| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/29/2009 02:58:16 PM · #1 |
So... I just bought one. It'll be arriving in a week or so. Yay!
I'm confused on lens choices. I shoot mostly headshots, and I'm trying to figure out why many photographers use something other than a 50mm. It seems like most use a zoom of up to 200-300mm. Any insight for me?
Anyway, just thought I'd express my excitement to people who know what Nikon D700 means since most people I hang out with don't know or care. :) |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 03:05:18 PM · #2 |
WOW! I hear that the addiction just gets worse and worse. You start with a mild d40 thinking, I can handle this, but then you're hooked. Next thing you know, you're 3 lenses poorer and clutching a d90 to you chest. I guess you're the example of where this all ends... ;)
Congrats on the new family member! :)
Message edited by author 2009-06-29 15:05:46. |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 03:12:13 PM · #3 |
Thanks!
The addiction was always there for me, but I really waited a long time to upgrade my D70. I wanted to wait until I felt I maximized my usage of the D70 so that I could really understand the limitations through experience, and I wanted to target those issues specifically instead of buying something for its name or because of a current fad.
Oh, and it's down to $2400 at beachcamera.com, so that was an incentive to go for it. :) |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 03:16:14 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by sprite777:
I'm confused on lens choices. I shoot mostly headshots, and I'm trying to figure out why many photographers use something other than a 50mm. It seems like most use a zoom of up to 200-300mm. Any insight for me? |
In the film days, the 85mm-105mm range was considered "standard" for headshots. This gives a nice, compact presentation of the face, nothing exaggerated.
On your previous, cropped-sensor camera, the 50mm was the equivalent of a FF 75mm lens (Nikon has a 1.5x crop factor). So to get the same working distance you are gonna have to mount at least a 75mm lens. There are a BUNCH of very, very nice 70-200mm lenses out there, which is why you see lots of them used for headshots. If you don't want to zoom, a wide-aperture 85mm would work real well with the FF sensor; I assume Nikon has the equivalent of Canon's 85mm f/1.8 & f/1.2 lenses available?
R. |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 03:22:45 PM · #5 |
| I really appreciate your help on that. That makes sense to me. Maybe they were referring to that 75 or 85mm rather than the higher end of those lenses, which is what I guess I was assuming. Yeah, I don't typically care about zooming, but for weddings I think I will eventually want a good wide zoom lens. The 14-24 would do nicely. Fat chance right now though after the big weekend purchase. :) Still excited though. |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 04:34:19 PM · #6 |
I have the 85mm 1.4 and it is SO great--I might as well super-glue to the camera body, as I can hardly stand to use my other lenses.
50mm works well for headshots on dx bodies (as it is an effective 75mm). I use both for headshots, but there is something about the image "feel" out of the 85mm that just sings. And, I think it has a much more pleasing bokeh--works well for headshots, too, as you often want to separate from the background.
I LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE my 85!
To Sum Up:
The 85mm 1.4 is okay.
;-) |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 05:30:07 PM · #7 |
Yikes. Just looked at the 85 prices though. Wowza.
Guess I'll have to save up! |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 05:32:08 PM · #8 |
i'll concur on the 85/1.4
one of the best ...
|
|
|
|
06/29/2009 06:01:57 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by sprite777:
Yikes. Just looked at the 85 prices though. Wowza.
Guess I'll have to save up! |
There is an 85 1.8 that is significantly less expensive--cannot speak to the images it produces, but it might get you use of an 85 length while you save up (or it might let you see if 85 is the length for you).
I am shooting dx, and love that 85 (effectively 127), but it does push me back some, even for headshots--3/4 shots are done from a fair distance. So when I move to FF it will, I hope feel a bit more intimate when shooting. I still believe the thing I like best about the lens is the quality of imagery, not the (effective) focal length. But it is possible that I could discover, after going to FF, that the feel I like from the image is just as much from the focal length, and I need to go longer.
And you can always rent one to try it out :-)
Message edited by author 2009-06-29 18:13:46. |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 06:15:56 PM · #10 |
Congratulations on your upgrade. From what you've said it seems as though you're ready for it, but my upgrade from D100 to D200 left me with a feeling of 'Thanks for the moonrocket, how do I drive this thing?' - a feeling that's not all bad, needless to say.
Plenty to do while you're saving up though :) |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 07:49:53 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by sprite777:
I really appreciate your help on that. That makes sense to me. Maybe they were referring to that 75 or 85mm rather than the higher end of those lenses, which is what I guess I was assuming. Yeah, I don't typically care about zooming, but for weddings I think I will eventually want a good wide zoom lens. The 14-24 would do nicely. Fat chance right now though after the big weekend purchase. :) Still excited though. |
The 14-24 is NOT a good lens for wide shots with people on the D700. It is too wide and distorts. The 24-70 f2.8 works very well and doesn't have the same issues unless you really widen it up. Just saying... for when you need it. They're about the same price. |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 08:48:09 PM · #12 |
| Thanks rjsktesch - I didn't mean for portraits, or even for the normal wedding obligatory family pics, just more for the quirky b-roll photos that people tend to love or hate. Kind of as a back up. You might be on to something with the 24-70 though since it could double. Is that a good all-purpose one for weddings and events? |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 09:22:05 PM · #13 |
Welcome to the D700. I was happy with my old D80, but now it seems shabby and low-quality. There's no going back.
The problem with doing headshots with a 50mm lens is that you'd have to get super close to get just the model's head, and at that range they'll look a little funny. Also you'll risk blocking their light. I think 85mm, 105mm, or 135mm would be a better choice, even if your studio space is limited. 50mm is good for full-body shots. Ken Rockwell talks about this at length: //www.kenrockwell.com/tech/portrait-lenses.htm
Btw, I have to add my vote to Nikon's 85mm f/1.4. Really fantastic. I tried the f/1.8 once (I forgot to call ahead and the f/1.4 was rented out) and I was disappointed with its sharpness (maybe a focusing problem).
You should definitely consider renting an expensive lens before jumping in and buying one (or perhaps instead of, if you don't need it often). My local Calumet rents the 85mm f/1.4 for $25 for a weekend. borrowlenses.com is a bit pricier, but a good option if you don't have something local. |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 09:43:24 PM · #14 |
The 85mm 1.4 is the only lens I use (unless I have to use something else).
  
  
Great lens. Wickedly sharp, wide open. Can't miss.
The image above is a crop of this shot...
which was cropped a bit itself. Just to show you how powerful that lens is in tandem with the D700.
Message edited by author 2009-06-29 21:46:17. |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 10:12:22 PM · #15 |
The D700 is an unforgiving sensor... only the best glass will give you all it is capable of... people are suggesting the 85mm 1.4, and I will second it! It is a marvelous piece of glass!
You could also pick up a 50mm 1.4 to go with it.
Both of these will give you the best from your D700. |
|
|
|
06/29/2009 10:33:55 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by sprite777:
Thanks rjsktesch - I didn't mean for portraits, or even for the normal wedding obligatory family pics, just more for the quirky b-roll photos that people tend to love or hate. Kind of as a back up. You might be on to something with the 24-70 though since it could double. Is that a good all-purpose one for weddings and events? |
If I have to have only one lens, the 24-70 f2.8 is the lens I use. It's wonderful for the mid-range.
|
|
