Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 5:21 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Portrait/walkaround Lens
PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 4:02 am 
It seems that 35mm or 50mm would be the choice, but there are few of those. Should I stay with Nikon or look towards Sigma/Tamron, which are more expensive. I use D80(Nikon has it for a couple of weeks for the censor service). Ideally I would want a lens that can also do decent macro shots without getting way too close to the object(don't wanna scare a butterfly before picture is taken) But that would, probably mean a 300 mm macro - not very good for the portrait.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 5:40 am 
Can't go wrong with the Nikkor 50mm 1.8. Dirt cheap, fast, and sharp. Not much gets better than that.

Can also look at getting the 85mm 1.8 instead if you want to do the butterfly thing, but on a D80 it becomes more of a short tele lens, so it might not be so great as a walkaround.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 6:54 am 
Perhaps the Micro-Nikkor AF-S 105mm f/2.8 VR can cover your macro/portrait needs.
For the walkaround, then the AF 35mm f/2D or the AF-S 35mm f/1.8G DX ought to suit you well.

One possible option; best of both worlds, albeit with two lenses. Not the cheapest, but ought to stick around in your bag for awhile if you use them a lot.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:12 am 
Two cents on the 50mm 1.8: I absolutely love this lens, it's exactly as Gnat says, super sharp and super cheap. The only downside is the DX crop factor which makes it a little tight as a walkaround lens (at least for my liking). I'd suggest you try it out, but the 35mm would be a more versatile lens imho, although you would lose the macro abilities of course. I don't do much macro, but the 50mm doesn't focus that close though, so for macro it might not do you that much good either... Dojobear's suggestion seems to be the best, although the most expensive as well.

If you want to go with something cheaper, how about the 35mm and a zoom tele? Of course, image quality can't compete with a prime but pure technical image quality is often overrated anyway. (think composition, idea, light etc etc)

Happy hunting
Bruno


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:39 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7965
Location: Germany
An alternative would be the Sigma AF 24-70mm 2.8 EX DG Asp Macro.
It goes down to 1:3.8 magnification which is pretty good for general purpose.
Image quality is surprisingly good as you can see from this review. It is flexible, has a large constant aperture for a zoom and at 70mm on a DX body is a good portrait lens.

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:20 pm 
I was thinking about Tamron SP 28-75mm f/2.8
any feedback on that lens?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:35 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7965
Location: Germany
See a review of the Tammy here. It is very good at DX/APS-C bodies.
Beware: A test of said lens on a full-frame Canon 5DII revealed that "the borders and more so the extreme corners leave something to be desired at f/2.8"

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 12:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:08 pm
Posts: 1626
Location: New York, US
I think that 50mm on a cropped sensor is too tight for walk around. I'd get the 35mm 1.8 AF-S. That's the next lens on my list as far as I can see.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 4:41 pm 
I have both of these lenses and most say that for what you are looking to do I would get both of them. The 50mm is my main portrait lens on the D60, and at only 150 bucks you can't go wrong. The 35mm Is the better walk around lens as on a crop frame body it is effectively a 52mm lens(i Think) but its super sharp and just a great lens. Getting both of these lenses will cost you about 500 dollars but will give you great results every time.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 8:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:08 pm
Posts: 1626
Location: New York, US
Yeah I agree with the above post. I'm going to be getting the 35mm 1.8 as my next lens. First I want a D90 though.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group