What would you use?

[12sndsgood]

cloudwalker, I think Derrels point was use the zoom lens she allready has.

And I also agree to hit up your local library. I try to read thru a book every couple of weeks, some are older and more film based but the basics are the same regardless of what format your using.

 

[KmH]

The only trouble is fast, telephoto prime lenses are not what amateurs recommend to each other.

Unfortunately, the 50 mm f/1.8/1.4/1.2 gets recommended as THE portrait lens, when 85 mm, 105 mm, 135 mm, and up do a better job of making portraits.

I know having enough space to use the longer focal lengths is often an issue.

A sweet Nikon lens for doing what the OP wants to do is the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200mm f/2.0 G ED VR II Telephoto Lens 2188 B&H

 

[DiskoJoe]

The only trouble is fast, telephoto prime lenses are not what amateurs recommend to each other.

Unfortunately, the 50 mm f/1.8/1.4/1.2 gets recommended as THE portrait lens, when 85 mm, 105 mm, 135 mm, and up do a bette job of making portraits.

I know having enough space to use the longer focal lengths is often an issue.

A sweet Nikon lens for doing what the OP wants to do is the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200mm f/2.0 G ED VR II Telephoto Lens 2188 B&H

Well it would get the job done. That is for sure. Maybe it has magical powers and unicorns will come dance around when everything is perfectly in focus.

 

[Bukitimah]

I hear alot that the 85 mm is a better protrait lens (for DX camera) but at 85 mm, if you are shooting indoor or in confined spaces, you tends to encounter problems. I feel the 50 mm is better. But when you are outdoor and need that extra zoom to single out the subject, then 85 mm would be great.

The trouble is, once you move above 100 mm, shake is a big challenge. I have tried to set a higher speed of 1/250 sec or even higher. What is the recommended setting if subject is at least 15 meters away and low light condition?

 

[AMOMENT]

I really enjoy macro close ups of people/features. I love the close -ups of childrens face that fill the frame and of moments between people that are caught REALLY up close. I feel they are so dramatic and they appeal to me. I have 55-300 mm zoom lens (f-4.-5.6) and a 50mm 1.8. lens. If I get too close to the subject that it will be out of focus with my 50mm and distorted no? I could use my telephoto and get close but then I'm prob also going to have to do some cropping and the edges of the frame would be blurred. I'm thinking a wide angle lens. Is that correct? However, I know with a wide angle, you have to watch for distortion.

I want to know how you're going to do a macro of a person's face without using an 8x10 large-format camera.

I dont think she really meant macro but rather an extreme close up.

Yeah, I didn't mean an actual macro....just as in really close =)

 

[MTVision]

Yeah, I didn't mean an actual macro....just as in really close =)

Don't you have a kit lens - the 18-55mm? If you do set it to 18 and try to fill the frame with someones face and see what it looks like.

You can fill the frame with the zoom you already have. Plus a little cropping isn't bad considering your camera doesn't make normal picture sizes - like 8x10, 4x6, etc. So fill almost the whole frame and then crop it to the size you'd want to print it too.

 

[Josh66]

The only trouble is fast, telephoto prime lenses are not what amateurs recommend to each other.

Unfortunately, the 50 mm f/1.8/1.4/1.2 gets recommended as THE portrait lens, when 85 mm, 105 mm, 135 mm, and up do a bette job of making portraits.

I know having enough space to use the longer focal lengths is often an issue.

A sweet Nikon lens for doing what the OP wants to do is the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200mm f/2.0 G ED VR II Telephoto Lens 2188 B&H

Well it would get the job done. That is for sure. Maybe it has magical powers and unicorns will come dance around when everything is perfectly in focus.

I don't really get what is funny about using a 200mm lens for portraits...

 

[Josh66]

if you are shooting indoor or in confined spaces, you tends to encounter problems.

Control the environment, don't let the environment control you.

 

[KmH]

What is the recommended setting if subject is at least 15 meters away and low light condition?

It is part of the photographers job to control the light.

Control the environment, don't let the environment control you.

If there isn't enough light you do one of 2 things.

1. Put the camera away.

2. Add light.

 

[AperturePriority]

Unfortunately, the 50 mm f/1.8/1.4/1.2 gets recommended as THE portrait lens, when 85 mm, 105 mm, 135 mm, and up do a better job of making portraits.

Hello all,

I am with Keith:
For indoor portrait, the shorter lenses like 50, 55, 58, 60, or 85mm are better for portraits. But for outdoor portrait photos, long tele focal lenses work best for me. I took these portrait/close-up photos with a 300mm lens on a DX camera:

​

Tu.

 

[DiskoJoe]

I hear alot that the 85 mm is a better protrait lens (for DX camera) but at 85 mm, if you are shooting indoor or in confined spaces, you tends to encounter problems. I feel the 50 mm is better. But when you are outdoor and need that extra zoom to single out the subject, then 85 mm would be great.

The trouble is, once you move above 100 mm, shake is a big challenge. I have tried to set a higher speed of 1/250 sec or even higher. What is the recommended setting if subject is at least 15 meters away and low light condition?

50mm is better for aps-c since it will give your a 75mm equivalent. 85 mm is a traditional length for portraits on full frame because for a head and shoulders shot you will be perfectly positioned to hit the person with flash and not over expose them.

85mm on aps-c is 127mm a good length but not always ideal.

 

[DiskoJoe]

The only trouble is fast, telephoto prime lenses are not what amateurs recommend to each other.

Unfortunately, the 50 mm f/1.8/1.4/1.2 gets recommended as THE portrait lens, when 85 mm, 105 mm, 135 mm, and up do a bette job of making portraits.

I know having enough space to use the longer focal lengths is often an issue.

A sweet Nikon lens for doing what the OP wants to do is the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200mm f/2.0 G ED VR II Telephoto Lens 2188 B&H

Well it would get the job done. That is for sure. Maybe it has magical powers and unicorns will come dance around when everything is perfectly in focus.

I don't really get what is funny about using a 200mm lens for portraits...

Obviously you didnt click the link. I was not laughing at the focal length. I was laughing cause he recommended a $6000 lens to a noob.

 

[KmH]

But, she gets paid to shoot for other people, so it gives her something to aspire to, or at least investigate why I would even mention the lens.

The AF-S 200 mm f/2 I had I bought used with a bunch of other gear in a distressed (nasty, nasty, divorce - need cash RTF now) sale.

The Nikon AF-S 200 mm f/2 produces some of the creamiest, smoothest bokeh you can get.

AperturePriority needs to get those fingers on the other side of the lens, so the lens is cradled in the palm of the hand, for support and stability. I'm a left eye shooter too, but I goofy-foot on a surf board/skate board.

 

[Derrel]

But, she gets paid to shoot for other people, so it gives her something to aspire to, or at least investigate why I would even mention the lens.

The AF-S 200 mm f/2 I had I bought used with a bunch of other gear in a distressed (nasty, nasty, divorce - need cash RTF now) sale.

The Nikon AF-S 200 mm f/2 produces some of the creamiest, smoothest bokeh you can get.

AperturePriority needs to get those fingers on the other side of the lens, so the lens is cradled in the palm of the hand, for support and stability. I'm a left eye shooter too, but I goofy-foot on a surf board/skate board.

The 200mm f/2 G creates arguably the "prettiest" images of any lens on the market. Used ones are actually selling for far,far under the current new price. I saw a clean used one five months ago that sold for $3,500.

There are many lenses that will give a beautiful result on a frame-filling close-up of a person's face. Use whatever lens you have, as long as it's not a really short focal length that forces you to shoot from a close distance, which will "exaggerate" the size of objects closest to the lens, like the chin,lips, and nose. Stephen Eastwood has long maintained a nice sample of a model, photographed with lenses from 19mm wide-angle to 350mm long telephoto.

strip1.jpg

Here is the web page where the photos reside, with larger, easier-to-compare pictures shot at each focal length: Untitled Document

 

[DiskoJoe]

But, she gets paid to shoot for other people

Really now? Really? Really? Really now? Really? I must have missed that statement.