Zoom for portraits with N80

I just purchased a N80 and a 50mm f/1.8. My budget only allows me to

purchase one zoom so I would like versatility, but more than

anything else I want to take great family photos at our get

togethers and of my baby. My main interests are photographing candid

shots of people-especially my child and documenting family camping

trips in the mountains with all of the scenery along the way. I am

just starting out with my SLR and need something affordable and

versatile because it may be awhile before I can afford another

purchase for my hobby. I know the 50mm will work nicely for many

shots, but if I am interested in learning to do portrait type photos

a different lens is needed, right? I have read a few places on this

forum that an 80-120mm zoom may be beneficial? I realize I may

require more than one type of zoom to meet my goal of portraits,

candid shots, and family trip photos. thanks everyone for any advice.

I have the 28-105 zoom with "macro" ability. I think it is 3.5-4.6 This lens covers most of my photography needs. The 28 covers most wide angle needs and the 80-105 range is good for portraits. It's main shortfall is it is a little on the slow side. But your 50/1.8 can compensate for that.

If you want shallow DOF the only zoom for portraits and the Nikon N80 (current product) is the AF 80~200/2.8D ED or AF-S 70~200/2.8G ED-IF VR. Too big and intimidating for many sitters and expensive to very expensive. If you have a healthy budget I�m sure the AF 105/2.0D DC is a fine lens or the AF 85/1.4D. For a more normal budget the AF 85/1.8D. Always the heretic I recommend a 105/2.5 AI or AIS with a nice incident/flash meter. If you are serious about portraits you�ll want one anyway.

 

I don�t recommend the AF 105/2.8D Micro unless you don�t mind buying a B+W Zeiss Softar 1, today�s price $163.75 (USD) at B&H. The lens is just 579.95 after rebate.

 

I know you asked for zooms but slow lenses don�t cut it as portrait lenses. If you don�t care if the background intrudes buy whatever slow zoom is in fashion this winter. Otherwise consider the AF 85/1.8D or the 105/2.5 AI or AIS.

 

Regards,

 

Dave.

I think we all have a tendency to want to cover a lot of focal lengths, and a zoom is certainly the most affordable way to do this. But you do pay a price in terms of maximum aperture. However, do you really need a wide range of focal lengths? For the price of a so-so consumer zoom, you can get a superb and fast 85mm 1.8D - great for portraits and candids, and many other things too.

If you wanted to take mid telephoto but primarily portrait shots I'd totally recommend the AF 85mm f/1.8, however even though I totally adore this lense I find it rather tricky to use in most 'general' situations.

If you have to go for a zoom and also if cost is a factor, why not try the AF-S 24 to 85mm, that way you'll get your portrait side as well as a wide angle side for a pretty reasonable price.

Pierre gave you the best response regarding buying a "zoom" versus a prime. Several posters have recommended the 85mm, and that is a good option, but that is pretty close to the 50mm, and you might want to take a look for something else. I think a great 2-lens kit is the 85mm plus either a 24, 28, or 35mm

something else = longer

Well, you said ZOOM so I say the 28-105 3.5-4.5 nikkor is your best bet. You get a nice range for portrait, you get a pretty good macro capability and you get a great travel lens.

If price is of concern try the 28-105, I love mine and use the "macro" feature more

than I thought also even though its not a zoom 85 1.8 is a great portrait lens

 

if you can spend more I shot for a couple days with my friends 24-120 VR and think

its a great lens, I sure I will end up with one somehow but my number one pick would

be for the 80-200 2.8 the price for the used ones has gotten pretty good! under

$650-700 for the 2 touch model

 

I didnt want to go waisting to much time with each lens since Im sure they all have

been covered very well on this site, but if not try www.nikonians.org this site is by far

the best resorce for Nikon gear and general photography on the web

 

 

good luck

Ray

If you must have a zoom, the 28-105 it is!

 

If you can do without a zoom, the 85mm Nikkors are a great choice, as others suggest above.

If I read correctly Amanda wants a lens to take pictures at family gatherings and for shooting candid shots of people, especially children.

 

I believe a zoom lens will fill the bill for convenience and flexibility and, especially, for taking candid shots in a party as it zooms in and out as one frames and composes in any which way without being conspicuous. I remember taking the most interesting variety of shots in a party with a Tamron 28-300mm on an N80. A 28-300mm is a do-it-all extreme. Other practial choice might be the Nikkor 24-120mmVR or the Tamron SP 24-135mm, or the 28-105mm that someone has suggested above.

"I know you asked for zooms but slow lenses don�t cut it as portrait lenses."

 

Amen. Of all of the uses that a zoom may offer, and situations where it may work,

portraits are not it's strong suit. Also, you don't have to be in a "studio setting" to get

a nice portrait shot, it can be taken anywhere. You don't have to plan for it, but you

do need to be prepared for it. Look, I like fast zooms as much as anyone, but there's

only so much that you can expect from any one lens. That's why there are cameras

that allow interchangeable lenses. The well known portrait lenses got that recognition

because of the job that they do so well. If you are just wanting pictures of people,

then a zoom will serve your purpose.

28-105 or 24-85. I shoot most of my portraits with my 50 1.8 and I have been very happy with it. I can get a close headshot as well as a body shot and with less distortion. The 28-105 has less distortion than the 24-85, but the 24-85 is more sharper. Either I think is the one you need. I also have the 70-300 4-5.6ED lens but I rarely use it now. If you want the background to be out of focus with an aperture of at least 4, try moving the subject more towards you and away from the background.

I don't know what your overall goal is- money or 1 great lens. if you're kinda hooped on the $ side then i'd have to say that getting the 28-100mm AND 70-300mm will drop you around the same price or less than the 28-105mm. somebody correct me if i'm wrong. these lenses aren't the best but i have no complaints about the 28-100mm yet. I just started out with my f80 too and i think the 28-100 covers all my versitility... so far