photosbysexton Loc: Knoxville, TN

My next lense purchase is coming up soon and I need some advice.

First of all, I'm using and Olympus E420 and an E620, so, I'm stuck using Zuiko lenses, unless I want to start adding other name brand bodies to my bag.

I have the 14-42 mm f 3.5-5.6, 40 -150 f 4-5.6, and the 70-300 f4-5.6 lenses now. My specialty is taking action shots of youth sports, and these lenses are actually perfect for this. I keep the short lense on the 420 and longest lense on the 620.

Now, I've had several people ask me to do portraits, maternity and wedding photos. I'm going to stay away from the weddings though (I'm allergic to weddings, yikes!).

Anyway, Zuiko is limited with it's primes, so I'm considering the following for portraits; 50mm f2.0 macro, 25mm f2.8 or 35mm f3.5.

Which of these would be the best for portraits and which of my existing lenses would be best to use until I save my pennies to buy the next one? I'm really liking the looks of the 50mm f2.0, but, I'm not married (there's that word again, GRRRR) to it yet.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

M

DanielB Loc: San Diego, Ca

I would go with the 50mm for sure. As far as what you have in the bag the 40-150 is probably what I'd use the most. The 14-42mm may be a little on the short side.

spokenimage Loc: Bearwaller, KY

I would go with the 50mm and use a hood if you are doing outside portraits. I love taking portraits of children outside just let them go and sit back and watch and you will get the most wonderful pictures God has ever allowed your eyes to see. I have a blog My Blessed One ! I have some pictures on that sight of my niece and daughter or a site of Spoken Image Photography. Good luck. Marlo

jdtx Loc: SA, Tx.

I do not suggest anything under 50mm for portraits in fact , most portrait photographers prefer a minimum of 85mm, you start to get distortion with the wider lenses and it can make some very odd lookin' people..

Kathi Loc: Pennsylvania

Hi. My favorite lens for portraits is my 85mm 1.8. I get a lot of great results from my 70 - 200mm 2.8 as well. I use this one for theatre and capturing individual actors on stage with fabulous images of them with the blurred background. I do use the 70 - 200 for weddings as well to get those great shots without them feeling like I'm right in their faces. Buying a new lens is so exciting... enjoy the thrill!

charles brown Loc: Tennesse

I use a 2.8 105 and takes tack sharp photos. However. the 1.8 for a blurred background is even better.

charles brown Loc: Tennesse

this day and age buying a new lens is both a thrill and expensive. Am retired so my choice was new lens or new rod and reel, both cost about the same - yes fishing can be that expensive. Opted for the rod and reel this time

photosbysexton Loc: Knoxville, TN

Yeah, I hear from many people that the 85 mm prime would be the best. But, to the best of my knowledge, there isn't one available for Olympus E series cameras. Zuiko also says that with their DSLR cameras, the focal length is doubled, so a 50mm would actually be a 100mm on a 35 mm film camera. Odd. Anyway, you all helped me with my decision. The 50mm will be my next lens. Now, to see if I can find a good used one. a hunting we will go, a hunting we will go . . .

photosbysexton Loc: Knoxville, TN

wow! Ebay just threw a hair into the biscuit batter. They had the same lens but in a tilt/shift lens, for much less money that the macro.

I don't know what to do now! Help :cry:

jdtx Loc: SA, Tx.

that depends on what you want to shoot, or what you shoot more of,,macro and tilt shift lenses are designed to do 2 totally different things

photopete Loc: Washington, DC

85mm or a 100mm.

photosbysexton Loc: Knoxville, TN

50mm f2.0 I love shooting architecture. Hence, the confusion.

jdtx Loc: SA, Tx.

the tilt shift lenses are made to order for architecture