|
|
Dannskig
Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 9
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:17 pm Post subject: Nikon lens for portrait & wedding 18-200mm vs.24-85mm vs 17- |
 |
|
|
| Hi I worked for years in the photo shope developing photos for professional photographers. Now is my turn! I got Nikon D 80 and try to choose between these tree lenses Nikon 18-200 , 17-55 2.8, and 24-85 2.8, If I can buy one for now which one I should get?I love to take portraits of my kids& weddings for friends. That is the range |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
 |
DanyXaserom
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 4
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:53 pm Post subject: Nikon lens for portrait & wedding 18-200mm vs.24-85mm vs 17- |
|
|
|
| The 17-55mm f/2.8 and the 24-85mm f/2.8 will give you more flexibility in available lighting with their wider aperture, but I really like the 18-200mm VR. I bought the 18-200mm VR this summer and found it to be an excellent optic. The range was phenomenal, allowing me often to shoot without changing lenses. The VR feature let me handhold my shots as slow as 1/4 of a second, without camera motion and blur.During a two-week adventure in China, the VR allowed me to take excellent images from a bouncing tour bus on country roads. The 18mm was wonderful in tight quarters and for scenics. The 200mm worked well for distant subjects. And the VR allowed me to shoot inside museums and temples where flash is not allowed.By the way, I'm a father to two daughters and an elementary school teacher. The 18-200mm VR has been a fixture on my Nikons since I got it and has helped capture "the moment" so often.http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htmI hope this was helpful for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
darvyning
Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 9
Location: usa
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 4:29 pm Post subject: Nikon lens for portrait & wedding 18-200mm vs.24-85mm vs 17- |
|
|
|
| Much depends on how you will be using it. If for landscapes and some nature photography then the 18-200mm. For weddings and portraits probably the 24-85mm. Not as wide as the 17-55mm but better for portraits and weddings IMO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaragauLfurry
Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 7
Location: TW
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:05 pm Post subject: Nikon lens for portrait & wedding 18-200mm vs.24-85mm vs 17- |
|
|
|
| The 18-200mm is the hot ticket right now ... if you can find one.http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htmI have used the 24-85mm f/2.8 for years as my "normal" lens, but the 18-200 seems to be the new standard.If you already have a 17-55mm then the 55-200mm would be a good one.http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200/versus-55-200mm.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaragauLfurry
Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 7
Location: TW
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:41 pm Post subject: Nikon lens for portrait & wedding 18-200mm vs.24-85mm vs 17- |
|
|
|
| Just a few words of advice.Don't use a focal length less than 50mm for portraiture. 100mm is about optimum. It lets you shoot from a little further away so you don't intimidate or intrude on the sitter, and there is no chance of 'big nose' syndrome which you get from a short focal length. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in