Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Portrait lens suggestion?


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1
brad10281

brad10281

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMichigan
I'll be taking a stab at senior portraits for my daughter this year. I have most of the required equipment but I'll be renting the lenses. I'm really intrigued by the Sigma 50-100 Art lens. I currently have a Sigma 18-50 2.8 but it's not giving me the results I want. I've shot with the Nikon 50mm 1.8 in the past, which worked out great, but I don't have that lens anymore. I'm considering renting the 50mm & 85mm, but would the Sigma work just as well while covering a broader range? I'm using a dx body.

Looking for thoughts on using the Sigma instead of the primes.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
  • Ron likes this

#2
Ron

Ron

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,383 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMagic City

The Sigma 50-100 Art lens may be your best choice assuming you're cool with the price. On DX it works out to a 75-150mm lens which covers the traditional portrait range. It is also fast (f/1.8) so you'll easily be able to throw the background out of focus. I don't personally own this lens so I can only judge it's image quality by what I've seen others do and from the reviews I've run across. And, they have been mostly excellent. 

 

I personally use either my AFS Nikkor 70-300mmVR or AFS 85mm f/1.8 for portraits but then, I'm cheap. :D

 

As far is using primes rather than zooms, for me at least (because I'm getting old), comes down to size and weight. The 85mm that I use weighs a whole lot less than the 70-300. The down side is that you have to do all your zooming with your feet. If you're in a tight spot that may not be practical. The Sigma 50-100 looks even larger than my 70-300 so it won't go unnoticed. That's another possible drawback.

 

Assuming you're OK with the price, size, and weight, I think I'd go with the Sigma.

 

--Ron



#3
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,708 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

The 50-100 will probably work well for the head-and-shoulders shots. For full-body and environmental portraits on DX, I wouldn't like to be without a fast 35 or even a fast 24.

 

Why doesn't the 18-50 give you the results you want?



#4
brad10281

brad10281

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMichigan
Thanks for your input Ron. Keep in mind I'll be renting the lenses. I figured using a single zoom would keep it simple as I wouldn't need to switch out lenses. Oddly enough, every thing I see online shows photographers mostly using a 70-200mm on an FX camera...so I figured the 50-100mm would get me close to that but yet have a wider aperture. I think I'm leaning toward the Sigma at this point.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk


Why doesn't the 18-50 give you the results you want?


Just comparing to some shots I took with the 50mm 1.8 (years ago), I think the 50mm just looks a lot better. I haven't done any real tests with 18-50mm yet so I don't have a real comparison quite yet. I'm thinking the 18-50mm and the 50-100mm should work well for what I need. Would love to try the 85mm though.

I'm curious to know if anyone thinks I need something longer than 100mm.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

#5
fallout666

fallout666

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 376 posts
  • Country Flag
  • Locationcfl area of space coast

also 50mm will be about 75mm since all or most 50mm are full frame lenses. that probably why does not like the 18-50. since not giving him the 75mm reach he use to. 



#6
brad10281

brad10281

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMichigan

also 50mm will be about 75mm since all or most 50mm are full frame lenses. that probably why does not like the 18-50. since not giving him the 75mm reach he use to.

Ok, now I'm confused. I've researched this online and came to the conclusion that there is ALWAYS a crop factor when using an APS-C sized sensor, whether the lens is made for DX or full frame. Can anyone clarify this? I don't have an FF lens to test with.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

#7
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,708 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

Focal length is a physical property of a lens. It does not change with the sensor size. There are some compacts that are only marked with the FX equivalent focal lengths, but for ILCs, the focal lengths are not recalculated as it would be very frustrating when mixing DX and FX lenses on the same camera.

The difference between a DX and an FX lens is the image circle. The DX lens projects a smaller image circle to keep the mass and size down. This is possible because of the smaller sensor size.



#8
brad10281

brad10281

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMichigan
I thought I'd post an update on this topic. I ended up purchasing a Nikkor 50mm 1.8 which is an FX lens and it gives roughly the same view as my Sigma (slight difference). So, to answer my own question, it doesn't seem to matter if it's a DX or FX lens, the focal length remains the same.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk