Portrait Lens for K10D

[michal russell]

<p>I have a K10D and want to know what is the best lens for doing alot of portraits. I shoot mostly inside with a strobe, maternity and babies, so i would need a fast lens but I do not want to spend alot of money as I am a bit tight right now. Looking to spend aprox $300-$350. I have the standard 18-55 and a 50-200, not sure what else I can add to my bag. Any help would be awesome</p>

<p>THANKS<br>

M</p>

[orly_andico]

<p>I'm in the same boat... lowest priced option is the FA 50/1.4 for around $200. Can't beat that price nor that aperture!</p>

<p>Another possibility is the DA 40/2.8 or the DA 70/2.4 which cost about 2X as much.</p>

<p>Or for more flexibility the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR Di which goes for around $350, or you can get it used for as low as $240.</p>

[tommyinca]

<p>Try this.</p><div></div>

[personalphotos]

<p>Orlando and Tommy have nailed the best choices. I have the FA 50/1.4 and the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR Di which gets the most use simply because the zoom is more flexible for framing the shot. My third lens for this is the DA*16-50mm/2.8 but it's 3x the price.</p>

<p>Get the Tamron, you won't regret it.</p>

[kentam]

<p>FA50<br>

My main lens for such kind of work is DA40 + DA70<br>

If the portrait planned to include some Environment then FA20 / FA28 / FA35 will be in my bag. Those lens are small very easy to carry.</p>

 

[orly_andico]

<p>The Sigma 70mm f/2.8 Macro only costs $50 more than the DA 70mm f/2.4 and it is a macro lens to boot.. additional utility for chasing bugs around.</p>

[jtk]

<p>Why do you need a fast lens with strobe? Are you after ultra-short depth of field? Why? Maybe light control would be more to the point?<br />Since your lenses surely give adequate sharpness and focal lengths, maybe your money would be better spent on better light control: collapsable reflector, off-axis flash bracket, or on-strobe diffusers? <a href="http://www.strobist.com">www.strobist.com</a> is a better resource...I've never seen anybody mention proper lighting on Pentax Forum. If you're not limited to running and gunning a light stand with off-camera strobe and umbrella would be far better than an on-camera strobe...see that strobist site for thousands of examples.<br>

An argument for the 70 2.4 vs Sigma is that it's tiny and far sharper, not to mention infinitely-better constructed than any non-Pentax. You're not photographing bugs, but the 70 focuses very closely.</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>If you're going to use a strobe, then the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 is my suggestion as it can deliver environmental portraits of the mums+babies with the wide end, and close up shots of the babies themselves at the long end.</p>

<p>I recently shot a friend's 4-day old baby with the FA 50mm f/1.4 and due to the babies size (they're small, you know?) it was too long if I just wanted the baby's head, but perfect if I wanted a full-body shot. I wasn't using strobes, though, otherwise I would have preferred the versatility of my Tammy 28-75mm.</p>

[stephen_van_egmond1]

<p>Since you're shooting with strobes, aperture is not really an issue unless you really care about depth of field... but that's a pretty unusual portrature style.</p>

<p>Any of the FA50 lenses will be fine. I have a f1.7 and it's great, and cheap. The suggestions for 70mm to me sound like they're too long, but may be appropriate for just babies.</p>

<p>My suggestion, get a cheaper prime, manual focus even, because you'll be shooting at F8 anyway any slight focus errors won't matter. Then spend more money on lighting.</p>

[trw]

<p>I find the 50mm a little short for babies. The 70mm is probably a better length for babies and adult headshots; I have yet to try it. I have been using the Tamron 90mm macro, but I find the working distances a bit far. The front element is recessed so far that you need minimal flagging (keep in mind though that the lens hood is designed for 35mm coverage). The 50 <i>is</i> a good choice for full-body and 3/4 shots of adults.</p>

<p> </p>

[rose_duclos]

<p>I'm going to make a different suggestion - instead of getting the 50f1.4 - look for the macro 50 f.2.8. <br>

The thing I realized in my f.1.4 version is that the DoF is so thin wide open, that it's really next to useless unless you're aiming at a peice of paper (indoors). I used it on one of my friends' neices and got her bangs, but her eyes were out of focus.</p>

<p>The macro 50 wide open is supposed be be fantastic, and it'll double for getting outside and doing close-up flower shots. :) Nothing wrong with a dual purpose lens, yes? :)</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I'm thinking money is probably better spent on lighting. You may find as others have also suggested that a good designed-for-film zoom (Tamron 28-75/2.8 is a good example) can be handy because it allows you to handle both waist-up shots and tighter head-shots (and small babies even) with one lens. If you improve your lighting you'll be able to shoot with adequate shutter speeds stopped down--f/8 is a great equalizer where most lenses are very good.</p>

[orly_andico]

<p>Actually the Tammy 28-75 (according to Photozone) already exceeds 2000 on the MTF50 when at f/4, so it's actually not necessary to stop all the way down to f/8.</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Michal, a fast lens has a few atributes. First, they are generally (but not always) the better lenses. Most consumer grade lenses are slower and consumer zooms are variable aperture (something I hate especially when shooting flash in manual).<br /> Second you have so much more control of the aperture and DOF. Lots of artistically shot portraits are done nearly wide open to limit the DOF to the face area only. Shooting wide open can also soften a portrait and create a better shot as a result. Sometimes the typical portrait lenses suggested are too sharp and show every skin blemish the person has.</p>

<p>As for using a macro lens, I have some reservations about that. I have the Sigma EX 105mm f2.8 and the Pentax FA 50mm f2.8. Both are way too sharp for this type of work and slower to focus. Macros have a very long focus 'throw' and even with a limiter (both mine do), they focus slower. When shooting groups or kids, you need the faster focus much of the time.</p>

<p>I still say the Tamron 28-75mm is the best lens for this type of work. A near perfect focal range on APS-C (42-112mm effective FL). Changing lenses during a portrait session is a real PITA. you need to be focused and working with the client to get them comfortable and doing what you need to get the right shots. Fiddling with gear doesn't aid this. Every Pro I've either worked with or talked to in my market shoots a zoom in various ranges of 16-90mm such as the Nikkor 24-70mm f2.8 or the Canon L24-70mm f2.8 and other similar lenses. Few use primes simply because the zooms have the quality and flexiblity to work effortlessly all day without changing gear.</p>

<p>When I want to shoot with my FA50mm, I actually have it on a second body. Just switching between 2 cameras that are set up the same way. All the strobes are on wireless triggers (light stands and either softboxes or umbrellas) and switching bodies is fast and easy.</p>

<p> </p>

[rogerdaltx]

<p>I'm going to STRONLY chime in for the Tamron 28-75mm /2.8 too. At your price point it's the best option. It's Sigma counter part is probably good too but I have not used it. The FA 50 is a good lens and a GREAT value, but for babies in particular you'll want something longer. For mother baby in a hospital setting you'll want wider. For keeping your subjects interest particularly young children a zoom makes life easier than primes to get the moment. <br /> <br /> Portraits are the majority of my photography these days. I own about 20 Pentax lenses (long store and I'm weeding them down) including seven limited's and the two DA* zooms; exceptional glass in any system. However I shoot about 75% of all my portrait work with the Tamron 28-75mm which is considerably less expensive than any of the better Pentax lenses. It's range on APSC perfectly covers the standard portrait range. It's very sharp (you'll end up softening portraits for the 40+ crowd). It's light weight, balances well. It's constant aperture makes working with off camera flash easier. It's an amazing value and out of the twenty or so lenses I own my most used. <br /> <br /> For one or two adults in a formal portrait I'll also use the FA 31mm limited and FA77mm limited. There rendering has a special quality about them, but both are out of your price range and the zoom will be more useful.<br /> <br /> Go with the Tamron and learn to get your flash off camera on a stand with a shoot through umbrella. The lighting will make more a difference than anything else in portraiture.</p>

[orly_andico]

<p>How about this.... I have a 16-45/4 and a 100mm.</p>

<p>I want to take better photographs (in general). Where is my $200 best spent? an FA 50/1.4? stretch a bit and get the DA 40/2.8? a Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR Di? or a Sigma EF 530 DG ST flash?</p>

[my stuff]

<p>Being that you have two zooms, I would suggest the Pentax 50mm f1.4lens which would be a 75mm on the K10D. Perfect for portraits.</p>

[michal russell]

<p>Thank you everyone for your help. I really appreciate it! <br>

Michal</p>

[chetan_dighe]

<p>Try primes - 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 105/2.8, 135/2.5 or 2.8 or 3.5<br>

With K10D, the focal length will be 1.6 times the full frame focal length. This means 50, 85 and 105 will be ideal. Make sure whatever lens you use, it is fast. Wide open aperture will give you best background blurs. Besides, also look for more number of aperture blades. That will again make the aperture round, and background blur smooth.<br>

For budget concerns, look for screw mount manual lenses. They are great value for money.<br>

Cheers.</p>