Lens for Portraiture and Street

[evan_browning]

<p>I'd agree with Ramon V and a few others here,<br>

Go for a f/2.8 zoom, 3rd party lens which is in your budget.<br>

I recently bought a Sigma 18-50 f/2.8. Retail is $419 but I found one for $370 on eBay. If you like being close to your subjects when shooting, this will work perfect for you. Plus, 50mm on your D40 is 75mm full frame, in that traditional or standard portrait range..</p>

[sd_woods]

<p>I found the poor review on amazon.co.uk, it seemed genuine enough to me.<br>

I find the kit lens useful for some things, just not great indoors. I intend to keep using it once I purchase another lens, therefore there's not really any point buying a lens with almost exactly the same focal length. I'll probably get that 85mm/1.8. Would that be suitable for portraits, and maybe at a later date, street?</p>

[Brad_]

>>> I'll probably get that 85mm/1.8. Would that be suitable for portraits, and maybe at a later date, street?

 

I have a 85/1.8 and almost never use it. Waaaaay too long for street on a crop cam; unless you like sniping from across

the street or down the block. Ditto for portraits.

[eric friedemann]

<p>SD, an 85mm lens on a DX DSLR like the D40 will give swell-looking portraits. The only drawback is that its the equivalent of 127mm on a 35mm camera, making it longish for indoor portraits. In other words, in small rooms, you may have difficulty backing up far enough to frame your subject.</p><div></div>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>there's not really any point buying a lens with almost exactly the same focal length.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>if you wanna shoot street, i'd recommend getting a wide to normal prime, then, like the 35/1.8. brad is on the money with his assessment of the 85/1.8.</p>

[j.art.photo.]

<p>Zoom? or Prime? have you considered the sigma 50mm 1.4? if 35 is not long enough i guess you either go for a longer prime or a zoom. why not keep it on the safe side with IQ and lens speed?? its a great walk around lens.. it will give you a safe working distance considering the cropp factor and is also a very good portrait lens.</p>

[sd_woods]

<p>At £330, I have not considered the Sigma.<br>

Considering Brad knows his stuff and says don't go near the 85mm, I'm really not sure what I ought to do. I would prefer a prime, I feel lazy when I just move a lens barrel instead of walking forward or backwards.</p>

[eric friedemann]

<p>SD, you're not currently doing street work, so the issue is what lens to buy for portraits. You have an 18-55mm. Go rent or borrow, say, a 55-200mm Nikkor and shoot some portraits with both lenses at a variety of focal lengths. See what focal length you like best for portraits. Once you have your ideal focal length in mind, you'll be in a better position to decide which lens to buy for portraiture.</p>

<p>There is no one right answer. There have been great portait photographers who have worked with wide, normal and telephoto lenses. </p>

[j.art.photo.]

<p>Ok then. 50mm 1.4 nikkor is also great. and mounted on your camera considering the cropp factor will become a short portrait telephoto.<br>

I also agree 85mm is a bit long for street specially on a aps-c , for street photography you need to build up your confidence at the time you approach people and 50mm gives you a confortable buffer zone . and still a great portrait lens if you decide to come closer to the subject.</p>

[matroskin]

<p>this question has been asked here not that long ago. in any case, i'll join people who recommend 50mm 1.8 or 1.4. here http://kostyanakazny.com/new_orleans/main_neworleans.htm you'll find examples of portraits on the streets with 50mm 1.8 on a cropped body in New Orleans a 1.5 years after Katrina. it's a fast lens and makes you think about composition before taking a photo.</p>

[kludge]

<p>The OP has a D40. No autofocus with the Tamron 17-50, unless Tamron added an internal motor I don't know about. If you're talking <em>classic</em> street photography and <em>classic</em> portraits, you really need two different lenses. Traditional street photos use a normal to slightly wide lens - the Nikon 35/1.8 fits the bill beautifully, and will autofocus on the D40. Traditional portraits use a fast telephoto. Nikon AF-S lenses of the right length and speed are also quite expensive. But if you're doing subject-poses kind of portraits, you might try an old AI or AIS manual-focus lens. It'll mean shooting full manual, but then you can get some really great glass for much less money (and weight).</p>

[mirceaciuca]

<p>Forget about Tamron 17-50/2.8 in street. All people say is a replace for Nikkor 17-55/2.8.... Come one! Maybe if you dont use wider lens a 28-75/2.8 will be enough. It works on 35mm too.<br>

Anyway, lets back to the rock. For street and you know that a 24 or 28 covers the wider part on 35mm. So you need a little lens, and a good one. Why not 30/1.4 Sigma, Nikkor 20/2.8 AF-D, 20/2.5 AIS, Voilenger 20/3.5 (is a good choice, but manual again). 20 will be 30mm.<br>

I use 50/1.4 and a 105/2 DC. Someone told you 105/2.5 is a good lens. Try to belive him, is right.<br>

I need me too a 20mm fx lens...I have tokina 12-24/4, but is too heavy....you need something little, <em>a invisible </em>lens for street. If you go with a 70-200/2.8 in the middle of the street people will made a circle around you...for 20-30m :) I have problem my self sometimes with 105/2....is a little biger. So, a little one will be ok.<br>

Is your call ;)<br>

And taht 35/1.8 have AF-S and it works really good on your D40. Think about it. Anyway...you need at last two lens.</p>

[mirceaciuca]

<p>Forget about Tamron 17-50/2.8 in street. All people say is a replace for Nikkor 17-55/2.8.... Come one! Maybe if you dont use wider lens a 28-75/2.8 will be enough. It works on 35mm too.<br>

Anyway, lets back to the rock. For street and you know that a 24 or 28 covers the wider part on 35mm. So you need a little lens, and a good one. Why not 30/1.4 Sigma, Nikkor 20/2.8 AF-D, 20/2.5 AIS, Voilenger 20/3.5 (is a good choice, but manual again). 20 will be 30mm.<br>

I use 50/1.4 and a 105/2 DC. Someone told you 105/2.5 is a good lens. Try to belive him, is right.<br>

I need me too a 20mm fx lens...I have tokina 12-24/4, but is too heavy....you need something little, <em>a invisible </em>lens for street. If you go with a 70-200/2.8 in the middle of the street people will made a circle around you...for 20-30m :) I have problem my self sometimes with 105/2....is a little biger. So, a little one will be ok.<br>

Is your call ;)<br>

And taht 35/1.8 have AF-S and it works really good on your D40. Think about it. Anyway...you need at last two lens.</p>

[tholte]

<p>Quit dinking around and get a new camera for Pete's sakes!</p>

[Brad_]

>>> No autofocus with the Tamron 17-50, unless Tamron added an internal motor I don't know about.

 

Maybe it would be good to know, or at least check, first?

 

>>> If you're talking classic street photography and classic portraits, you really need two different lenses.

 

What does classic SP mean? I do both street and portraits with a single lens.

 

 

>>> Forget about Tamron 17-50/2.8 in street.

 

Why? Works great for me - absolute best decision I made for shooting street...

[bob_bill]

<p>Sigma 50 1.4. Try one, you'll be sold. I love it on dx and fx. Might be a few pounds more, but a lens like this was all Cartier-Bresson needed. It will be a solid start for a lens kit on either format. </p>

[fast_primes]

<p>SD,<br>

I'm in a similar boat with a D60, 18-55VR and a 35F1.8. I've also just acquired a 50F1.8 D--which of course does not AF with D40/D60 Nikons. That is your cheapest interim solution. Tamron now offers a 60MM F2.0 DX macro lens that they claim is fairly compact. But it's fairly expensive at $550 or so--perhaps it will go down after initial demand is met.And it's not yet available in the Nikon mount--so far only Canon. Pentax and only Pentax, offers a genuine DX format telephoto with it's petite 70F2.3.<br>

Of course after hitting the ball out of the park with the new 35F1.8 DX lens, Nikon might follow up with a 70mm DX equivalent of the famed 105 with F2.0 or F2.5--but alas, there is no hint anywhere that they are thinking of this! Only more zooms. Skipping the full 1:1 macro, would mean a lighter/cheaper lens.</p>

[newbie1]

<p>I shoot street, street portraits, street head shots. I will take two lens with me. Please see my street shots portraits. I use a Nikon 18-200 2.8 AF VR lens. This works well with wide angle street shots and get in close portraits while on the move. I only shoot in RAW as I am able to make adjustments in Photoshop. I also use my 80-400 AF VR Nikon lens; you have to get used to this one as it is a bit heavy. I do carry my 85mm 1.8 Nikon lens but have found it a bit limiting when on the move on the street; it is a great portrait lens, however, I do not think it is great on the street due to the many variables there.</p>

[josephbraun]

<p>50mm / 1.4</p>

[lesterphoto]

<p>I was in Paris and tried some street photography for the first time and got some good shots using my D700 and 85mm f1.4 and 50mm f1.4. Now if only I can do the same thing here at home in the states!</p>

[sd_woods]

<p>First of all, you shut up Tim Holte! Lenses are more important, and I accept I should've gotten a better camera to begin with but it's too late for that now, so don't make me feel bad about it.</p>

<p>I am pretty much sold on the 50mm f/1.4. Brad, I accept that you think the Tamron is probably a better idea, but I want to use a prime. I look up to a few photographers on here, one of them being Ton Mestrom, who recommends that beginners use primes for a while. Perhaps I will buy the Tamron at a later date.</p>

<p>For now however, I want to thank all of you for being such a help, it really is quite surprising how much people like to talk about their hobbies.</p>

[jc_k]

<p>let alone the 85's, i tried walking around with a 70-300VR a couple times. Even at the widest end (70mm, 105mm equiv) it's a disaster.</p>

<p>It's excellent for capturing head shots *across the street*, but if you wanna take the whole store-front, forget it. I had to stand back like 5 meters just to take a group shot of 4 people - 2 in front 2 behind.</p>

<p>so to answer SD's question, the 85/1.8D is a good "street portraiture" lens within his budget, but not a "Street" lens.</p>

[Brad_]

>>> let alone the 85's, i tried walking around with a 70-300VR a couple times. Even at the widest end (70mm, 105mm

equiv) it's a disaster.

 

Exactly. For SP, even a 50mm is way to much of a tele on a crop cam for me. That would drive me nuts and be pretty

limiting having only that on the street...

 

>>> so to answer SD's question, the 85/1.8D is a good "street portraiture" lens within his budget, but not a "Street" lens.

 

Gotta disagree. Not a good portraiture lens on a crop cam. Unless you like to snipe with an unaware subject. But I

wouldn't call that "portraiture."

[trevans]

<p>I'd also like to chime in on the Tamron, it's one heck of a little lens. Yes it does have a built-in autofocus motor ("whirrr, whirrr"). Now that it has VR built in... what are you waiting for? This is something you'll only find in Canon (that is, a normal-range 2.8 zoom with stabilization).</p>

[Brad_]

BTW, I've got a lot of street photos and street portraits <a href= "http://www.citysnaps.net/blog/">here</a>. Mostly done

with 17-50mm f/2.8 and few with a 10-22mm f/3.5 - 5.6. And a couple here and there with a panasonic LX3 (24-60mm equiv, f/2.0).