?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile ABMann.net Previous Previous Next Next
Gets me some Bokeh. - Portrait of a Young Man as The Artist — LiveJournal
abmann
abmann
Gets me some Bokeh.
Anyone o my Flist have experience using the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 lens or non-nikon equivalent? I'm looking for a fast lens for lower light shots and it seems it would be good for indoor portraiture what with it being faster than Satan with the runs. Plus, I want the extra bokeh that I'm not getting with my other lenses at the moment.

Otherwise, how do macro lenses work with portraits? Bokeh of doom?
--

Would someone like to explain WHY it is SNOWING??
Stoopid weather.
8 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
alyska From: alyska Date: April 4th, 2007 01:42 pm (UTC) (Link)
you generally want soemthing a bit longer than normal lens length to shoot portraits, as there's much less distortion that way. (especially in the nose!)

i'd go with something more...70mm-120mmish, on a 35mm equiv. camera. if you don't mind the distortion, they're rather fun. just hard to keep the whole face in the plane of focus.

/geek.
abmann From: abmann Date: April 4th, 2007 01:52 pm (UTC) (Link)
Noses can serve as the best portraits though.


I think I'm just a fan of the wide angles. My ultra wide has been the bestest friend ever.
Nikon does have a 105mm prime but it isn't quite as fast as the 50. Though f/2 is HARDLY something to complain about.

Maybe the sigma 105mm f2.8. Hrm.
alyska From: alyska Date: April 5th, 2007 01:24 am (UTC) (Link)
you shoudl really shoot with something longer than the 50mm. there's some fix in the conversion factor (you're not a full-frame chip on your dslr, right?) you'll want somethnig like an 80mm or so with your dslr.

besides f1.8-2.0? that's not even a third of a stop. there's hardly a difference!
abmann From: abmann Date: April 5th, 2007 03:11 pm (UTC) (Link)
Yeah but that's a third of the light too. And when the lens is that wide and each stop doubles the light coming in, thats a lot of light lost!

HOWEVER! It is awfully far away. I took a look through 50mm and I'd need to be all up ins to get a good photo.
alyska From: alyska Date: April 6th, 2007 12:59 am (UTC) (Link)
yes. other photographers will hate you if you show up at an event to shoot with a less than normal length lens, because you'll have to be up in your subject's face to get your shots. this is why we like long lenses. especially sports photogs.

when he guest lectured my photojournalism class, i got to handle the journal's photographer's 1ds duo with 300 and 400mm lenses on them (for shooting packer games.) yegads, was that a lot of lens.
bizarre From: bizarre Date: April 4th, 2007 04:19 pm (UTC) (Link)
</i>
theotherqpc From: theotherqpc Date: April 4th, 2007 04:48 pm (UTC) (Link)
i have a Nikon 50mm prime that i believe goes up to f/1.4, but it's from the pre-electronic days, if that matters to you - no autofocus or nothin'.







and for low light/bokeh,

abmann From: abmann Date: April 4th, 2007 04:51 pm (UTC) (Link)
That's pretty nice, actually. Seems totally worth the $100 they run.
8 comments or Leave a comment