Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Prime
want to buy a few primes... but which...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="spb_stan" data-source="post: 647882" data-attributes="member: 43545"><p>I suggest renting lenses to be sure you really want that FL. 24mm for walking around it pretty versatile but not wide enough for much landscape. I have the 24 1.4G Nikon and ended up using it less than any other lens in my kit. I borrowed a 20mm 1.8G, which is over $1000 lower cost and found it a really good lens and 20 mm to be a very versatile lens. With wide angle, if not level with the horizon there is perspective distortion but barrel and pincushion distortion was very low. I think it is the best deal in wide angle general purpose primes now and borrow it for weddings and other events were groups are shot with a lot of atmosphere like an ornate church or in a museum to get a good sense of space.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Someone mentioned the 85 being too short for portraits but unless one has a large studio, and is seeking more compression distortion, the 85mm fl is probably the most popular because there are so many good choices out there. The new Sigma Art 85mm is stellar but bang for the buck, I have not found any better than the 85 1.8G. I have a 85 1.4D and like it, built to last another 100 years but it is larger and heavier. I use it in the studio but more often, I toss my 85 1.8G in the bag....it is 1/3 the price and 96% as good except in CA where it is much better. It is light, well made with a solid feel although the barrel is plastic. </p><p>My current portrait lenses include 50 1.2, 50 1.4 Sigma, 50 1.8D, 85 1.4D and 1.8G, 24-70 2.8G, 135 2.0DC and 70-200 2.8. Of all those in that normal portrait range the most used are the 70-200 2.8 and 85 1.8G. A distant 3rd in number of session is the 135 2.0. </p><p></p><p>Outdoor, natural light or environmental shots where the separation is gained by bokeh, 85 and longer is easier to get desirable subject isolation but in a studio normally you shoot stopped down because you don't need isolation but you do need the best image quality so a lot of lenses that are not so super fast are useful due to their sharpness and color at f/5.6 or smaller. So comparing lenses at the FL you are actually going to use them opens up more options by including slower lens. </p><p></p><p>I would suggest considering that Nikon line of 1.8G lenses to be some of the best deals for new lenses if you do not need razor thin DOF, and hand hold, because 1.4 on any of these lenses is less useful than most people think. I have a 50 1.2 which is a bear to focus handheld and a few fractions of an inch DOF, and usually stop it down to 2.0 for portraits. </p><p>Everyone seems to mention sharpness and speed(aperture) for low light as the main criterias for a lens, but perceived sharpness comes from light. Low light ruins color fidelity and apparent sharpness. There is no reason that any lens made over the last 80 years is not better than your display medium if given decent light.. If one uses light augmentation or modifiers, even lowly kit zooms can deliver stunning images where no one could tell that is was not taken with a $2000 pime. The main reason pros like fast lenses is having more light for AF systems to do their best. Not many serious photos are shot wide open, but every scene benefits from having more light entering the AF sensor. The dialed in aperture is closed down to the instant the shutter starts to open, but the rest of the time, the aperture is open to its widest for VF and AF effectiveness.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="spb_stan, post: 647882, member: 43545"] I suggest renting lenses to be sure you really want that FL. 24mm for walking around it pretty versatile but not wide enough for much landscape. I have the 24 1.4G Nikon and ended up using it less than any other lens in my kit. I borrowed a 20mm 1.8G, which is over $1000 lower cost and found it a really good lens and 20 mm to be a very versatile lens. With wide angle, if not level with the horizon there is perspective distortion but barrel and pincushion distortion was very low. I think it is the best deal in wide angle general purpose primes now and borrow it for weddings and other events were groups are shot with a lot of atmosphere like an ornate church or in a museum to get a good sense of space. Someone mentioned the 85 being too short for portraits but unless one has a large studio, and is seeking more compression distortion, the 85mm fl is probably the most popular because there are so many good choices out there. The new Sigma Art 85mm is stellar but bang for the buck, I have not found any better than the 85 1.8G. I have a 85 1.4D and like it, built to last another 100 years but it is larger and heavier. I use it in the studio but more often, I toss my 85 1.8G in the bag....it is 1/3 the price and 96% as good except in CA where it is much better. It is light, well made with a solid feel although the barrel is plastic. My current portrait lenses include 50 1.2, 50 1.4 Sigma, 50 1.8D, 85 1.4D and 1.8G, 24-70 2.8G, 135 2.0DC and 70-200 2.8. Of all those in that normal portrait range the most used are the 70-200 2.8 and 85 1.8G. A distant 3rd in number of session is the 135 2.0. Outdoor, natural light or environmental shots where the separation is gained by bokeh, 85 and longer is easier to get desirable subject isolation but in a studio normally you shoot stopped down because you don't need isolation but you do need the best image quality so a lot of lenses that are not so super fast are useful due to their sharpness and color at f/5.6 or smaller. So comparing lenses at the FL you are actually going to use them opens up more options by including slower lens. I would suggest considering that Nikon line of 1.8G lenses to be some of the best deals for new lenses if you do not need razor thin DOF, and hand hold, because 1.4 on any of these lenses is less useful than most people think. I have a 50 1.2 which is a bear to focus handheld and a few fractions of an inch DOF, and usually stop it down to 2.0 for portraits. Everyone seems to mention sharpness and speed(aperture) for low light as the main criterias for a lens, but perceived sharpness comes from light. Low light ruins color fidelity and apparent sharpness. There is no reason that any lens made over the last 80 years is not better than your display medium if given decent light.. If one uses light augmentation or modifiers, even lowly kit zooms can deliver stunning images where no one could tell that is was not taken with a $2000 pime. The main reason pros like fast lenses is having more light for AF systems to do their best. Not many serious photos are shot wide open, but every scene benefits from having more light entering the AF sensor. The dialed in aperture is closed down to the instant the shutter starts to open, but the rest of the time, the aperture is open to its widest for VF and AF effectiveness. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Prime
want to buy a few primes... but which...
Top