Portraits

[ash]

Re: Portraits

I don't expect anyone to believe me, what do I no?
Patrick Ive just done a random search on google and picked 3 links that came up on the first page, I put in 'best nikon lens for portraits'

http://www.digital-slr-guide.com/best-portrait-lens.html

http://askville.amazon.com/lens-Nikon-portrait-photography/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=1074667

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-best.htm

[Patrick]

Re: Portraits

I don't expect anyone to believe me, what do I no?
Patrick Ive just done a random search on google and picked 3 links that came up on the first page, I put in 'best nikon lens for portraits'

http://www.digital-slr-guide.com/best-portrait-lens.html

http://askville.amazon.com/lens-Nikon-portrait-photography/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=1074667

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-best.htm

Ok Ash you believe what you want, that's up to you, but advising someone to spend hard earned cash on a lens already covered by one he already owns plus the fact of the extra convenience of the short zoom I feel to be poor advice.
Stephen has more years experience at photography than you are old and earns a full time living from photography. Ian has been round the block once or twice. I have been making portraits for over 40 years, so what do we know?
A lens of around the 100mm area has a flattering flattening affect, 200mm flattens too much, 50mm on close-ups can distorts features, fine for half figure and full length.
If a fixed focal length lens is required I would suggest the 90mm Ian talked about or a 105 Macro it makes a stunning portrait lens.

My best advise would be stick with the 24-105 and learn to use it properly then consider what would be a better alternative.

Patrick

[TheBull1875]

Re: Portraits

Well I certainly didn't want an argument to start :-)
What it shows is that there are diverse views on what is good and what is better. To me it doesn't mean one is better than the other, merely that people have preferences in life for different things due to their experiences. Money thankfully is not a problem I have in life but will stick with the zoom at the minute and see what I can do.

Thanks all, but please don't argue.

[Stephen]

Re: Portraits

Well I certainly didn't want an argument to start :-)
What it shows is that there are diverse views on what is good and what is better. To me it doesn't mean one is better than the other, merely that people have preferences in life for different things due to their experiences. Money thankfully is not a problem I have in life but will stick with the zoom at the minute and see what I can do.

Thanks all, but please don't argue.

I often think there is not enough on this forum. I prefer to think of it as healthy discussion, where individuals can express their opinions with passion without offence and falling out. I think that is what's happening here and I personally welcome more of it

[Ian]

Re: Portraits

Nobody is arguing - it's called 'debate'

I certainly agree that a 50mm standard lens, particularly when used with a cropped sensor camera, can be a very cost-effective lens for limited depth of field work, including portraits. Last year I acquired a 50mm, f/1.4 lens that must have been 25 years old at least for use on my Olympus gear (which conveniently makes it a 100mm equivalent lens), and here's a sample (more of a candid than a portrait, it has to be said! )



But the advice here that you can use a standard zoom lens, which you may already have, is perfectly sound. The deficiencies in cheap standard kit zooms these days is more to do with edge of the frame performance and limited options for really low depth of field, but you can still produce some cracking portraits with a kit zoom.

And my advice to anyone looking in; don't be cautious, register (if you aren't already), log in and join in the discussion!

Ian

[Patrick]

Re: Portraits

Well I certainly didn't want an argument to start :-)
What it shows is that there are diverse views on what is good and what is better. To me it doesn't mean one is better than the other, merely that people have preferences in life for different things due to their experiences. Money thankfully is not a problem I have in life but will stick with the zoom at the minute and see what I can do.

Thanks all, but please don't argue.

I agree with Stephen no argument just a different point of view, on this I disagree to some extent with Ash, but I do see the value of his suggestion up to a point. I just feel you should get more experience taking portraits before making the move. If money permits and you are using the 50mm area of the zoom a lot then fine invest in a good example your style is emerging and it will be the tool for the job. If not put the money to a better quality zoom than the kit lens but the same sort of range.

Patrick

[ash]

Re: Portraits

Stephen has more years experience at photography than you are old and earns a full time living from photography. Ian has been round the block once or twice. I have been making portraits for over 40 years, so what do we know?
Patrick

Blimey you old gits! I thought i was old

For the record I was not saying any of the advice was wrong, or any of the lenses not suitable.

But you have to except opinions other than your own.
Otherwise you will put people off posting if they think they are going to have hassle posting their views.

And my input into the thread was the fact that the 50mm 1.8 is the best nikon portrait lens bar none for the money!

I agree that disagreements lead to interesting discussions sometimes but you still have to accept both sides and respect that, and not go off on some offensive rant about how long you have been taking pictures and drag other forum members into it, thats just not nice.

Lets keep it professional
Ash.