Opinions, please. Macro Lens for Portrait Use???

[camerateur]

Hello Everyone!

So I ordered a Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 lens on Amazon for about 500 dollars.
I was excited to save money on this since I really wanted a portrait zoom lens.
Nowhere on the description did it say anything about being a Macro lens, I made sure. However, when I got it in the mail, it said "MACRO" on the box.
I understand that I can still use this lens, but macro lenses are awfully sharp which isn't the most flattering for everyone. I want to do event and wedding photography, however, macro's would be better for newborn and pet photography, right?

TL;DR
-Does anyone have experience using a macro lens as a portrait zoom lens? Did you have good or bad experience?


Thank you in advance!

 

[Overread]

It's not a macro lens.

What it has is macro on the box because marketing put it there to help drive sales; on most zoom lenses with "macro" in the title the it means that it can do close focusing. This means at best a ratio of 0.5:1 magnification which is half what a real macro lens get to at 1:1. That means you can get a full flower in the frame, but you won't be getting a fly in the frame fully.

It might also have a focus limiter switch for close and further off distances, but won't will have a normal focus wheel control for its normal focusing distances (dedicated macro lenses typically have a more crude control where small turns on the focus wheel make big changes in the focus position for further off subjects, making them a touch more tricky to fine tune focus by hand).

As for sharpness many of the best portrait lenses are very very sharp - you can always soften sharp details easily - you can't do the reverse so easily.

 

[tirediron]

^^ Spot on! ^^ As Over mentioned, you can always soften, but sharpening comes at a cost. Even if the lens is that sharp, it won't be a problem. I routinely use my macro lenses for portrait work. What I would be more concerned about is the focal length; 75mm is just starting to get into what is considered "ideal" portrait length. It will be fine for group shots, but maybe not ideal for a bridal portrait.

 

[Braineack]

13" min focus and 1:4 suggests it's no where near a macro lens.

I cant imagine having a sharp lens as a negative for portraits...

 

[greybeard]

^^ Spot on! ^^ As Over mentioned, you can always soften, but sharpening comes at a cost. Even if the lens is that sharp, it won't be a problem. I routinely use my macro lenses for portrait work. What I would be more concerned about is the focal length; 75mm is just starting to get into what is considered "ideal" portrait length. It will be fine for group shots, but maybe not ideal for a bridal portrait.

Are you thinking FF or Crop Frame?

 

[tirediron]

^^ Spot on! ^^ As Over mentioned, you can always soften, but sharpening comes at a cost. Even if the lens is that sharp, it won't be a problem. I routinely use my macro lenses for portrait work. What I would be more concerned about is the focal length; 75mm is just starting to get into what is considered "ideal" portrait length. It will be fine for group shots, but maybe not ideal for a bridal portrait.

Are you thinking FF or Crop Frame?

Doesn't matter; focal length is focal length. The only difference that sensor size makes is with respect to the field of view.

 

[Braineack]

yeah, but you wont be standing the same place DX vs FX to frame a similar shot...

I nicely framed headshot on an FX, would be a cropped in face shot on a DX...

but with that said, you still want a longer lens on DX. The compression and angle of view just isn't there.

 

[Derrel]

It ought to work just fine, Jenny. You'll have some focal length flexibility, which can be VERY handy when doing portraits. Just do not stand overly close to a portrait subject, or you will tend to see distortion on parts of the body that are closest to the lens. At short distances, the nose will tend to appear a little bit larger than it should. Extended hands will appear a bit bigger than they should. The closer shoulder will loom large, while the farther shoulder will appear smallish...this is a "perspective" problem, and to avoid it, you want to shoot from, at least, 7 feet distant.

You CAN however, use this to advantage, for example, on a seated portrait of a woman let'; say, wearing shorts...you can have her angled off to the side slightly, legs extending a bit toward the camera, and with her legs off toward the side of the frame, you can use this perspective distortion to make the legs look longer!! It is done a LOT in magazine photos of actresses. With just a subtle forward but angled placement of the legs, and a shortish focal length, say 28 to 45mm, and the camera fairly close, the legs of a subject can be made to appear longer.

 

[camerateur]

It's not a macro lens.

What it has is macro on the box because marketing put it there to help drive sales; on most zoom lenses with "macro" in the title the it means that it can do close focusing. This means at best a ratio of 0.5:1 magnification which is half what a real macro lens get to at 1:1. That means you can get a full flower in the frame, but you won't be getting a fly in the frame fully.

It might also have a focus limiter switch for close and further off distances, but won't will have a normal focus wheel control for its normal focusing distances (dedicated macro lenses typically have a more crude control where small turns on the focus wheel make big changes in the focus position for further off subjects, making them a touch more tricky to fine tune focus by hand).

As for sharpness many of the best portrait lenses are very very sharp - you can always soften sharp details easily - you can't do the reverse so easily.

I see! This makes a lot of sense, seeing as how it was producing good portraits that I could see, however, reading about the macro aspect online scared me into thinking there is something technically wrong with the lens that I could not see!
Thanks for the info!!

 

[camerateur]

^^ Spot on! ^^ As Over mentioned, you can always soften, but sharpening comes at a cost. Even if the lens is that sharp, it won't be a problem. I routinely use my macro lenses for portrait work. What I would be more concerned about is the focal length; 75mm is just starting to get into what is considered "ideal" portrait length. It will be fine for group shots, but maybe not ideal for a bridal portrait.

Thank you!
I was thinking similarly! There was a Tokina 50mm-135mm 2.8 lens that I was looking into as well.
I'm kind of thinking I should have gone that route and purchased a wide zoom later on, however I bought this since it covered a general middle focal range.
(I use the Nikon D7000, so DX, for what it's worth)

 

[Derrel]

^^ Spot on! ^^ As Over mentioned, you can always soften, but sharpening comes at a cost. Even if the lens is that sharp, it won't be a problem. I routinely use my macro lenses for portrait work. What I would be more concerned about is the focal length; 75mm is just starting to get into what is considered "ideal" portrait length. It will be fine for group shots, but maybe not ideal for a bridal portrait.

Thank you!
I was thinking similarly! There was a Tokina 50mm-135mm 2.8 lens that I was looking into as well.
I'm kind of thinking I should have gone that route and purchased a wide zoom later on, however I bought this since it covered a general middle focal range.
(I use the Nikon D7000, so DX, for what it's worth)

I have an older, manual focus Nikon 50-135mm f/3.5 zoom that uses 62mm filters and accessories. I LIKE IT!!! Having that 50mm bottom end, instead of a 70mm, or 80mm setting really adds a tremendous amount of usefulness in a lot of shooting situations. For use on an APS-C body, I always like my 50-135, especially when I was in a place where I could not easily "step back", like say at a 4th of July parade, or at an event where I had to STAY in one place, or at one distance. I have a 70-200, but the 50-135 was actually more useful as a walkabout/event lens. I know there's a lot of tradition involved in the 70-200 marketing, but yeah, the 50-135mm range is very useful. With HIGH-resolution digital, like a D7100, you can crop a 135mm frame, but you can never get the wider view of a 50mm lens with a 70mm--unless you can move wayyyyy back. So, I totally get the 50-135mm zoom concept: I actually OWN one, albeit an older, manual focus one.

 

[camerateur]

^^ Spot on! ^^ As Over mentioned, you can always soften, but sharpening comes at a cost. Even if the lens is that sharp, it won't be a problem. I routinely use my macro lenses for portrait work. What I would be more concerned about is the focal length; 75mm is just starting to get into what is considered "ideal" portrait length. It will be fine for group shots, but maybe not ideal for a bridal portrait.

Thank you!
I was thinking similarly! There was a Tokina 50mm-135mm 2.8 lens that I was looking into as well.
I'm kind of thinking I should have gone that route and purchased a wide zoom later on, however I bought this since it covered a general middle focal range.
(I use the Nikon D7000, so DX, for what it's worth)

I have an older, manual focus Nikon 50-135mm f/3.5 zoom that uses 62mm filters and accessories. I LIKE IT!!! Having that 50mm bottom end, instead of a 70mm, or 80mm setting really adds a tremendous amount of usefulness in a lot of shooting situations. For use on an APS-C body, I always like my 50-135, especially when I was in a place where I could not easily "step back", like say at a 4th of July parade, or at an event where I had to STAY in one place, or at one distance. I have a 70-200, but the 50-135 was actually more useful as a walkabout/event lens. I know there's a lot of tradition involved in the 70-200 marketing, but yeah, the 50-135mm range is very useful. With HIGH-resolution digital, like a D7100, you can crop a 135mm frame, but you can never get the wider view of a 50mm lens with a 70mm--unless you can move wayyyyy back. So, I totally get the 50-135mm zoom concept: I actually OWN one, albeit an older, manual focus one.

Thanks so much for the information!
I definitely saw the potential when I was looking into the lens, good to know it is up to your standards