vilaysak_phichit Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 I have Nikon D200 Body, I would like to select good lens for D200 in my wedding studio which it not so expensive. Could anyone tell me which lenses is the better one for wedding studio? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot1 Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 Depends what you consider not so expensive. What is your budget? What type of shots are you looking to take. 17-55 and 70-200 are your best choices for image quality. If those are out of your reach, 18-55 or 18-70mm or 18-135mm lenses will all give you excellent results at a much lower cost provided you have proper lighting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanjo_viagran Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 why zoom..!! don't know how big is your studio but I'll get a Nikon 85mm 1.8D or 1.4D (depending on budget) those lenses will give you a much better result even than the 17-55 or 70-200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ed_farmer Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 Vilaysak, <p><p> I am going to assume that you are not talking about "studio" photography, but wedding photography in the field. I have been using the Sigma 18-125 lens on my D200 since I bought both last year. I believe that the particular lens that I am using has been discountinued, but there is a replacement. <p><p> Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonybeach Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 "don't know how big is your studio but I'll get a Nikon 85mm 1.8D or 1.4D (depending on budget) those lenses will give you a much better result even than the 17-55 or 70-200." Not really, but perhaps you are referring to your experience and individual preferences: http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_70200_28vr/index.htm http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_85_18/index.htm What I would find more appealing about the 85/1.8 would be its size, weight, and price; the 70-200/2.8 VR is a little stand-offish with its 1.5 meter minimum focusing distance and pretty expensive (but it's a bargain if you were to replace it with 3 or 4 primes). The 17-55/2.8 has the nicest bokeh I have seen at 50mm (all the primes look harsh by comparison). A more affordable option would be the Tamron 17-50/2.8 which got a reasonably positive review here: http://www.bythom.com/1750lens.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_skomial Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 In about one week time span there was a discussion of Nikkor 85/1.4 and 85/1.8 lenses. I only have the 1.4 that is FAR superior to my 70-200/VR, but was surprised by a reviewer who stated that the 85/1.8 bokeh made him "vomit". Actually the word is quite popular in describing lenses quality on the web. So, one needs to use own vocabulary, and form own opinion as well. I would vote for Juanjo Viagran opinion, but if that makes you vomit, go and see your doctor...do not blame Nikon for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_keane2 Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 Another affirmative for the 85 f1.8, and also the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartyfisher Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 Also consider the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 great bokeh and quality. the focal range is just about perfect for a small studio and for portraiture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_fasano Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 I use a Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VR, which isn't expensive if you didn't find one of your D200 bodies expensive. Overall, it's a superb lens. I also use a Sigma 18-50 2.8 EX D, which is sturdy and sharp--definitely a value. And I have an assortment of fast primes for exceptionally dark locales where, for whatever reason, flash is not an option: a 50 1.4 and an 85 1.8--both Nikkors--and a 28 1.8 Sigma. I reach for the Nikkor 50 mm early and often; the Sigma I could live without. The 50 mm Nikkor and the Sigma are cheap, though somewhat more limited in their applicability, while the 85 mm Nikkor is somewhere in the neighborhood of $400 US, I believe. Overall, a classic lens. I've never run into a Nikonian who owned one and didn't love it. It's kind of loud, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_fasano Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 I almost forgot: if you're shooting weddings, having a Nikkor 60mm macro is indispensable for getting photos of details the bride will cherish but wouldn't buy as a print--cake toppers, balloons, cards, place holders, etc. don't forget a tripod and an MC-30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gy Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 Maybe you can also consider the Sigma 50-150 f2.8.. It is said to be very sharp and gets good reviews between 50-100 range ( the most usefull ranges for what u will use for I guess ) and its small & light compared to 70-200 ( more comfortable to shoot without tripod ) and much cheaper.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vilaysak_phichit Posted November 14, 2007 Author Share Posted November 14, 2007 Thanks to all response. Your recommandation is very importance for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now