Good lenses for Photo shoots?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Shacklebolt, Jan 7, 2008.

  1. Shacklebolt macrumors 6502a

    Shacklebolt

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    #1
    I'm doing my first interview/ photo shoot for a magazine that I have thus far only written album/concert reviews for (along with a few sporadic photos). I honestly think I will do perfectly fine with my D80 with it's 18-135mm kit lens, so I'm not worried.

    I don't know if it'll be a cover, but I do know that I want to do my level best. The band is electronic indie/math rock, so I'm not just planning on sitting them down and having them strike poses (although that might be some of it). I expect half of the shots to be moderately spur-of-the-moment ("Hey... so let's talk about the band's next plans... oh wait a second, let me take a picture of you. Sweet.") but perhaps some sit-down alright-guys-start-looking-like-hipsters-great-thanks shots as well.

    I'm not planning on buying any new lenses for this, as I'm still learning the ins and outs of the ones that I have (and am perfectly happy), but, in an ideal world, with unlimited funds at your disposal, what lenses which you go into a shoot like this armed with?
     
  2. superted666 Guest

    superted666

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    #2
    Although ive not shot in that way professionally before i recently found when experimenting that for studio type shots its well worth finding your lenses sweet spot to really get the sharpest and highest quality shots.

    Try stopping down a f4 lens or similar to f8/f9 and you should see the quality improve with less soft pictures.

    Make sure you have a good light source for this!
     
  3. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #3
    Between 2 and 4 off-camera flash heads and some diffusion of some sort will do more for your images than a lens. strobist.blogspot.com is a good starting point and www.dg28.com isn't bad either. FWIW, I prefer the Nikkor 35-70 AF-D for studio work, but if you're happy with the quality of your lens then time is best spent on the quality of your light.
     
  4. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #4
    Okay, I'm not a pro - so take this (or dismiss it) however you want. But I think the lens I just ordered, the new Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8, would be great for this sort of thing.

    I know with the primes you gain another stop or so; but the thing is even the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.4 don't look very impressive below f/2.8 - so if I had them I'd be hesitant to shoot wider than that. It's the same way with the 35mm f/2, which I do have - f/2.8 is as low as I usually want to go.
     
  5. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #6
    I'd worry more about lighting than about lenses. _Anything_ other than direct camera mounted flash.

    Your 18-135 covers the range you might need. The reason to get another lens would be to ccontrol depth of field. But with some effort you can simulate a background blur in Photoshop but you can't fix lighting. Light make the image, well that and the subject.

    I don't think sharpness matters a lot here.
     
  6. MurphyM macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    #7
  7. zdobson macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Location:
    Indiana
    #8
    +1 on the primes. only go ahead and use f/1.4 or 2.0. They're there for a reason. Just use a little unsharp mask in photoshop.
     

Share This Page