# Ideal lens for an outdoor photo shoot?



## Ryan Hall (Feb 5, 2009)

I'm interested in doing photo shoots (people in general, families, bridals, that sort of thing) as a photographer and I was wondering what type of lens was ideal for this kind of photography. What sort of lenses do you use for these types of shoots?


----------



## teneighty23 (Feb 6, 2009)

a lense with good background blur is best for portraits, usually the straight 50mm lenses with high apertures, 1.8 or so are great, the 100 mm range is a great area for portraits too, im talking in full ratio too, so just take that into account.

what kind of camera do you have right now?


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Feb 6, 2009)

pick up a prim  use your feet to zoom... 50mm F/1.8 or F/1.4 if you can afford it


----------



## Ryan Hall (Feb 6, 2009)

teneighty23 said:


> a lense with good background blur is best for portraits, usually the straight 50mm lenses with high apertures, 1.8 or so are great, the 100 mm range is a great area for portraits too, im talking in full ratio too, so just take that into account.
> 
> what kind of camera do you have right now?


 
I'm going to use the D80. I've got two lenses. One is the 18-55mm kit lens, and its aperture goes up to 3.5. I've also got a SIGMA 70-300mm. I'll probably use the 18-55 for this photo shoot.


----------



## Ryan Hall (Feb 6, 2009)

prodigy2k7 said:


> pick up a prim  use your feet to zoom... 50mm F/1.8 or F/1.4 if you can afford it


 

What is a "prim", and what do you mean by use your feet to zoom?


----------



## Christie Photo (Feb 6, 2009)

Ryan Hall said:


> What is a "prim", and what do you mean by use your feet to zoom?




"Prime" is a word that has come into wide use to describe fixed focal length lenses.  Since it is not a "zoom" lens, you'll have to move the camera in and out to frame your subject.

-Pete


----------



## Ryan Hall (Feb 6, 2009)

Christie Photo said:


> "Prime" is a word that has come into wide use to describe fixed focal length lenses. Since it is not a "zoom" lens, you'll have to move the camera in and out to frame your subject.
> 
> -Pete


 
Why would a photographer use that kind of lens? Or was the suggestion mild sarcasm?


----------



## Christie Photo (Feb 6, 2009)

Ryan Hall said:


> I've also got a SIGMA 70-300mm. I'll probably use the 18-55 for this photo shoot.



I'd use the longer lens.  I feel it's far better to achieve a soft background for portraits by using a longer lens and finding a "deep setting" for your subject.  In other words, place your subject far away from the background.  This will allow you to shoot at f4 and still have good separation between subject and background, while minimizing any distortions associated with shorter lenses.

-Pete


----------



## Christie Photo (Feb 6, 2009)

Ryan Hall said:


> Why would a photographer use that kind of lens? Or was the suggestion mild sarcasm?




It's what I use.  I like fixed focal length lenses because they provide more quality for the money spent.  Although, these days, zoom lenses have REALLY improved.

-Pete


----------



## Big Mike (Feb 6, 2009)

There are a few reasons why a photographer would use a prime (non-zoom) lens. 

One reason is because prime lenses often have larger maximum apertures.  For example, a 50mm F1.8 lens has a maximum aperture of F1.8 while you 'kit' 18-55mm lens has a max aperture of F3.5-5.6 (or similar)....which is a fair bit smaller than F1.8.  
A larger aperture lets more light in, so that you can get a faster shutter speed...but it also gives you a shallower depth of field (DOF).  As mentioned, it's often a nice look when you can make the background blurry and this can be accomplished with a shallow DOF.

Next is image quality.  You may not realize it at this point...but the lenses you have are at the lower end of the quality scale for these types of lenses.  A simple 50mm F1.8 would be a pretty good step up in image quality.  A more expensive lens like a 50mm F1.4 might be an even bigger step up in image quality.  It can be hard to judge the quality that a lens will give you...but price is a good indicator...so if you want really good quality, you have to pay for it.


----------



## bigtwinky (Feb 6, 2009)

I had a 22-55mm lens when I first started with my camera last year.  
My first lens purchase was a 50mm f/1.8 ($120 CAD) and I quickly retired my 22-55.  The 50mm is a great lens for the price.  Great for portraits and great as well in low light conditions.

I almost exclusively use a 10-22 and my 50mm these days while I save up for a new lens.


----------



## Lyncca (Feb 6, 2009)

For portrait photography I only use my 50mm and 35mm primes. I will eventually probably get an 85mm or 105mm as well. Once you get used to a prime lens they are really great!

Oh, and another huge benefit is they are MUCH lighter. By the time you have the D300 (in my case), flash, battery etc. that sucker gets heavy, so adding another 2-3 lb. lens is a lot in comparison to the little nifty fifty


----------

