Jump to content

Lens for the night/landscape/portrait shooting f1.8 loving hobbiest


Recommended Posts

My story is weird. For the past 2 years I have been using my brothers cameras on random occasions to take pictures. It was always infrequent but I managed to get a few good pictures every blue moon when I had it. I've tried Nikon and canon but ultimately stuck with sony and just bought an A7 this week. Now my problem is what lens should I get?

 

I've seen countless youtube videos and reviews for a lot of lenses... mainly Zeiss, but I'm having the hardest time picking 1. Looking back at most of my better pictures I found that I love staying at f 1.8 for pretty much every portrait and most other pictures I take. I love bokeh a lot. But I also want to get into more landscape, street, and background inclusive portraits. From what I've seen so far it sounds like a 35 or 50 are the only options, but the 85 is the portrait lens I'd want for potentially selling graduation pictures. And then comes in price and quality. I can cough up 500 now or wait a month for 700 or so but I'm positive I won't be that patient. But this will mostlikelt be my only lens for atleast 6 months if not years.

 

 

Sorry for the messy post, any help on my first lens purchase us appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a wide scale to cover with 700'ish. I'd look for used prime lenses for Nikon Canon Pentax or Minolta, a scratch or two doesn't have much effect on the picture quality but reduces the price considerably. Get a good adapter and find the lenses with pennies, just take your time and do some research, you'll find reviews from most of them with Google. For landscapes get so wideangled as you dare (I used 20mm mostly with FF) about portraits dunno so much. If wildlife is your thing a 200 or 300mm is good to start with..

 

BR Teddy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me, but I don’t understand the logic of buying an expensive interchangeable lens camera then limiting yourself to one prime lens that you always set to minimum depth of field (maximum aperture). Especially when you list a wide variety of subjects you’d like to photograph.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

In your shoes, I would get the Sony FE 55mm f1.8. It's an allround lens capable of good portraits with nice bokeh. It often sells with a reduction on new lenses, or you can buy a used copy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me, but I don’t understand the logic of buying an expensive interchangeable lens camera then limiting yourself to one prime lens that you always set to minimum depth of field (maximum aperture). Especially when you list a wide variety of subjects you’d like to photograph.

 

Because as a college student I currently have limited funds and experience. Like I said all my past experience gas been with my brothers camera and less than 15 times total. Of the pictures that I am proud of the most, all but a few were shot at f1.8. I will one day have money for more lenses, but that's in the unforeseen future. So in asking for advice on which lens should be my first; so I have some versatility including fast low light capability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were to limit myself to one fast lens, I would choose the Sony/Zeiss 35mm 1.4.  It is extremely sharp, has great presence, and is more versatile than my second choice 50mm Zeiss 1.4 (which is extraordinary too, but 50mm less useful for day to day shooting if you just have one lens.)  I briefly owned the 55mm 1.8 but it is not in the class of the 50mm 1.4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If I were to limit myself to one fast lens, I would choose the Sony/Zeiss 35mm 1.4.It is extremely sharp, has great presence, and is more versatile than my second choice 50mm Zeiss 1.4 (which is extraordinary too, but 50mm less useful for day to day shooting if you just have one lens.)I briefly owned the 55mm 1.8 but it is not in the class of the 50mm 1.4.

My brother was urging me to get the 55mm 1.8 but he hasn't had it himself. Input from people who have had multiple lenses is just what I wanted so thanks for the input.  :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you really love an 85 for portraits and that is 

important to you, realize that it is also a great 

landscape lens. "Common wisdom" is "bubble 

think", just bubble dwellers telling each other 

the same things over and over. I can assure

you that landscapes composed with an 85mm 

will stand out from all the "me-too" wide angle 

stuff. Your details will be clearer, field of view 

will be wide enuf without being too cluttered. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you really love an 85 for portraits and that is

important to you, realize that it is also a great

landscape lens. "Common wisdom" is "bubble

think", just bubble dwellers telling each other

the same things over and over. I can assure

you that landscapes composed with an 85mm

will stand out from all the "me-too" wide angle

stuff. Your details will be clearer, field of view

will be wide enuf without being too cluttered.

I hadn't even though of looking at the 85 for landscape. No videos ever mention a lens past 50mm for landscape. I'll have to check out some sample images. Thanks.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

If you're into photography, it's always a good idea to get the best camera you can afford. It doesn't have to be the best camera available, just the best one you can afford. So, buying an A7 and one good lens is probably a rational choice if you're into portraits and landscape.

 

An 85mm lens is good for portraits but it's not an allround lens. The focal length will be either too long or too short for most other types of photography. Therefore, I would argue against it as an only lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hadn't even though of looking at the 85 for landscape.

No videos ever mention a lens past 50mm for landscape.

I'll have to check out some sample images. Thanks.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

     

Search for videos and sample images and you'll  

just wind up buried in examples of the "common 

wisdom". Rotsa ruck on that.   

    

 This is about 80% crop from 70mm so this would 

be the field of view from an 85mm. It's not really 

narrow, and is about the same as human vision 

when viewing a distant scene. "Normal" lens are 

similar to human vision when viewing things that 

are closer at hand. This is NOT a huge distance 

away. I just grabbed a shot from my front porch as 

an example of FoV, and the bench is immediately 

across the street from the house. 

   

  

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

    

    

   

If I had cross road to shoot this I'd need a wide angle 

to get the foreground objects and bridge would be tiny. 

  

I'm not saying the whole world should convert to 85 

for sceneics. Only that if you love the 85mm for your 

portraits, don't let everyone tell you it's not much of a 

scenic lens. Use it well and it will show you all of its 

advantages. You compose for the lens at hand. Thaz 

how it's always been.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d hate to be limited to just one focal length. Since you’re on a tight budget and you don’t even know what focal length you prefer, why not start with two or three vintage prime lenses? For example Minolta Rokkor 50mm/1.7 lenses can be found dirt cheap and are very good. You could try that a while before deciding if you want to spring for a more expensive modern lens. That assumes you can live without autofocus and stabilization for a while.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Jaf-Photo, above. My first Sony lens was the 55 1.8. It's a fantastic lens for portraits and a great walk-around lens. Super sharp, with beautiful bokeh. I love it far more than my Sony 24-70G. If you feel really compelled to shoot wide angle, your next lens could be an inexpensive Rokinon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

There are different types of landscape photography. There are mountains, plains, woodlands, deserts, seascapes, waterways etc. So, there is no one lens that covers every type of landscape photo possible.

 

But when people talk about landscape photos, they generally mean a wide view of natural scenery. They rarely mean a shot of a park bench with a railway bridge in the background.

 

I don't think it's very ethical to try to impose your way of doing things on other people. Especially if it's somewhat underwhelming.

 

 

 

 

Search for videos and sample images and you'll

just wind up buried in examples of the "common

wisdom". Rotsa ruck on that.

 

This is about 80% crop from 70mm so this would

be the field of view from an 85mm. It's not really

narrow, and is about the same as human vision

when viewing a distant scene. "Normal" lens are

similar to human vision when viewing things that

are closer at hand. This is NOT a huge distance

away. I just grabbed a shot from my front porch as

an example of FoV, and the bench is immediately

across the street from the house.

 

 

attachicon.gifHudson Drizzle BW 3103 WS.jpg

 

 

If I had cross road to shoot this I'd need a wide angle

to get the foreground objects and bridge would be tiny.

 

I'm not saying the whole world should convert to 85

for sceneics. Only that if you love the 85mm for your

portraits, don't let everyone tell you it's not much of a

scenic lens. Use it well and it will show you all of its

advantages. You compose for the lens at hand. Thaz

how it's always been.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

...... when people talk about landscape photos, they generally

mean a wide view of natural scenery. They rarely mean a shot

of a park bench with a railway bridge in the background.

 

I don't think it's very ethical to try to impose your way of doing

things on other people. 

     

Mebbe you read too quickly or on a tiny screen,

so I'll just repeat myself ... with highlighting :  

 

.... not saying the whole world should convert to 85 

for scenics. Only that if you love the 85mm for your 

portraits, don't let everyone tell you it's not much of a 

scenic lens.  

      

Clearly, "ethics" is a red herring here. Likewise fishy is 

any concern about "wide view of natural scenery", since 

"wide view" tends to involve distance, and 85mm is a 

wide view at any distance describable as "scenery". No 

argument offered about the fact that one can IMPOSE a 

much wider FoV on a scene, but compromising the idea 

of "natural scenery", moving toward "effects". There's no 

more "natural" FoV than staying within the 35 to 90mm 

range. So if someone loves their 85 for portraits, it's not 

really "ethical" to dump on the scenic potential of the 85, 

given that it's already on hand due to love of portraiture. 

Ethically, you "dance with the one who brung you"

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------    

 

Thanks for providing a reason to repeat myself. From 

what I'm seeing of wide and ultrawide usage, mebbe the 

"whole world" SHOULD convert to 50 or 85 for scenics. 

Only just mebbe .....    

    

BTW, checking the exif I find the FL is 100mm. Here's 

the scene in it's original color with no cropping:   

    

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

    

    

    

 

 

`    

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

I read it. You're telling a guy to use 85mm for landscape photography, even though it would be vety limiting and the guy hadn't even thought of it. That's trying to impose your way on someone.

 

 

Mebbe you read to quickly or on a tiny screen,

so I'll just repeat myself ... with highlighting :  

 

.... not saying the whole world should convert to 85 for scenics. Only that if you love the 85mm for your portraits, don't let everyone tell you it's not much of a scenic lens.  

    

-----------------------------------------------------------------------    

 

    

Thanks for providing an excuse to repeat that. From 

what I'm seeing of wide and ultrawide use, mebbe the 

"whole world" SHOULD convert to 50 or 85 for scenics. 

    

Link to post
Share on other sites

........That's trying to impose your way on someone.

 

   

Imposing ? I won't even question that. Maybe 

I'm ordering him, telepathically. "Brain snatcher" 

powers at 100%, ordering him to just go ahead

and use what's on hand. Large deal. 

  

OTOH, YOU are telling him not to go ahead and 

use a lens that he already prefers for portraiture, 

when that lens can be used for other purposes.   

The whole point of an 85 is that it's a very MILD 

telephoto FL and so is handy for other purposes. 

  

There's no point in arguing what is ideal. It doesn't 

hafta be ideal, as long as it's capable and already 

on hand. If THAT constitutes "imposing", then I'm

shamelessly guilty of imposing common sense in 

the face of well-worn photogeek-party-line advice

about spending someone else's budget. 

   

If it makes you happy I'll say it right here, "85mm 

is NOT ideal for scenics". But there IS NO ideal 

FL, and no reason reach for whatever is in use by 

the Great Majority if another able tool is at hand.  

Obviously, in a perfect world, the OP would own all 

the likely lenses, and have a caddy to carry them ! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

  

Obviously, in a perfect world, the OP would own all 

the likely lenses, and have a caddy to carry them !

 

Darn. Why didn't I think of that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Cameras come and go as technology improves.  A good lens will last a long time.  My first E mount lens was the 55 f1.8.  Now two years later I may replace it with the 50 f1.4 which was not available two years ago.  Wide open, the 55 delivers bokeh.  My copy was bought used on eBay.  

 

My advice: get the best glass you can afford.  They hold value well and will serve you well while you own they.  If you buy junk, you get what you pay for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...