BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Answers

Totally Confused

I have decided to get her the Nikon D70s for Christmas. My budget is $800 for this equipment. I have seen some deals on ebay that include a couple of lenses. I just don't know if these lenses are appropriate for her portrait photography. If they are not appropriate, maybe I should purchase the body by itself and then add a lense that would be appropriate.

Currently she is an amatuer, but she has asperations of starting a part-time portrait (non-wedding) photography business.

Can someone help me in determining what I should do?

For instance most of the deals include the d70s body, a tamron 28-80 lens and a tamron 70-300 lens. Is it worth the extra $ to get the Nikor 18-55 and the Nikor 70-300. Am I totaly missing the mark? I know very little about photography as you can tell. I wish I could just ask my wife, but I want it to be a suprise.

To love this question, log in above
November 04, 2006

the lenses would be ideally suited for portraits and allow her to learn in preparation for her start up business. It suppose it would be great if the lenses could take her through the first year or two of business. Then once (if) the bucks start to roll in she can upgrade.

To love this comment, log in above
November 04, 2006

Now, I know some guys here will disagree with me, but in terms of professional portraiture, the object is to sell prints....big big prints. 24x30, 36x48...the kinds of prints that get framed and mounted over the fireplace. So, in that respect, while there are some very good 35mm format digital cameras, I always recommend medium format or even larger to people who want income from this type of work.

The cost of an upgrade in two years or so, as you mentioned, could be considerable if she has to replace her entire system. In fact, even if her work is top shelf, I think it's hard to have a self-supporting business selling merely 8x10, 5x7 and wallet size photos unless she's doing school work on a mass scale, and that's a pretty tough nut to crack as a sole practitioner even if she wanted to.

In addition, and again, IMHO, the zoom lenses you want, while nice, aren't the best for portaiture. My own preference for shooting portraits, even with 35mm, is using either a fixed focus Nikkor 105 mm or 150mm on a medium format camera. Wide angle lenses have little, if any, value in potrait work primarily because they distort and don't allow you to fill the frame with your subject without nearly literally getting in their face. Zooms are versatile and great for shooting sporting events, nature, etc., but not all that swell for portraits.

Another thing your budget seems to be missing is lighting equipment, whether stand alone strobes light or on-camera/bracket flash. The portability of the latter is good but it may not be enough for lighting large groups in the studio. Lighting equipment arsenals are easily expanded, however, although it's much easier to stick with the same manufacturer for studio lighting from the outset rather than changing later on.

One last thing: Which camera someone gets is a really subjective decision based on a myriad of pretty personal factors. So, while your intentions are certainly nice and well-founded, I'd figure out a way for her to pick out her own camera because she's going to be the one using it. Maybe a huge box at x-mas with an envelope holding a big gift certificate or, a hand-made gift certificate with your budget printed on it and your promise to spring for it when she decides what she wants to get. How's that? ;>)

BTW, if she wants to work in medium format film, check out http://www. APUG.org and you can get some very good deals on medium format bodies, including Mamiya, Hasselblad, even Rolleiflex that are really well suited for portrait photography. Also take a look at KEH.com for used gear, digital or film.

Meanwhile, take it light. ;>)
[Another} Mark.

To love this comment, log in above
November 04, 2006

Then they say just what you did, oh and I only want to spend $800.00...sigh, you have to pay to get “everything” you want.

But if I had to tell you the number one the thing you need (besides the camera itself) for “portraits” is a good fast lens. and for portraits you should be looking at 50mm or 80mm prime lens with a 1.4F aperture (this will run you about $350.00). This lens will not be a good landscape lens, because it is will not do wide angle, but like I said you have to pay to get everything you want. When you are ready to shoot wide angle save up and get a good fast wide angle lens. The 50mm or 80mm 1.4F lens will be a wonderful portrait lens.

I have many different lenses. The lens I use almost all the time is my prime Canon EF 50mm 1:1.4. I don’t know how I ever took portraits with out it.

A flash is important but if you have a fast lens then you will have more control of your light situation.

In my opinion if you start with this you will have a good “portrait” camera. Then as your wife learns more and more she can at to her collection of lenses.

I am currently saving for a Canon 70-200 2.8f lens it is 1,700$. It will zoom, it will take better portraits as well as maro. It is will not do wide angle. I will start saving up for a fast wide angle lens after I get after the 70-200 

Photography a is a very expensive and rewarding hobby,

Good luck.

-Sandy
I would not get a Medium format camera if you are just starting out. I agree for very large portraits a medium format camera is a good choice. But if you are learning, a digital camera is much easier for that. I would say a medium format camera is something someone buys that has a lot of photography experience (and extra money). At good SLR high mega pix camera will do the job. I have blow up crystal clear poster size pictures. A fast lens will help produce very crisp clear shots.

To love this comment, log in above
November 08, 2006

One of my company's clients is a bigtime photographer so I asked his thoughts and he said that currently, medium format is a $20k-$35k proposition. With that in mind I opted to start her out with the D80.

Prime lenses will be perfect for birthday and Christmas gifts in the future.

Thanks for all of your input.

To love this comment, log in above
January 05, 2007

To love this comment, log in above
January 05, 2007

Deep down, everyone knows that the tools we use are based on the job at hand. When I was a cub, I learned portraiture using a 5x7 camera. My boss and mentor learned using an 8x10. Not long afterward the 4x5 camera replaced all except for the Madison Avenue advertising guys who adhered to their 8x10’s. These big cameras were called “Gross Format”. Next in time came the 120/620 film cameras. These imaged on 2 ¼ x 3 ¼ or 2 ¼ x 2 ¼ film or thereabouts. These are the medium formats. Latter the 35mm with its 0.95 x 1.4 inch (24x36mm) image was crowned the king. Now its digital with the imaging chips that get smaller by the month. The questions you need to ask, why was a particular size popular and what equipment do I need for my goals today?

What format size was popular in any era is based on technological abilities. Film was the only game in town; most films yielded a negative images. Negatives themselves are merely a means to an end which is the print. Coexisting was a small contingent of positive film users who required slides (transparency) for the final presentation.

Why a particular format size? First and foremost, and true today, large prints are advantageous. A photographer generally brings to bear, the same efforts delivering a 4 x 5 inch print vs. a 30 x 40. However the profits on the bigger are exceedingly generous. Since big prints are the objective, every era chose format related to its enlargement capacity. Advances in film technology shrunk the format size. Additionally, portrait photography thrives on imaginings. No pimples, no molds, no scares, no odd pigmentations etc. Pre-digital required hand retouching. First the negative needed to have a “tooth” a rough surface accepting pencil marks. Some portrait sheet films had such a texture, otherwise matte lacquer was applied to the roll films. Next the retoucher penciled or painted out the blemishes with a brush. Gross formats are a breeze to retouch, medium format negatives challenging, 35mm films with tiny images are close to impossible to retouch by hand. Next it the equipment. The Gross formats were big, heavy and plump, not dainty. The 4x5’s weren’t much better. Oh the mediums were godsends, lovely and chromed. Oh but the 35mm were jewels, we loved them even without much retouching ability. We sold prints using the philosophy of the leather jacket salesman “range challenged” with barbed wire marks the in thing.

Now digital changes all that:
Most film using guys and girls won’t admit it, but film will soon be seen only in the museum labeled a “gelatin print”. I know this because film and film camera and associated apparatus are sold due to economy of scale. Each digital camera sold reduces the demand for film thus the price of the film camera and the materials and chemicals of the process must soon climb out of reach.

The morel is: Beginning photographers don’t study film no more. Buy equipment with an eye towards the future. That goes for the lenses too.

Alan Marcus
ammarcus@earthlink.net

To love this comment, log in above
January 05, 2007