tdozier3 Loc: Northern Illinois

This is a great lens for the price. I got mine on sale for 176 bucks new. It is also an FX lens, so if you ever decide to buy a full frame camera you will have no issues with it.Just keep in mind the crop factor on the DX body.

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

I agree that the 85mm, although the portrait lens of choice, it is best on a full-frame camera. I would opt for the 50mm f/1.4 instead. I have a very limited studio space and I actually prefer my Sigma 35mm f/1.4 on my full frame camera. Outside, I use the 85mm or my favorite outdoor portrait lens: the 135mm f1.8; but that lens is pretty pricey!!

To the OP: Good luck with your decision

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

The FF 85 or 105 with a large aperture, or a CF 50 -60, still needing a large aperture for background blur, is desirable.
The new PS background blur tool may make somewhat smaller aperture acceptable, but I have not tried it yet.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...nikon d5300 and I am on a fixed income..."
Jcthebaptist4950 the AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II Kit Lens that came with you Nikon D5300 will do just fine...

That said if you didn't get the camera with it's "Kit" lens then please consider the AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G.
This is likely one of the best portrait DX lens that Nikon has produced. Albeit it does not have VR like your kit lens so is a tad more demanding.

B&H has it new for $167 however sadly it only comes with a 1 year warranty...
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html

Personally I would not buy this lens used... At only $167 and a year warranty used pricing is not a wise route in my humble estimation... I have this lens and find it to be an excellent optic... It is "Equal" to 50mm in Full Frame Format...

btw, Richard Avedon used a 50mm Full Frame "Equivalent" format on his large format cameras...
And he created some of the most iconic portraiture of his day...

Hope this helps Jcthebaptist4950... All the best on your photographic journey

DanielJDLM

With a crop sensor the 50 would be fine, but I agree with others than the 18-55 kit lens works great. I have done model shoots with it with great results. I also use a 16-80 (24-120on DX) and simply set it at the appropriate zoom setting.

Jcthebaptist4950

Thank you for the information. I do appreciate.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

If you want to explore close up photography, look up Mike Moats. The will show you the way and not use expensive equipment.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Tamron 60mm f2 MACRO .....used ebay
.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Except that the D5300 is an APS-C camera, so a 50mm lens that "acts like a 75mm" is quite close to an ideal short telephoto for portraits.

Yes, an 85mm lens will work too, "acting like a 125mm". But it will either require more working distance or make for much tighter shots.

On my APS-C cameras I use both 50mm and 85mm as my "short and long" portrait lenses. On full frame I usually use 85mm and 135mm.

This is not to say that other focal lengths can't be used. They can. Personally I've shot portraits with 20mm, 700mm and almost everything in between. You have to be very careful using normal to wide angle lenses, due to the way they can distort and exaggerate. Longer telephotos can even more effectively obliterate backgrounds, but require lots of distance between you and the subject, which isn't always a good thing. Short telephotos for [i]full frame[/1] in the 70mm to 135mm focal lengths are the most ideal... the most flattering to the subjects with the least distortion and exaggeration. For Nikon APS-C cameras, that translates to a range from 45mm to 90mm. (Although Canon APS-C have slightly different "crop factor", it's not enough difference to worry about and prime lenses within the same focal length range applies.)

One of the key things usually wanted in a portrait lens is a large aperture. This is so you can blur down backgrounds and make your subject stand out. That's not always necessary, such as in a studio where you can control the background and it's lighting. But the ability to use a large aperture for shallower depth of field is desirable for candid, location shooting where you don't always have much choice about what's behind the subject and need to make it "go away" with blur effects.

Prime lenses can offer larger apertures than zooms, most of which have f/2.8 or smaller max apertures that limit how much background blur they can induce. Plus, f/2.8 zooms, along with a few zooms with even larger max apertures, are big, heavy and very expensive. Those zooms' size can be intrusive and intimidating to subjects, too. More compact and affordable zooms like 18-55mm kit lenses have a max aperture of f/5.6 at the telephoto end of their zoom range. That's two stops smaller than an f/2.8 zoom and three or more stops smaller than a lot of prime lenses.

So... some more arguments in their favor... relatively large aperture 50mm are compact, commonly available and affordable lenses.

The very good Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.8G can be found brand new for under $200.

Yongnuo offers a 50mm f/1.4 lens (2/3 stop larger max aperture) that costs even less, though I know nothing about it's build quality, image quality or AF performance. Read some reviews, if considering it.



Yes, that's a good lens too. It's compact and capable both as a macro lens and good for portraiture. I've used one on my Canon for 5 or 6 years. I'm generally not a fan of using macro lenses for portraiture (f/2.8 max aperture and actually too sharp, IMO), but this lens is an exception. It has larger aperture than most, which makes it quite usable. It can be sharp with great detail stopped down, or a little more forgiving wide open. Great color rendition and reasonably compact, too. The only thing, it's not fast focusing. That's typically no problem for macro or for most portraiture... But don't expect to use this lens for any sort of action photography. It doesn't acquire focus quickly or track movement well. I haven't compared them myself, but I'd wager the AF-S Nikkor 50mm lens is significantly faster focusing! I see the Tamron 60mm f/2 for Nikon is selling for around $280-$300 on eBay, B&H and elsewhere. I think it's now discontinued, but recently sold new for around $500.

Note: For a D5300 be sure to get a compatible lens. Earlier "AF" Nikkor don't have a built-in focusing motor. They rely on a motor built into the camera body. But that's only found on the D7000 series and higher Nikon DSLR models. The D5300 doesn't have the in-camera focusing motor. If you shop used and even some new, you'll find various lenses that will fit the D5300, but won't autofocus because they lack the focusing motor. So if you want autofocus you'll need to limit your shopping to AF-S or AF-P Nikkors, or third party lenses with a built-in focusing motor (incl. the 60mm Tamron mentioned above).

tgreenhaw

The canon 24-105 is either f3.5 ef or f4L. I find that for portraits I prefer f2.8 to get the right depth of field. More open and it's hard to get a whole face in focus. Above f3 or so too much of the background is not bokehed. You don't need f1.4 imho, it's only used in specialty occasions when you only want an 1/8 of an inch in focus. Look at a used f1.8 canon 85mm if you can justify $300 for stepping up your portrait game.

xposure

I agree that the AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm F2.8G ED could be the best choice. It is like shooting with a 90mm on a crop sensor and macro lenses perform better close up than regular lenses that are optimized for infinity not closer than 5 ft. like the Micro Nikkor.

tgreenhaw

I forgot to mention that wide open at 105mm would drop more of the background, but you may not have room to frame your shot. That's why 85 with a larger aperture is popular.

DanielJDLM

What about the Tamron 45mm? APC would be 67.5mm. Has VR too!

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

https://www.ebay.com/itm/254957508266?epid=1700318641&hash=item3b5ca6d6aa:g:IVYAAOSwnRZgh1Br
.