fast standard zooms in the Nikon line that can be had for under $500, so it looks like I'll end up with either the Sigma 17-70mm or the Nikon 60mm.

That lens is currently $670 on Amazon. I'd really like to stay under $500. Sorry I didn't mention that in my original post. If I could get it used from a reputable seller for under $500, I'd consider it though.

http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Autofocus-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-NA07999044966J?r=FE

If low light is concern- 2.8 or better is what you want. Or you can learn to use off camera flash.

 

[greybeard]

The Nikon 85mm f/1.8G also gets dropped because 127mm is too much zoom as well????

85mm is 85mm, if you like what you have at 85mm on your 55-200 zoom then the 85mm 1.8 will be the same width and perspective. My personal favorite for portrait work on crop frame is my old 50mm 1.8. I would think the the 60mm macro you are looking at should do a descent job at both. That 24-85 f/2.8-4 KmH suggested is a pretty sweet lens too.

 

[KmH]

I would suggest looking hard at the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens.

That lens is currently $670 on Amazon. I'd really like to stay under $500. Sorry I didn't mention that in my original post. If I could get it used from a reputable seller for under $500, I'd consider it though.

You can get good, clean, well cared for used ones for $500 or less.

 

[Rafterman]

85mm is 85mm, if you like what you have at 85mm on your 55-200 zoom then the 85mm 1.8 will be the same width and perspective.

For me, the test at 85mm on my 55-200 was too much zoom for using indoors. I guess mentioning the crop factor conversion to 127mm was a pointless thing to do. Sorry about that, I tend to "over-explain" things sometimes.

My personal favorite for portrait work on crop frame is my old 50mm 1.8. I would think the the 60mm macro you are looking at should do a descent job at both. That 24-85 f/2.8-4 KmH suggested is a pretty sweet lens too.

The 50mm 1.8G has been on my radar for while, but since I already own the 35mm 1.8G, I can't justify buying the 50 when I can just move my feet and walk closer to the subject.

You can get good, clean, well cared for used ones for $500 or less.

Yeah, Mach0 posted a helpful link to KEH. Didn't even think to check there. Usually, I look for used gear on Amazon, Adorama, or sometimes Craigslist. Actually, Adorama has one in like new condition for $500 and in very good condition for $330.

 

[greybeard]

The 50mm 1.8G has been on my radar for while, but since I already own the 35mm 1.8G, I can't justify buying the 50 when I can just move my feet and walk closer to the subject.

Trying to shoot a tight portrait with your 35mm 1.8 will put you too close to your subject and cause their nose to be exaggerated and their ears to appear smaller. The 50mm will move you back from the subject and will produce a much more flattering perspective. That is the whole point of a portrait lens.

 

[Rafterman]

Trying to shoot a tight portrait with your 35mm 1.8 will put you too close to your subject and cause their nose to be exaggerated and their ears to appear smaller. The 50mm will move you back from the subject and will produce a much more flattering perspective. That is the whole point of a portrait lens.

Yes, I get that. I didn't intend on using my 35mm for portraits. I know that getting close to a subject with a wide-angle will make them look weird. I've purposely shot peoples' and dogs' faces with my Tokina at 12mm for the purpose of making them look abstract and goofy, with hilarious results.

EDIT: I just found some very helpful portrait lens info in some older threads on here. Thanks everyone for the tips and advice.