Nikon Lenses

[j._christmas]

<p>Hi All - I was wondering what you would recommended for a group shot, about 30-35 people. I have a D3200 and I currently have 2 lenses (18-55mm and 55-200mm) and am just starting photography on the side. I have mostly shot engagement and senior sessions so any tips or tricks would be helpful! :)</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Back up as far as you can and then zoom in to get them all in. Depends on the room. I would want 35mm or longer on DX for that, but you have to work with the space you have, too.</p>

<p>I've seen people "undistort" the people at the edges in post production, too.</p>

 

[Albins images]

Eehh.. use the lenses you have!

 

Put the camera on a sturdy (..) tripod, set the aperture at f/

8 and a shutterspeed of 1/125sec or faster. Make sure

that the group is as compact as possible and is looking at

the camera at the same time. For that to happen, do not

allow anyone else beside you.

 

Good luck!

[j._christmas]

<p>Thank you! Yeah I have a tripod with a remote that I like to use. I was looking into the wide lenses? Any suggestions? I'm taking a few trips and would love to get some landscape pictures... beaches, mountains, etc.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Unless the location absolutely doesn't allow you to do so, on a D3200 (which is DX), I would use no wider than 20mm or so for any group shot. If your lens is too wide, the people near the edges of the frame will look distorted and considerably smaller than those in the center. If you have 30 people, I would try to arrange them into at least 3 rows, perhaps more, on some stairs so that people in the front row won't block those in the back. You are better off using a longer focal length, shooting from farther away, so that those in the front row will not look considerably bigger than those in the back.</p>

<p>On FX, I would use no wider than 35mm, which translates to approximately 23mm or so for DX.</p>

[djthomas]

<p>How big is the space you have to work in, and how are you planning on lighting the people in the photograph?</p>

[SCL]

<p>Your present lens is fine for what you intend. Don't get in too close or you will introduce horrible distortion at the edges. I recently saw some well done shots of the type you describe. The shots were outdoors with a wooded background - nothing distracting. The photographer posed the front row sitting on the grassy ground, 2nd row kneeling, and 3rd row standing. Also the photographer was about 25-30 feet away and on a ladder with his camera mounted to the ladder. Most shots were near sunset, but people were positioned so that the sun lit the trees behind them, but didn't cause them to squint by being directly on them. I remember when I was in a similar shot for a national magazine ad for my company...there were about 22-24 people in the shot, 2 rows - 1st row kneeling (1 foot on ground, 1 knee on ground), slightly semicircular arrangement. Tripod high. Assistants with large neutral reflectors so there were no shadows.</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I second Shun recommendation. Wide angle won't make pleasing photo for your subjects although it may create interesting photo for yourself. </p>

[steve_singleton2]

<p>May I answer a question you didn't ask? That question is how to go about shooting a commercially acceptable group shot of 30-35 people.<br>

Rather than worrying about buying a lens, I'd urge you to think through the shot in other ways. First, you really want to shoot outdoors, because I'm assuming you don't have professional flash units, light stands, umbrellas, wireless triggers, etc., etc. A good shot needs good light and creating it takes practice and expensive equipment. Just cranking up the exposure index isn't a good substitute. If speedlight flash is all you've got, you're going to have trouble getting even exposure of the group from front to rear. If bouncing off the ceiling is possible, that would help, but it will cut two stops of light and require a larger aperture, hence shallower depth of field.<br>

Never set up a location shoot without scouting the location, ideally before you quote a price. That's asking for trouble until you see what will be involved. You want an attractive or at least neutral background in the shade. Is there a better location close by? Maybe it's slightly less convenient for people to walk a bit to the location, but they're paying you to get a memorable photo not to make things as convenient as possible. You're the director of this shot and they are the actors. If you have confidence and are politely professional, they'll go along with your ideas. If it's feasible, try to insist that the shot be scheduled in the morning or afternoon, when you can pose the group in shade. Nice even open skylight will prevent blocked shadows and blown out highlights and you may be able to add daylight-balanced fill flash to add catchlights to eyes and open up any shadows. Outdoor lighting will also allow you to use a faster shutter speed to prevent camera shake and a smaller aperture for greater depth of field.<br>

<br />A tripod may or may not work for this shot. You'll want to be taller than anyone and able to look down on the group, after posing taller people in back and shorter in front. If you can't get above the group using what's already there, be prepared to bring a step ladder or at least a tall step stool to raise your point of view.<br>

Pose with the final print in mind. If you're going to sell 4x6 or 6x9s, your viewinder will be fairly accurate, if 8x10's you'll need to compose accordingly.<br>

Now to the lens. What's wrong with the 18-55? Your knowledge is more important than the lens you use. My long term suggestion would be to join the Professional Photographers of America (PPA) and attend seminars geared toward portrait photographers. The cost of doing so will improve your business-oriented photography faster than a new lens.</p>

[j._christmas]

<p>Great suggestions, and I really appreciate the comments. I will be shooting outdoors with a non-distracting background... few trees/wooded area. I do have an attachable flash as well. The only reason I was asking about additional lenses is because I'm experimenting.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>Even if you shoot outside, use the flash. it will open up the shadows and add a little sparkle to the image.<br /><br />One thing to emphasize in posing a group that large is that the people have to be really, really tight together. That doesn't mean politely a couple of inches apart. It means touching shoulder to shoulder at least. If you have stairs to put them on or a little bit of a slope (it's outside) you can elevate the second and third rows a bit. Getting on a ladder as mentioned above lets you shoot slightly down on them, which is one way to make sure you see everybody's faces. Absolutely essential to see every face. Shoot lots of shots to make sure everybody's eyes are open and expressions are good. Try to get the exposure dialed in perfectly before you start shooting for real, but shoot raw so you can fix any exposure or color problems later if you have to.</p>

[john_narsuitus]

<blockquote>

<p>"I was looking into the wide lenses? Any suggestions?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Your 18-55mm lens should be wide enough for your group shot. Below is a group photo I took with my wide-angle zoom lens set at 20mm.</p>

<p> </div>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Below is a group photo I took with my wide-angle zoom lens set at 20mm.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>EXIF data show that image was captured with a Fuji S5, which is also a DX body. Therefore, a 20mm lens is only a moderately wide lens.</p>

[Two23]

<p>I would level the camera in two planes, and use x2 two flash mounted on lightstands with umbrellas. The lens you have will work fine--your deficit is lighting.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>I suspect if you fed a RAW version of John N's shot into something like DxO, it would remove the slight curvature distortion, the vignetting or darkened edges and de-distort the couple of people at the extreme edges. It can do it with a JPEG, but RAW's always better.</p>

<p>As the OP is shooting outdoors, main light shouldn't be such a problem, but a suitable sized flash to fill-in harsh sun-shadows is more tricky, so positioning is crucial. Having somewhere helpful to arrange height variation makes a tiered set-up the best option.</p>

<p>There was a similar post about 6 months ago, but I'm not sure the OP came back to show the results. </p>

<p>Maybe Shun knows where it is?</p>

[kohanmike]

<p>This was shot with a D300s (Dx) and Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 VC set at 30mm, SB600 in the hot shoe of the camera, tilted up 45 degrees, with a LumiQuest diffuser. I was about 25 feet away.</p><div></div>

[andylynn]

If you're outdoors, if there's a slope or stairs you can try an arrangement like Michael has which wouldn't require a wide

angle. If not, put them in rows and try to arrange them in a bit of an arc instead of a line, so the people on the ends are

the same distance from your camera as the ones in the middle. If you put them in a line, stand too close and use wide

angle, the people on the ends will be noticeably farther from you than the ones in the center and will appear short in the

photo.

[djthomas]

<p>Depending on what your deliverables will be (a framed print, digital image?) another shooting option would be to shoot them in smaller groups (perhaps related to their function/relationships)--maybe three or four groups--and then (if you are providing prints) have the different images matted and mounted in the same frame. The smaller groups are easier to control and light--and easier to see the individual faces in the final image. I know that there are lots of times that we can't get away from these "team-type" pictures--but in the end, <em>most of the time</em> that's what they end up looking like. Any information you can provide on the group... (e.g., co-workers, choir, sports team, etc., what type of environment do they work/perform in typically and what is the occasion for the shoot?)</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Michael K, my EXIF reader says your 17-50mm was set to 20mm.....</p>

<p>..which I guess gives an FOV of 30mm, rather than a focal length of 30mm giving a FOV of a 45mm lens.</p>

<p>So basically a 20mm prime would work well......rather than a 28mm prime.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Do you notice that people in the back row appear to be much smaller than those in the front row? That is the result from using a lens that is too wide and the camera is too close to the subjects.</p>

<p>That is why I prefer to use a longer lens and capture from farther away. Obviously people in the front row will always be closer to the camera, but if the difference between front and back row is, for example, 20 feet vs. 24 feet instead of 10 vs. 14 feet, your subjects will look more even. Sometimes it also helps to bring a step ladder so that you can shoot from a higher angle. That can also help to even out the distance from the camera.</p>

<p>In other words, perspective matters such that the comment "zoom with your feet" shows the lack of understanding of basic photography. But sometimes you are limited by the location and cannot shoot from farther away. In that case, if possible, I would find a different location for group pictures.</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>+1 Shun. As you're outside, I'd possibly try even the 55mm end of your short zoom. Your longer lens isn't as good. f8 gives good centre and edge sharpness...See here</p>

<p>http://www.lenstip.com/225.4-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_DX_18-55_mm_f_3.5-5.6G_VR_Image_resolution.html</p>

<p>The only downside with more distance is that your flash will loose effective power, but as it's only intended to give catchlights and maybe lift the shadows a little, not such a biggy.</p>

<p>Low ISO, 100 ideally, maybe 1/125 and set on a tripod...it makes group composition easier. If you're supposed to be in it, either use the self timer and run...or preferably a wireless trigger...:-)</p>