Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 23, 2007, 9:09 AM   #31
TDN
Senior Member
 
TDN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,288
Default

I do both, depending on what mood I'm in:lol:

got the 18-55mm, a 28-200mm and a 60-300mm

I'd like to add a 28-70mm f2.8 to this lineup.

As for primes, my lineup is getting better: 35mm, 50mm, 105mm, 200mm, 400mm

Got a 28mm coming in next week and I'd like to add a 135mm to that range too.

Most of them from 35mm to 200mm are very usable for portraits, depending on the environment. The others would be possible too, but only under "special" conditions (like being far away from the subject)...

Tom

P.S.: One from last year. An exception to what I said above: at 23mm:


TDN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2007, 9:28 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

TDN wrote:
Quote:
I do both, depending on what mood I'm in:lol:

got the 18-55mm, a 28-200mm and a 60-300mm

I'd like to add a 28-70mm f2.8 to this lineup.

As for primes, my lineup is getting better: 35mm, 50mm, 105mm, 200mm, 400mm

Got a 28mm coming in next week and I'd like to add a 135mm to that range too.

Most of them from 35mm to 200mm are very usable for portraits, depending on the environment. The others would be possible too, but only under "special" conditions (like being far away from the subject)...

Tom

P.S.: One from last year. An exception to what I said above: at 23mm:
Tom

Very sharp B&W pict/portrait.

Dug up another couple of 300mm portrait to compare with those of Mark (of above)
All uncropped with no pp. Only resizing was done













I doubt if I did any portrait with my 300mm+TC=450mm


Daniel
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2007, 12:01 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

danielchtong wrote:
Quote:
My 135mm or 300mm cannot be a portrait lens. Hehe I take lousy portrait with my 300mm.

Here is an uncropped one taken on St Patrick Day 2007 in Toronto



Later on I will try to use my TC and jack it up to 450mm for another portrait.

Daniel
OK and at a football game I could talke a portrait (if your definition is just a head shot.) with a 1000mm lens. Wouldn't make it a portrait lens, or the result othar than just being a head shot.

Your example here is a nice close head shot, but due to the 300mm compresion, I'd say the background is far too sharp, decernable/distracting to really qualiy as a portrait.

But this is getting a little like "what's a macro" Some say NOTHING but a 1:1 is, others say up to 1:4 counts.

I think if you asked most portrait photographers to suggest a portrait lens likely you would not hear like over 85-90mm (even for a ful frame) , and a fast lens as well to get the soft backgrounds.

Now a 135mm is outer edge of that range again more on a FF (let alone digital), and if 2.8 or better, fast enough likely even with the tele compression, but only really useful outdoors....Not indoors/small studio work. That's really all I have been getting at all along.
Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2007, 12:20 AM   #34
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

bilybianca wrote:
Quote:
I really like the longer lenses for portrait (ooooh, I'd love to have the A* 135 1.8...), it allows you to get near without getting near, so to speak. A lot of people (and cats) feel a bit intimidated when you put your camera up their nose. I guess your cat portraits would have been impossible with a 50 mm (or your Zen:-)), the cat would have started playing with the camera or would have gone away to sleep undisturbed.

My avatar was taken with a 600 mm, I don't think I would have been allowed in his playing grounds...
And thats a very nice example that it can be done, again though I doubt you'd suggest a 600mm to someone as a portrait lens.

Is see the EXIF has been stripped, I 'd would be curios to know though what the f/stop was and how far behind roughly the background was. (As well as your distance)

Now that VS the reply cited post above does qualify as portrait composition not just a head shot.


Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2007, 3:24 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

Hayward wrote:
Quote:
I doubt you'd suggest a 600mm to someone as a portrait lens.
I say it again: suggest whatever you want to anyone, but leave my brain and thoughts alone. I suggest whatever I want.

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:54 PM.