View single post by Robert
 Posted: Mon Apr 23rd, 2012 12:13
Robert



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: South Lakeland, UK
Posts: 4066
Status: 
Offline

28-70 AFS Lens for Portraits





Thread started 10th March 2001

Post # 1 Neeley:

Does anyone have any experience of serious portrait photography using the 28-70 AFS lens. Is this lens suitable or can anyone suggest an alternative. I already have the 17-35,80-200 and the 300mm f4, all AFS and have been particularly impressed with all these lenses.

Any comments would be helpful.


Post # 2 Brad:

Hope I don't insult you but I have learned the hard way that when shooting portraits with 35mm lenses 50mm is the minimum because any focal length below that will cause distortion of any body part that is closer to the lens than others. This can lead to noses and other body parts which are not reproduced accurately on the print. I am a part time photographer but will never shoot portaits with a 35mm again with less than 60mm or better focal length because I shot some cheerleaders with a 18-35mm and was mortified by the results, live and learn! Best of luck.


Post # 3 srphoto:

70 to 105 or so has been the standard. Gives normal perspective and adequate depth of field. Keep in mind the lenses have a narrower field of view on the D1, so you'd have to get further back for the same view.

Also, you still have the SAME depth of field that lens has on a film camera, so further back increases it a little. Moving further back, however, changes perspective a little, so it's a trade off.

I found the 70 end of the 28-70 or the 80-90 end of the 80-200 to be adequate. If you have a prime lens in this range, use it.

Seth


Post # 4 Richard Parkinson:

I have the 20-70AFS and the 80-200AFS, but would not choose to use them for portraits. The 85 1.8 (or 1.4 if you can afford it) or the 50mm 1.4 perform much better for portraits on the D1 IMO.


Post # 5 Graham JR Whistler:

I find my 24-120 Nikon lens works very well for studio portraits and even full face close-up at 110-80mm range.

I also have an old 105mm f2.5 none AF lens and it produces super sharp pictures.

Graham Whistler FBIPP FRPS


Post # 6 Joe McCary:

I have been shooting lots of portraits lately with my D1 and although I love my 105 DC portrait lens on a 35-film camera, I find it is just too long for most location situations. With this lens I find I am back too far to have a decent rapport with the subject and too far back for what seems to be the small rooms on location. SO I use my 24-120 in about the 65-75 range. I have been considering switching from the 24-120 when I can afford the more expensive lens, so I see no reason you could not use the 28-70.

Of course, this relates to formal portraits, when shooting environmental portraits any lens is fair game.

Joe


Post # 7 Bob Davies:

I also have the 17-35 and 80-200 and recently purchased an AFS 28-70 f2.8, using it quite often for portraits. Shooting wide open, it delivers excellent sharpness and usually throws the background sufficiently out of focus.

I find the 80-200 a bit too long for most portraits, though I sometimes use it in the studio, which has plenty of room to retreat back. The upper end of the 28-70 will do fine, but if you're doing just portraits in a controlled environment (e.g., the studio), I'd invest in something a bit less expensive and more job-specific. The 85mm f1.8 or 1.4 sound good, but I have no experience with them and don't know how they're priced, though I'd expect the latter to be high. The depth of field with either would be advantageous while wide open.

I didn't buy one of these more portrait-specific lenses because my work isn't usually structured and I need the flexibility. I.e., I may shoot a job in the studio in the AM and then go out on location later on for a portrait in a cramped office.
Plus, I must plan around using both the D1 and film bodies (F4 and F5).


Post # 8 Don Zawadiwsky:

I've had good success with the 85/1.8 AF for portraits on the D1. Only disadvantage over using a 50 or the upper end of a 28~70 is having to move back farther; otherwise you're too close.


Post # 9 Larrynip:

I shoot the 17-35, 80-200, and I also have the 28-70. I LOVE that Lens! That has been my portrait lens of choice. If you have the $$, go for it. You won't be sorry. Remember, the D1 gives you more reach because of the CCD size.


Post # 9 Trapagon:

I agree with Richard's post above. I use the 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 for portrait work. I'd not go any wider than 50mm unless you are going for a W/A effect.



____________________
Robert.