Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Distance from subject to camera with an 85mm lens
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
May 31, 2016 09:12:22   #
Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.
 
I use a 90mm Sony, it's a macro lens but it doubles as a portrait lens as well even though I mainly shoot macro. I use a FF Sony a7r2 but I also use it on my a6300 as well and get the equivalent of a 135mm lense. This works out for me great in that one lense, triple duty. Getting my money's worth out of this one.

Reply
May 31, 2016 09:39:50   #
jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ
 
rjaywallace wrote:
There would appear to be an easy way for you to answer this question. You already list four lenses that include an 85mm focal length in their range. How do they work in that 14 foot room when you extend them to 85mm? It may not be a perfect apples-to-apples comparison, but you could get a pretty good idea.



Reply
May 31, 2016 13:03:10   #
forjava Loc: Half Moon Bay, CA
 
Very useful remarks. Esp. the gel thing.
Thanks.
Seemingly, nobody ever says if some of the lights can be continuous, for example, when the key and fill are strobes.

Apaflo wrote:
I had not noticed the list of lenses in your signature. You don't need an 85mm prime. That's a waste of money at this point.

Either the 28-70mm f/2.8 or the 70-200mm f/2.8 will serve your needs, depending on focus distance and the framing you want.

At least two of us have hinted fairly heavily that lights would be a better way to fuss with gear acquisition. With two speedlights (and the SB800 is a good one) you have a start.

Extra lights are cheap if you want to go easy on the pocket book. The results are just as good as with better equipment. The advantage is easy of use, not better images.

You need two main lights, one powerful light that can deal with a softbox. Then you need a fill light, that need not be as powerful. Another pair that also need not be much of anything at all are used for a hair light and one to light the background. The SB800 is good for the main light, and the others can be older used manual lights with optical triggers. Vivitar 283 and 285 models are common, and along with Nikon SB24 are under $50. SB28 and SB26 models are under $100. Brand new models from various Chinese distributors are running everywhere from $40 on up.

So extra flash units is not the problem, it's outfitting them with a light stand and whatever kind of light modifiers are reasonable... the hair light needs a really tall stand and some kind of a snoot and grid. The side lights need medium height stands and barn doors. The main lights might be a softbox on one and a large beauty dish on the other, and they need fairly tall light stands. The background light can use a very short stand and needs something to hold color gels.

The total cost is probably about the same or less than a good 85mm f/1.4, but the effect on your photography would be huge. (You will have a very hard time, shooting studio portraits, seeing a difference between shooting with an 85mm f/1.4 and that 70-200mm f/2.8 set to 85mm.)
I had not noticed the list of lenses in your signa... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
May 31, 2016 13:17:58   #
CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver
 
forjava wrote:
Very useful remarks. Esp. the gel thing.
Thanks.
Seemingly, nobody ever says if some of the lights can be continuous, for example, when the key and fill are strobes.


Light is light. One can use/mix continuous with strobes long as color temperatures match, BUT (as a general statement) one would have to dial the strobes down pretty far as most continuous lights even at the highest settings are putting out much less light than speedlights or strobes. So it certainly can be done. It is just the balancing the outputs that would be problematic. Some of the very expensive continuous light units have become much brighter, but those units are not going to be in the price range of any but the high-end professionals.

Reply
May 31, 2016 16:47:13   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
You don't need an 85mm, in relatively small space like you have, it will be very limited.... mostly a head and shoulders "tight portrait" only lens.

Besides, you already have one of the best possible portrait lenses for use on a DX camera.... Your Sigma 50/1.4. (Even better than the f2.8 zooms.)

Someone mentions a 60/2.8 macro, which would be no better than using one of your f2.8 zooms.

Instead, if money is really burning a hole in your pocket, Tamron SP 60/2.0 is great both for macro and portraits. It's f2.0 aperture is a full stop larger than the f2.8s.

These large apertures are not so much about low light shooting, as they are about controlling depth of field, being able to strongly blur down backgrounds and make the subject really pop in portraits.

Note that like most macro lenses the Tamron 60/2.0 is not particularly fast focusing. It's fine for portraits and macro.... but not very usable for sports/action.

Reply
May 31, 2016 17:51:13   #
Dziadzi Loc: Wilkes-Barre, PA
 
Tjcoates wrote:
For portraits using my 7100 I have obtained very good results using a 50mm which on a DX body is equal to 75mm and have done so in very tight spaces.


May I ask what f-stop your 50mm is? I do have an f/1.4

Reply
May 31, 2016 17:53:45   #
Dziadzi Loc: Wilkes-Barre, PA
 
amfoto1 wrote:
You don't need an 85mm, in relatively small space like you have, it will be very limited.... mostly a head and shoulders "tight portrait" only lens.

Besides, you already have one of the best possible portrait lenses for use on a DX camera.... Your Sigma 50/1.4. (Even better than the f2.8 zooms.)

Someone mentions a 60/2.8 macro, which would be no better than using one of your f2.8 zooms.

Instead, if money is really burning a hole in your pocket, Tamron SP 60/2.0 is great both for macro and portraits. It's f2.0 aperture is a full stop larger than the f2.8s.

These large apertures are not so much about low light shooting, as they are about controlling depth of field, being able to strongly blur down backgrounds and make the subject really pop in portraits.

Note that like most macro lenses the Tamron 60/2.0 is not particularly fast focusing. It's fine for portraits and macro.... but not very usable for sports/action.
You don't need an 85mm, in relatively small space ... (show quote)


Alan, that is my latest thought......the Tamron 60mm.

Reply
 
 
May 31, 2016 18:00:59   #
Dziadzi Loc: Wilkes-Barre, PA
 
Apaflo wrote:
I had not noticed the list of lenses in your signature. You don't need an 85mm prime. That's a waste of money at this point.

Either the 28-70mm f/2.8 or the 70-200mm f/2.8 will serve your needs, depending on focus distance and the framing you want.

At least two of us have hinted fairly heavily that lights would be a better way to fuss with gear acquisition. With two speedlights (and the SB800 is a good one) you have a start.

Extra lights are cheap if you want to go easy on the pocket book. The results are just as good as with better equipment. The advantage is easy of use, not better images.

You need two main lights, one powerful light that can deal with a softbox. Then you need a fill light, that need not be as powerful. Another pair that also need not be much of anything at all are used for a hair light and one to light the background. The SB800 is good for the main light, and the others can be older used manual lights with optical triggers. Vivitar 283 and 285 models are common, and along with Nikon SB24 are under $50. SB28 and SB26 models are under $100. Brand new models from various Chinese distributors are running everywhere from $40 on up.

So extra flash units is not the problem, it's outfitting them with a light stand and whatever kind of light modifiers are reasonable... the hair light needs a really tall stand and some kind of a snoot and grid. The side lights need medium height stands and barn doors. The main lights might be a softbox on one and a large beauty dish on the other, and they need fairly tall light stands. The background light can use a very short stand and needs something to hold color gels.

The total cost is probably about the same or less than a good 85mm f/1.4, but the effect on your photography would be huge. (You will have a very hard time, shooting studio portraits, seeing a difference between shooting with an 85mm f/1.4 and that 70-200mm f/2.8 set to 85mm.)
I had not noticed the list of lenses in your signa... (show quote)


That was a mindful, Apaflo.

Reply
May 31, 2016 18:02:49   #
Dziadzi Loc: Wilkes-Barre, PA
 
Apaflo wrote:
He already stated that he has less than 14 feet of room. At a focus distance of 12 feet, the 85mm will work for nothing greater than a head and shoulders shot. This has already been discussed, there is no point in rehashing it.

As to wanting a prime? So what. There is no benefit compared to his existing lenses. You are recommending a $500 paper weight. For a tight budget, paper weights are pretty low on the priority list...


Thanks!

Reply
May 31, 2016 18:04:51   #
Dziadzi Loc: Wilkes-Barre, PA
 
Thanks, Steve!

Reply
May 31, 2016 18:07:06   #
Dziadzi Loc: Wilkes-Barre, PA
 
SteveR wrote:
Didn't see that. Obviously from his list of lenses he could have answered the question himself.


The OP doesn't spend all day on here.

Reply
 
 
May 31, 2016 18:12:08   #
Dziadzi Loc: Wilkes-Barre, PA
 
Thanks everyone for all of your input. I am going to try the 50mm Sigma, and rent the Tamron 60 to see what the difference is.

Reply
May 31, 2016 18:16:18   #
charles brown Loc: Tennesse
 
Dziadzi wrote:
I am having a gas attack to purchase an 85mm lens for portraiture shooting. My big question is.....will I have enough room to be able to use an 85mm lens on my D7100? The room in my house that I would like to use is less than 14ft.


As said by others, use the money for something else, you already have lenses that will do the job nicely. Do you have a garage? Found that I had much more room there than in the house. Go to youtube and you will find lots of videos that will be of help. They cover everything from one light set-ups to two, three, four, etc. light set-ups. I also have an open concept house (kitchen, dining room, living room all open to each other) and have had people stand in front of the living room fireplace and taken the picture while standing in the kitchen.

Reply
May 31, 2016 18:16:22   #
SharpShooter Loc: NorCal
 
Dziadzi wrote:
The OP doesn't spend all day on here.


And why not?!?! What is wrong with you?!
Even if you had a job, you should spend all day at work on here.
And if you have a LIFE......, get RID of it!!!!!!
SS

Reply
May 31, 2016 19:54:51   #
Dziadzi Loc: Wilkes-Barre, PA
 
charles brown wrote:
As said by others, use the money for something else, you already have lenses that will do the job nicely. Do you have a garage? Found that I had much more room there than in the house. Go to youtube and you will find lots of videos that will be of help. They cover everything from one light set-ups to two, three, four, etc. light set-ups. I also have an open concept house (kitchen, dining room, living room all open to each other) and have had people stand in front of the living room fireplace and taken the picture while standing in the kitchen.
As said by others, use the money for something els... (show quote)


Not everyone can afford an open concept home. Some of us can only afford a Cape Cod.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.