Nikon Lense decision

[Lunchbox]

I am looking for a good lense for portrait photos right now the only lense i have is the 18-200vr on my d200

Plan on doing indoor and outdoor portraits was wondering what i should be looking at.

 

[MelodySoul]

What is your budget?

 

[jlykins]

Do you need to be able to zoom or will a fixed focal length work for you?

 

[kundalini]

What is your budget?

+1

Prime or zoom?

How important is low light situations?

Autofocus or manual?


BTW, singularly, it is spelled lens.

 

[Lunchbox]

well i been looking at the 50mm 1.8 just because its a decent price

the budget is under 500$

autofocus is preferred.

 

[kundalini]

The 85mm f/1.8 is a sweet portrait lens, sharp as a tack with great bokeh. It might be a little long for indoor use unless you have a large room to work in.

Here's an example of the 85mm at f/3.2..... I think

I've got more somewhere, but I know this was the 85mm and I'm thinking it's SOOC. It is a robust lens.

**makes note to self.... reorganize photobucket**


Off topic - My sons live in Greenville and attend ECU. I live outside Raleigh.

 

[Lunchbox]

The 85mm f/1.8 is a sweet portrait lens, sharp as a tack with great bokeh. It might be a little long for indoor use unless you have a large room to work in.

Here's an example of the 85mm at f/3.2..... I think

I've got more somewhere, but I know this was the 85mm and I'm thinking it's SOOC. It is a robust lens.

**makes note to self.... reorganize photobucket**


Off topic - My sons live in Greenville and attend ECU. I live outside Raleigh.

thanks but i think i need something more versatile for indoor shooting than the 85...whats your sons name?.....i know alot of people at ECU

 

[Alleh Lindquist]

50 1.4? If you get the 1.8 you will end up always thinking about upgrading it anyway.

 

[benhasajeep]

You already have a lens that covers portrait range. Its just not that fast of a lens. It is a decent lens though. I would say go with the 50 1.8. My reasoning is 1 its cheap. 2 they are replacing the 50 1.4 with an AF-S version which means the price on the current D type 50 1.4 will go down and or get a rebate. 3 its not that bad of a lens. 4 when you are ready for the faster one, you can normally get a good bit of the original amount back since its so cheap in the first place.

 

[johan.sie]

in most cases i think 50mm 1.8 is sufficient

 

[Lyncca]

You already have a lens that covers portrait range. Its just not that fast of a lens. It is a decent lens though. I would say go with the 50 1.8. My reasoning is 1 its cheap. 2 they are replacing the 50 1.4 with an AF-S version which means the price on the current D type 50 1.4 will go down and or get a rebate. 3 its not that bad of a lens. 4 when you are ready for the faster one, you can normally get a good bit of the original amount back since its so cheap in the first place.

I'm sorry, but I don't think that the 18-200 VR is a good portrait lens. I love it as a general use lens when I am out and about and can't change my lenses much (when family members or friends may kill me if I stop yet again and change lenses), but when I tried to use it as a portrait lens I could tell a big difference between it and my 50 f1.8.

A good point was brought up about the length of room required. I have a spare room I use that is fairly large (for a spare bedroom) and it doesn't provide enough length to capture a full (adult) person with the 50mm. I bought the 35mm f2.0 and with off camera flash it works perfectly. There is also a faster 35mm, but it is above your mentioned price range.

The 35mm 2.0 was under $400 I think. With that and the 50 f1.8, you would be pretty set and be around $500.

This was shot with the 35mm. It is also helpful with babies when you can't be too far from them without them crawling off or to make small adjustments to their clothing etc...

 

[epp_b]

You've got some good lengths in the 18-200, but the "bokeh" is reportedly not good.

Maybe look on eBay for a used 105mm AI?

 

[Lyncca]

You've got some good lengths in the 18-200, but the "bokeh" is reportedly not good.

Maybe look on eBay for a used 105mm AI?

I had problems getting good seperation from backdrops or any background for that matter and with any kind of distance, I didn't get the sharpness in the eyes that I wanted.

If the 85mm isn't verstaile enough, then the 105 more than likely isn't either for tight inside portraits.

 

[sabbath999]

I have a 18-200 VR, I agree with the previous posters about it... it is best at being at "walking around" lens but I woudn't use it for portraits as my main lens (the 18-55 kit lens is actually much sharper).

I also have a 50 f/1.8 and it is OK, but not spectacular. The f/1.4 is a vastly superior lens IMHO.

 

[Lyncca]

I have a 18-200 VR, I agree with the previous posters about it... it is best at being at "walking around" lens but I woudn't use it for portraits as my main lens (the 18-55 kit lens is actually much sharper).

I also have a 50 f/1.8 and it is OK, but not spectacular. The f/1.4 is a vastly superior lens IMHO.

Shush! I do NOT need to get another lens yet! The new camera (and accessories) beat up my pocketbook well enough for a while!