Um... a little help please

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by PiotrC70, Oct 1, 2008.

  1. PiotrC70

    PiotrC70

    123
    Sep 18, 2008
    Seattle, WA
    Alright... so I'm at the dilema that most of you have been at some point, or continue to be each time you invest into your next piece of gear..

    Here are the candidates..
    85/1.8 Nikon
    105/2.8 Macro Tokina which I would be mostly using as a portrait lens, but it's nice to have the Macro feature... Let it be known that I'm not apposed to Sigma or Tamron versions... I've just been really happy with my 12-24 Tokina.
    Also, I can't justify spending the extra 300 for the Nikon with VR unless someone can convince me that it's just that much better.

    Tokina 10-17 fisheye... I like the creative landscape perspectives they give you, but know NOTHING when it comes to fish eyes whether a fixed focal is better than my logical choice above.

    The last choice is a given at some point but want input anyways...

    I'm scared of flash photography and was looking at gaining experience by buying an SB-800 kit and learning flash fill, and off camera flash techniques..

    As you can see, all the choices above are roughly 400-500 dollars so any input is greatly appreciated.
     
  2. timkoo

    timkoo

    304
    Oct 9, 2007
    Chicago
    Depends on what you're going for.

    My vote's for the SB-800/900 - flash photography is gonna keep you going and going.....
    Sounds like you're into portraiture, flash would be an excellent addition and you can shoot portraits with the 50 for the time being
     
  3. TEWKES

    TEWKES

    45
    Aug 18, 2008
    Canada
    Tamron 90

    If you want an excellent macro lens for the money, check out the Tamron 90 F2.8 MM DI. It produces excellent results and doubles nicely as a portrait lens or general purpose telephoto. It gets excellent reviews from folks on this forum.

    I just have the Tamron now but have also owned the Sigma 105 and Nikon 105VR. I have no experience with the Tokina.

    Cheers,

    Mark
     
  4. PiotrC70

    PiotrC70

    123
    Sep 18, 2008
    Seattle, WA
    Mark, owning both the 105's you mentioned, I take it your belief that the 90 Tam is a better?

    One of my worries with the 105 is that I would be too far from the subject... the 90 would be a great compromise between the 2.

    I'll have to search the forum for some shots with this lens. Have any poertraits with the 90 you can post?

    With regards to the previous reply, I'm defiently getting into portraits a lot more and my friends... uh... I mean, my models have mentioned me being too close with the 50. The Flash would be a VERY nice addition since I'm terified of anything dealing with the words indoor+photography... lol
     
  5. TEWKES

    TEWKES

    45
    Aug 18, 2008
    Canada
    Better than the Sigma, IMO yes. I am not sure I would say that it is better than the Nikon. I think it maybe a tad better in overall image quality but it is missing the AF-S and VR. Ultimately I decided that I did not need those two features in a macro lens. If IQ is important to you, the Tamron will not disapoint.

    But like the other poster mentioned, if you really want to get into more portrait work, you may want to start off with the flash. Getting off Camera lighting opens up a whole new world of possibilities for portrait work. I started off with an SB-600 which be picked up for around $200. The 50MM that you already have does a fine job for portraits.

    I will try to post some portrait samples with both the Tamron and the 50mm 1.8. There are alot of Tamron samples on the forum as it is very popular.

    Cheers,
    Mark
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.