My Most Used Portrait Lens Will Surprise You
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- I take a look at my most used portrait lens and why it has become my most used lens.
🔥ONLINE WORKSHOPS:
www.martincast...
🔥 My presets and tutorials:
www.martincast...
🔥 Your support makes a big difference to me, consider buying me a coffee here:
ko-fi.com/mart...
If you only watch ONE MORE video of mine, make it this one:
• ISO and Sharpness are ...
=========================
Follow me on instagram: / martincastein
Website: www.martincast...
=========================
24-70 mm at 2.8 is my favorite lens at the moment because of its versatility.
This resonated with me! I've been told by more than one client they like my work because I shoot a blended glamour and fashion style. My go-to lens was the Sigma 24-105mm f/4 Art but I sold it and other gear I wasn't using to get the Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8 which has become my main lens for studio, headshot, and event photography. I also love the RF 50mm f/1.8 for times when I want to crush the background more. I'd love to get my hands on the 50mm f/1.2 but I blew my budget on the 24-105 which has already paid for itself.
Thanks Martin, I have never seen your channel before, Your work is stellar. So many people talking about cameras and gear cannot actually photograph people. That does not apply to you. Thanks for the video.
Thank you!
Please check out his other videos. One can learn a lot from Martin. He is very knowledgeable and talented, and no nonsense.
During the time I did event photography I used a 24-70 F2.8 for much of the same reason as long as I felt that the light was in my faviour. Many of the weddings I shot had elements that led the couple to choose a particular venue, so some of the bridal photos were taken in those areas that were outdoors. I would use a variety of prime lens when the light was low or the faster aperture was needed. Because I worked by myself, I used the 24-70 F2.8 during the wedding ceremony so I started at 7omm an worked down to 24mm as the bridal party made their way down the asile. This way I could use one camera and focus on the ceremony.
For portraits I use the Canon R my three main lenses are
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 G2
Zeiss 35mm f/2 Distagon
Nikon 105 f/2 DC
I shoot with the 24-70 f2.8 the most, but my best portraits have come from my 135mm 2.0. Somehow, the distance works well with my personality. I like intimate face shots. If I'm working closer to my subject using a shorter lens, subtle signs of discomfort, or trying to please, can come through in the resulting photograph. So, the slightly longer lens seems to work better with my personality and vibe. And it's been this way for me for a long time. Back in my film shooting days, my two favorite lenses were a Zeiss Biotar 7.5 cm f1.5 and a Nikon 105 f2.5.
I hear ya. That 135 f/2.0 is legendary! I have had limited success with the 135 f/2.8 SF lens myself. I like 85/ 135/ 200/ 300 focal ranges. Stay safe Happy Shooting!
I often shoot with a 50 1.4 on my 5D2. That's my go-to portrait lens although I don't mind the 40 mm 2.8.
I love the 40mm f2.8. It's the best little lens to walk around with if I only want to take one camera with me. Otherwise I carry the RP with the good old EF 50mm f1.8, and my little M series camera with the 22mm f2 in case I suddenly want to shoot wider without messing around switching lenses.
Agreed, I love hiking with the 40 mm, it's so light. @@SzilviaVirag
Try sigma art 40mm f1.4..
Will blow your socks off
Unmatched in image quality
I agree, for me 24-70/2.8 was the best investment in the past. For fashion and weddings it has done most of the work.
It's definitely my most used lens. I mostly do event portraits at a university. (Nikkor Z)
2.8 is a magic number on full frame. I've since decided that I don't really need anything faster. I now carry 28mm 2.8 and 50mm 2.5 primes for my Leica and they are tiny. But I still get the right amount of separation. In fact, I am usually at f4 on a 50mm in-between a meter or two for portrait.
This was a great video and for it it was the 24-105 f4 I just love the focal range it offers but I do agree with the sharpness issue
Thank you for the video! I most often use Nikkor 50 1.8G and Nikkor 80-200 2.8D.
Superb lighting. Some of the best I’ve seen. Thank you.
I'm a Fuji film shooter and also Nikon and other bits and pieces as well and definitely you start to develop a niche for what you want with the lenses you have. I'm a big 50 mm fan and the reason for it is in Fuji that particular lens that I use which is a 35 1.4mm - 50 equivalent is that it has character. And when she been shooting for with awhile you kinda know where to stand in relative distance to people I like it because I can get candid shots of people, but I can also step back a little bit and still retain some background separation and honestly with Lightroom now you can add a little bit of background separation and it doesn't look too bad. It's also good in confined spaces it's also discreet and what I mean is my 50 mm equivalent lens is very small and discreet so it doesn't intimidate people as soon as you put a big hulking long zoom lens on the end of your camera intimidates people I've seen it yesterday at a wedding. I was shooting with the FujifilmXT5 with a 50 mm equivalent lens and I had no problems getting shots. I then pulled out my GFX just for a couple long shots with a big lens on it and you just see the people and the way they change as soon as they see a big camera with a big lens, everything changes. No other people have talked about this as well, and I never believed it until I saw it with my own eyes. A big lens will intimidate customers and people add an event where is a smaller camera with a more discreet look will not intimidate people. And yes it's real so that is a factor that I've now started to think about more and more. And it's partly why cameras like the X100v and Vi are so popular for that stroller Photography because they are small and discreet
a 28/24 AF looks like a 85 & quite heavy. u r no longer invisible !
We need to turn the discussion of lenses around. That will do two things: (1) remove the surprise, and (2) introduce learning and frustration that goes with learning.
The result will be better images.
Both in the portrait (person) and the background, what we are discussing is "perspective".
And perspective follows from distance to subject, and angle to subject.
Relative to that, the focal length, image angle, is just the in-camera crop.
Our problem is that "we" do not see photographically. We need to learn that - photographers and fin art artists.
Once we can see photographically, we can easily decide at what distance to shoot a subject. And in that use perspective compression, or perspective exaggeration, or perspective masking versus accentuation.
This, again, follows from distance and angle to subject.
Very wide image angle lenses add some seeming distortion to the edge of the frame. And we need to learn to deal with that. Other than that, the discussion is about distance.
As to the nifty-fifty, we have to understand that this is a "masculine" thing. The anatomy of the brain is on the X chromosome and men with one X, women with 2 Xs have different brains. Vision is in part also on the X chromosome. 1X people have more "tunnel vision" and 2X people have more wide-angle vision. The latter may want more "context" or background, hence a wider angle lens.
Part of this discussion was relayed to me by two Asian women. Where one said she preferred white men for their more profiles faces. The other a photographer that shot portraits with a 35mm lens - i.e. at closer distance and hence exaggerating relief in the face, or elsewhere.
We also have to consider the effect of the smartphone-camera and selfies. The face-perspective in a portrait that was unacceptable 40 years ago is totally fine today - portraits are shot at arm's length a lot, now.
So I would want to see my images classified by Lightroom by distance, not focal length.
I am a Sony shooter, and though I don't use it as often as say my 55 1.8 or my 85 1.8, I absolutely love the 135 STF 2.8 (T4.5) utilizing an adapter. The background separation and bokeh are amazing. It is quite heavy though.
I really enjoyed this video. I'm considering adding a standard zoom and have been eyeing the rf 28-70 f2, I mostly shoot candids of my children and for the past 10 years been using 35,50,85 combo but always wondered if I need a standard zoom. What really got me is when you said it's only a boring range if you make it boring. I'm also considering upgrading my 50mm 1.8 to the 1.2 version. Ah first world problems great video and new sub here
Loved your samples, Martin. I watched it a 2nd time without the sound. You draw a lot of emotion out of your models.
Thank you Martin for the informative videos. The lens I use most often on my Canon R50 is the Canon 18-150 f 3.5 - 6.3 RF lens. I bought the camera with two lenses, an 18 - 45 mm f 4.5 - 6.3 lens and a 55 - 210 f 5 - 7.1. It was frustrating having to change lenses, and felt there had to be a better option than to need to take two lenses everywhere you went. That is what I was doing at the first big event I took the camera to, which was the wedding of a nephew. According to the specs the 18-150 has better aperture at 18 mm and at 150 it is probably about the same as the kit lenses. I also have an 85 mm f2 lens and a 50 mm f 1.8 lens, these are Canon "RF" lenses. I also bought a 75 - 300 EF lens and bought an adaptor so I could use it with the camera , but I hadn't been using it as I had trouble with the auto-focus constantly hunting while you were walking or moving the camera around. I eventually found a parameter which I changed and it no longer does that, so I might use it more often now. I also have a Canon SX60 HS, which comes with a built in lens (3.8 - 247 mm f 3.4 - 6.5); and a Nikon D70, for which I currently have only one lens, which is a Nikon 18-200 f 3.4 - 5.6.
Hi Martin just discovered your channel and wanted to say something about your work really stands out from the crowd. I will check out your other videos.
Welcome aboard!
I saw someone ripping on the 24-70 2.8L mark 1 on reddit the other day and I'm just like HUH? No, it's not as sharp as the mark II but it's a big upgrade almost any other standard zoom at the price point. The character, bokeh, and sharpness is far better than the 24-105 imo.
Your portfolio is very impressive.
Thank you
Didn’t see that coming. Would’ve figured a 50 or 85. Maybe a 40 or a 60mil macro. Never would’ve guessed a zoom though.
This is why I find the new RF 24-105 f/2.8 so tempting. When I have my 24-105 f/4 on for portraits, I often wish that I could get the additional separation and more limited depth of field that a wider aperture would provide. I can get that with my 35, 50, and 85mm primes and my 70-200 f/2.8 zoom, but they all feel limiting in some way. I'd probably keep the f/4 for travel and general use, and the primes for specific use cases, but the f/2.8 seems like it would open up some new possibilities.
I agree. I have the RF 24-105 f/2.8. It is just always on my R3 unless I have the RF 100-300 on it.
My Trinity of lenses:
RF 100-300mm F2.8 L IS USM
RF 24-105mm F2.8 L IS USM Z
RF 10-20mm f/4L IS STM
Getting the most flattering perspective is all about the subject to camera distance, which is why a zoom lens is so versatile. On a FF A 40mm or 35mm is great for an environmental portrait but sucks for tight to medium head shots, even a 50mm sucks for tight to medium head shots IMO. If I wasn't using a zoom, I prefer the 40mm 1.4 (Sigma Art) or a 35mm 1.4 for a wider environment shot and an 85 1.4 for the tight to mid CU head shot, but no wider than a 70mm. But for fast versatility the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 is hard to beat.
a 40 f/2 was my most used on a m-mount rangefinder. Excellent & compact !
many memorable environ.portraits (esp. at dusk) from Central Park "woodstock"
& then used as a 60 on apsc sony by focus-peaking for a few years.
seldom used on FF a7 series; will do more often , good results expected.
Hard to imagine replacing it w/ the excellent 40 f/2.5 G (tested corner to corner,
diagonal real-world photos by camera lab in uk) by coughing up $600.
the 20-70 f/4 G is still on my mind; f/4 is not a problem as i am used to (all film) 24-35 f3.5, 24-50 f/4 AF & the Tokina 25-50 (only 2 weeks old on a new body snatched by 2 guys in front of st.mark's church on 2nd ave) ; problem is i chose & bought the(3 yrs older) 17-28 f/2.8 over it only 4 months ago. "harder" to use as it's less versatile,
17-40 f/2.8 would be ideal, 2.8 is good. The Aperture ring on the
20-70 is something to dro on. i'm Not a gadget freak, just a make-doer (like in
my kitchen ; open all cupboards & fridge & make-do ). considering i started on 127 film , over the yrs i own practically nothing compared to most photogs.
folks, damn the topedoes/lenses shoot ahead.
p.s. the 20-70 G could be too sharp ( not too harsh ) for portraits !
photos of various metal surfaces are just unreal
The women in the red coat image with the black buttons wow that's some image.
Most used for me now is the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 on APSC. The most versatile and light weight zoom that makes shooting APSC actually worth the trade-offs.
Good question (at the end), and a tough one. I've just started being more interested in photographing portraits. I shot predominately wildlife, and avoided portraits because I didn't understand strobes (or even light if I'm being completely honest), didn't own a stand, and didn't understand the first thing (or so I thought) about positioning people and making them feel comfortable in front of my lens. Once I started paying a bit more attention to the four letter word (pose), I realized many of the concepts are the same as in dance - esthetically pleasing angles and positions, That made me feel more comfortable about directing someone else. Now, as for the most used lens thing: I'm going to combine a comment you made in your most recent video (the one you made today) on starting with portraits, with my comment here. The most common lens I'm using, is the one I'm using now. That is to say, I'm trying to force myself to use one lens for all portraiture for a while, till I feel I know it very well, and then do the same with the alternatives. Yes, I get the prime vs zoom, and the less expensive f/4 zoom in studio vs better separation outdoors. I don't own many lenses, but the ones I own tend to be "unique" (Nikkor 105mm f/1.4 (used copy), 200mm f/2 - used copy purchased for low light sports/action.and small child photography). The 2 telephoto lenses are the ones I shoot the most outdoors. You know the problems with the 200mm for portraits - if you are doing your type of photography (i.e. fashion-lite, environmentalist portrait), you need a hand-signals to work with your subject. That said, and not to make too much of it, I just love the look and separation of that lens when you shoot it wide-open. I imagine the 24-70mm f/2.8 will be the next lens to pick up and really learn. After that, it's likely a 24 or 35mm prime. Perhaps, it's just me, but I feel as though a 50mm prime would be the most challenging, so I'm electing to leave it for last. An 85mm? everyone shoots them - and I'd rather not lump myself there just yet.
Absolutely lovely video! I like that there are still "calm" people on here. No shouting, no "super sick jump cuts". Just wondering what you think about the 35-150mm by Tamron. Of course it's another Platform and all but I sold my 28-75 2.8 for the 35-150mm as I noticed I mostly shoot above 45mm. Personally I couldn't be happier but I'm wondering wether too much comfort is the enemy of growth. (I'm an absolute amateur btw).
I cant do the shouting and jumping about over a camera or lens haha. I think if were shooting on sony id get the 35-150. I think its the smart choice focal range for a zoom and the results ive seen are very good, its not overly sharp which is perfect.
I use the Nikkor 24-85 2.8 on my D850.Nice old lens. Just enough tele reach but not too much. And macro to boot!
Agreed, best lens ever. I used the d series on my f100, and the g series on my d750.
If I were shooting portraits, which I am not, I would be taking a long hard look at the new RF 24-105 f2.8L lens for my R-5 body. I have the 24-105 f4 L version, and I agree it is not as sharp as my RF 50 1.2.
Love your work. Inspiring and educational.
RF 35mm 1.8 or its fuji eqv 23mm 1.4. Small enough with enough separation to carry everywhere you go and excellent for photography of children in their environment
Excellent video! Thanks for sharing Martin.
Great food for thought - thanks Martin!
Some good points here. 50m is a great portrait lens so is tge 35mf2 just have to get a bit closer and it’s wider close up, but as you say the 50m has its editorial look
Was wondering, having not seen anything for awhile. Even though I m not doing portraits or even a pro for that matter I always try to learn from the information
I’m good, needed a little break for a bit but back now and feeling ready to go!
I’m quite surprised by this as my 24-70 f2.8 is an ultra reliable workhorse for weddings and events and I get great results. However for me personally nothing can touch the 85mm f1.2 for pure aesthetics and artistic beauty. It is slow but portrait photography isn’t fast moving. My preferred aperture is f2 or wider. Sublime.
I sometimes shoot with my 24-120 f4 because its flexible, but I prefer my 50mm f1,4 for the separation.
I really love the 500mm f8 for portraits. In the studio it gives me incredible close ups that highlight the emotion I am going after. And outside it really captures the mid day light and the harsh shadows I prefer. Great video- thanks for sharing.
I miss my 250mm f5,6 mirror lens lost in "storage". Incredible saturation (compared to regular lenses in range 150-300) due to reduction of lenses used (needed for correction). Difficult to use at close distance, dof is practically zero.
Incredible portraits!!! Very inspirational. Thanks!
Many thanks!
My God man! do you ever bring out the handsome in the materiels you work with
I am not surprised, the EF 24-70mm 2.8 is a good mix between performance and character (and now price), it is my most used Canon zoom lens. To each his own but for the Canon EF system my most used lens is the EF 50mm f/1.2 - although IMO it can be a frustrating lens, so I am not calling it my favorite lens for that reason.
That was pretty well explained. I have a crop sensor and the 50mm, and I'm finding that it's really hard to fit things in the picture, I often can't back up far enough. I haven't really tried it for portraits, but I will this week. I'm in a portraiture class at college and I'm considering getting the 24mm, it's not too expensive.
I was in your shoes, had crop sensor and 50mm. I had the same problem, had trouble fitting things in the picture. I'm using now 35mm on full frame, and finally I feel I have the freedom that I always anted. That's equivalent to 24mm on a crop sensor, I encourage you to try it.
@@ShutterNChill u mean it's equiv. to 53mm on crop ?
Try the 35mm 1.8 macro lense.
On the crop sensor camera
My 28-105mm II is the one I’ve taken the most surprisingly good portrait pictures with. Other lenses that have given good results were expected to (mainly the Nifty 50 and the Sigma 50mm Art).
If yours is the old 3.5-4.5 Canon USM II then I have the same lens. It's is my favourite all day walk around lens because paired it's so light ( only 370g!) and makes a refreshing change from the weight of my L lenses. Nice 7 blade diaphragm.
@@hywel3143Indeed the one.
Thank you Martin Castein for this insightful and self-reflective lens choice review!
My pleasure!
And what about the highly desirable 85mm 1.2? Does anyone have a reason for preferring a smaller aperture?
Sony A7iv and Tamron 35-150 2-2.8 is my most used set-up. I am finding I can make it work magic in almost any circumstance (I do mostly families in outdoor settings). Lately I almost never end up going to my Sigma 85 1.4 DG DN Art, not even for single portraits of the kids, etc. I just am getting what I need from the Tamron and it stops the flow sometimes, especially with the little ones, to change mid-session. Considering selling the Sigma but I have made some beautiful shots with it, kind of can't bear the thought of parting with it.
I use the Tamron 35-150 the most. It's my perfect portrait lens.
Loved to see you smile @ 00:59, And laugh @ 02:10. 😊
Great Stuff Martin! 👍
Thanks! 😃
Great video, as always. The lens I use the most on my Canon 6D is the 24-105mm L, followed by the 85mm f/1.4 L and the 100mm f/2.8 L.
The 100mm is such a good lens
@@MartinCasteinIt is indeed
Your analysis is awesome and your images are amazing ...
Thank you very much!
Interesting conclusion, and commentary thanks for sharing.
Wonderful images BTW
cheers
First time around here. I use Canon 90D and use 100mm 2.8 for head shots, 85mm 1.8 for portraits and a sigma 18-35mm 1.8 for half and full body shots. I am not a strong boket guy. Most of my shots are something between 3.2 and 5.6 or 8 aperture. thanks for the video.
I have a Tamron 18/270 and for some strange reason it's my most used lens, on my DX Nikon bodies, but I use my 85mm, 35 mm, 50mm, primes on my FX body, weired, ohh also use my 90mm Tamron for macro shooting on both bodies love that lens good portrait lens too, well in my opinion.
For portraits, I use the following Nikkor prime lenses on full-frame Nikon F-mount cameras:
24mm for large group portraits
28mm for group portraits
35mm for group portraits and environmental portraits
50mm for full-length and 3/4 length portraits
85mm for half-length and head & shoulder portraits
105mm macro for head & shoulder, face shots, and tight face shots
135mm for face shots and tight face shots
180mm for face shots and tight face shots
For portraits, I use the following zoom lenses on full-frame Nikon F-mount cameras:
28-70mm f/2.8 Nikkor
75-150mm f/3.5 Nikon Series E
80-200mm f/2.8 Nikkor
28-200mm f/3.8 to f/5.6 Tamron
Thanks
Thank you so much !!!
Informational, thanks Martin!!
I never checked but I'm pretty certain I shoot most of my Canon work on the 28-70/2.0. It rarely leaves the R5, whether that's in studio or on location. I also rarely shoot it at 2.0, mostly at 2.8 (or above, in the studio with flash). So, for most (but not all) work, a 24-70 would have done it for me too ;-) I do shoot primes, but on other systems for jobs where I don't have to be so fast.
without watching, I'll go for the 85mm 1.8
Well, the GFX GF 110 f2 is simply amazing for portraits!
I'm buying this lens next.
Too obvious.
50mm f1.4 or f1.8
Watch the video 😅
At the start of the video, my guess was exactly "24-70 F2.8". Now, I haven't added any of the "L", or "Mark I", but I can honestly say, I wasn't surprised (by the most used lens at least).
Thanks for your videos ❤
You are welcome !!!
On the D500 and D7500 on Nikon I only use 2 lenses. 17-55 2.8 for professional work and 18-300 walk around.
I like a 200mm for outdoor and 40mm indoor.
I often shoot with 50 f1.4 on 6D M1.
The lenses I use depend on the camera body, the lighting conditions, and the type of photography. For example, if your camera has a cropped sensor, using a lens made for a cropped sensor gives you sharper images. Or if you're shooting an indoor event, you may not have enough room to use an 85mm or even a 50mm.
Not a surprise. I had the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 v.2 and what else did I need? In Kruger park something longer, of course, but other than that, not much. Now I have the Sony eq. and it leaves nothing to be hoped for. With the RIV I have enough pixels for a tighter crop in P+P. Unfortunately, I love lenses so I have a lot of them that barely get any use. I feel good having them. Does that count?
weight is full time 24/7 ; necessity is not.
i separately bought the kit lens for a7C to use on a7iv, bought a 3rd party hood
and the lens (front) has never been recapped.
Collapsed when not in use, unexpectedly good optical quality (bought after seeing J.Vong's utube vlog video) makes for a great carry around for
casual use; smaller max aperture is not a full-time problem & can be "fixed".
For 15 yrs since 9th grade, I had been zooming w/ my feet (58 f1.4, 28 &135)
until i got the really good uni-max-aper internal focus zoom in 1981 (when good usable zooms started to appear). Lazy zooming w/o changing subj-cam distance
(& thus perspective) makes many present-day photos boring. Focal length (for me ) has never been a problem when in use, what feels good looks good & vice versa; besides we physicists know what light really is ( Seriously kidding ! ).
5.6 & 8 are most used in studio portraits (w/0rw/o strobe) & to offend some I'd
say the above mention circa 81 zoom beats many a famous portrait lens (some
portrait lenses are just too harsh for portraits ! not bec.of lighting) hi-res first !
Enjoy & have fun w/ ur 2470 F2.
What is your thought on 35-150mm f2-2.8? It seems to be the perfect focal length for portrait/fashion under all situations..
There is good reason why the Holy Trinity of lenses idea has always been Wide, mid, and long f2.8's. Aesthetically f2.8 has always been plenty enough background blur on full frame, but there is another part of the secret sauce. Because these are the standard pro kit, and therefore a significant driver of profits, Canon and Nikon have, in the AF era, put an outsized portion of their lens development resources into the Holy Trinity, and frankly, the investment dollars show in the quality of the results.
Most people (Canon and Nikon, both) tend to downplay the mid zoom. I do not know why, because, as you say, when it comes to results in professional jobs, it is the 24-70 that delivers most often. Having said that, I do notice it is job category dependent. The 24-70 reigns (for me) more in food and product, while the 70 to 200 is nearer the top in fashion, especially closer to the longer end. I think this is more to do with compression than bokeh, and the fact that I generally have the room to shoot in the 180-ish zone. It fits my style.
So my basic kit is the Trinity, paired with some fast primes, although it is common for me to use an f4 wide zoom instead of 2.8. I still remember the joy I felt when using the Canon 11-24 for the first time, and that is f4. The fast primes are rarely for more bokeh, but simply for the extra stops in low light. I have never understood this current craze for more blur. To me, too much blur is a disadvantage just as often (or more often) than it is a good thing. I must be weird.
28-70 F2.8 sigma on E-mount
You would enjoy the 28-70 f2 lens then...it's a special one
Tokina 100mm f2.8 with my Nikon D700 and SB-900 speedlight
i agree 100%!!!
Probably would be better to check the focal distance. Which is used most.
Stunning pictures 👌.
Many thanks
You are right 24-105 f4 is not sharp I changed it to 24-70 f2.8
i was expecting a prime lens to be revealed....i was surprised to hear it was a zoom lens!
i have this lens and hardly use it....the nikon 24-70 f2.8 E i regret not getting the G version of this lens because it could work with my film Nikon F6.
Picked up the 24-105 2.8 worth every penny so is the 85 1.2 still king.
First time on your channel. Love the way you look in the frame, like a speaking portrait. That's the way a true portrait photographer should look in his vids, I thought while watching😅 Is it a 2 foot softbox with a grid or a beauty dish, I wonder...
I use Tamron 28-75 f2.8, it's the only one I have though.
Hahaha thanks I’m always thinking about changing it up but it’s simple and does the job I guess, it’s a 3x2 softbox so you basically got it right
Photography topics always remind me of being in philosophy class. It's all so subjective, with never a definitive answer. You're a good soul, Martin.
Thank you
Your editing or post is just fantastic
IMHO too overly done. Their faces look too smooth and Plasticky.
I’ve found a way to come up with inexpensive prime lenses from the manufactures. They offer me what they call reconditioned lenses at incredibly low prices. These are newly purchased lenses returned by the customer. These are nearly unused lenses that have been returned because the customer is not accustomed to using prime lenses and want to purchase something different. These are usually around 35, 50 or 85mm. After inspection the manufacture finds they are in brand new condition. They offer it to me at a very low price because they are aware that I know exactly what I am getting and will not return it. Try making an offer to the manufacturer. They are anxious to make the sale.
Ok so my Canon 50mm 1.8 is a 80mm with the 1x6 crop and my 24mm pancake is a 38.4 mm . I have never used either for a portrait lens ?
maybe give it a go?
The classic triad of lenses for Leica users has traditionally been 35mm, 50mm, and 90mm.
I'm missing that 24-70 & 5diii setup 😅
💯
❤❤❤❤
For me it’s 35mm or 40mm mostly.
I've got the 24-105 Canon and Sigma art, both a cracking lens. Maybe you have a dodgy one?
That was not very surprising. I do most of my portraits with my Nikon 24 70 2.8. I also use the 70 200 2.8 but recently I refrain from it because of the slight compression of faces. I rarely use my prime lenses. It is a shame.
Most used lens is the Nikon Z 70-200 2.8 S. By far.
I like your way to take/make/shoot/create photos with human beings/persons & your presentation as well. Because I've been taking photos since 1971 with film and only partly switched to half format digital (Nikon D300) with the same lenses (Nikkor F), my favourite portraits lenses of today are Micro-Nikkor 55 or 60 mm and still 85mm. My GP-Zooms are 35-105mm (Zoom-Nikkor 3.5-4.5/35-105 AIS) and 3.5/75-150 AIS S.E. Beyond that I have been experienced with a complete range of focal length between 15 and 300 mm, additionally the 500 mm mirror lens. And I enjoyed shooting portraits with all of them: VARIATIO DELECTAT - that's the way I like it;-)) @philosimot
Martin I have a question about the lenses (for the Nikon users)! Are the Tamrons or the Sigmas enough good in your opinion or you are going straight for the Nikkors? Which one do you prefer? Which one is more capable to get you closer to the result that you wish for? I know that without the skills maybe nothing can work! I've realised that from your talk...! But still I want your opinion, and your opinion matters to me...
the problem with those lenses is they often dont have consistent focus, like they will hit for a few shots then not. some of them dont work with certain individual camera bodies and some work just fine. Its just such a lottery. So i would say go with nikon if you can. If you want to try a tamron or sigma then please buy from a place you can return it to such as i think mpb have this option. Then you can test it and see at least. Id opt for the nikon version if possible though.
@@MartinCastein Big thnx "Teacher"!!! What would I have done without you... all the wrong things!😅 From what camera, what mm, what lenses... they could all go just wrong! From one mistake to another and in the end... I would end up banging my head against the wall! You know imagine first the purchase and then one day finding the Martin' s Castein Chanel...... Oh ggggGOd! haha 😂 Big thnx!!! BIG!!!!
hahahah you are welcome, i made all the errors so you dont have to haha
@@MartinCastein "Pain is a gateway to wisdom.", "The wise man has failed in every possible way before the fool has even tried". 😇😁
@@MartinCastein Martin, would you really mind if a lens (let's say the Nikkor 24-70 2.8) didn't have a stabilizer (VR) ? Is it so important? Do you use the VR version?
"Funny" why, especially in studio, we would not rather want to put up with 4 cameras with, say,
24 f1.4,
35 f1.2
50 f1.2
85 f1.4 (yes I WANT 75 f 1.2 or f1.4)
But still there too we like the 'elasticity' of th 24-70,
BUT; is it not because we find it strange to would have to invest and use ND filters to take advantage of open aperture, and would have to take them of again when alternating with shooting at say f5.6. ..?
I did not buy a 24-70 when changing system, to force myself away from it. After usefull 7 years, I might have to admit I should allow myself again that zoom.
The 't' in 'often' is silent.
There are just too many like channels on YT for photography...mostly they all seem to be doing the same thing akin to each genre!
Just a thought. My Canon 50 mm 1.8 with a crop is about 85mm or 90mm how would it do ?
No problem in its own way, use it.
I think it’s 80mm
@@MartinCastein thanks. I also use the Canon 28mm pancake with good results.
Sigma 105 1.4 Art
After many years i star to understand maybe i just need 70-200 actually 😂 not 85 or anything. Though i would love 100-300 f2.8 if it ever existed
In the Olympus world, there’s a 40-150 2.8, equivalent to 80-300. I love that lens.
24-70mm f2.8...? Thats a general purpose lens.....i prefer primes...50mm....
If you aren’t wider than 2.8 you don’t see a difference
Every photographer knows what lens he likes to use for what effects he's after. Nothing new here
yet here you are
99% chicks I see, I'm sure that says something about western women 😂
buy any magazine and you will see the same. women buy from women.