Thread: Need a Lens Recommendation

the Tamron isn't working well for me - having trouble getting crisp images from it.

I'm going to my Red Leaf Workshop next week and I'm feeling a little intimidated. I have a 24mm Nikkor, but it's a little too wide angled for portraits. I can't afford the 17-55 or 24-70.

I have a manual focus 50mm, and the 85mm -

I'm leaning towards the 35mm 2.0? Confused on the D vs G, because the new G is cheaper than the D. Should I forgo that and just pick up the 50 1.4 instead? Is it redundant to have a 50 and an 85?

Sorry- I'm really stressing about having the right equipment for next week!

Portraiture should really be done at about 100mm...so I'm a bit confused. Are you looking for a portrait lens or a wide angle?

I think a good lens suite would include:

200mm range
85 (for crop sensor) or 100mm range for portraits
20-70 wide angle range - for travel and everyday
a macro

I don't know about the lens. If it were me I would go with the 50 1.4 just because it is such a versatile focal length. But you know much better than I do.

I just wanted to say that I looked up the workshop and it looks fantastic! Have a great time and come and tell us all about it!

I have the new 50mm 1.4 (the AF-S G) and I LOVE IT! Seriously there is no comparison to my old 50 1.8. It has 9 blades so the bokeh is smooth and creamy, and it's ridiculously sharp.

I also have the 17-55 2.8, which I also adore. My only two lenses, but those are the absolute best I could afford. I bought my 17-55 used and saved about $400--might be an option?

For portraits I'd also recommend Nikon's 85mm. People LOVE the 1.8, and worship the 1.4 (and they better for that price tag, LOL!). One of those two will be my next lens.

HTH!

I want a wide angle that won't distort people's features if I have to shoot in a tight space. My 24mm is doing that and I'm ending up with fun big foreheads/legs etc.

I wish I could afford the Nikkor 17-55 or 24-70, but I spent pretty much my lifesavings for this workshop, and I still have to pick up 30 more GB of memory, so I need something that will work in a pinch

I love my 85mm, it just won't work in those tight situations!

I won't have time to find a used one because there is nothing where I live, and we won't make it to Victoria until right before the meet and greet on Monday -

Duh you already have the 85, sorry!!!

Katie has the 35 f/2.0 and I think she was quite happy with it. I'm not sure what benefits there are to that over the 1.8 though...

I have nothing constructive to add. Just wanted to say that I love your new siggy pic!

I guess I do have a question. I am confused about the statement, "Portraiture should be done at about 100mm." Can someone clarify this? Or direct me to a reference and I'll read for myself?

In that case, I suggest the 50mm for full frame as fast as you can get....or the 35mm for a crop sensor.

I've read the portait lens thing several places, but most notably in Scott Kelby's Digital Photography book....Volume 1 I think.

Found a video that explains this concept REALLY well. Highly recommend watching this.
http://www.bukisa.com/videos/9348_ho...it-photography

This article is pretty good too and the examples aren't quite as exaggerated as the one in the video. I especially like the example photos under the "perspective" heading.
http://www.dolcepics.com/articles/le...-vs-telephoto/

So I read and watched both of those. I get the distortion argument and angle of view. I knew that stuff already but I still don't get why 100mm. I mean there would be less distortion at 50mm and the background field of view is a photographers decision and really an artistic decision and could be useful either way. So I am not seeing the reason that 100 mm should be used nearly always in portraiture.