Zoom lens for portraits

NewbieNewbie
edited May 2014 Posted in » Nikon D3100 Forum
I have a 50mm and a 35mm lens. I would like to get some sort of zoom lens. I was told that a 24-70mm is excellent, as I shoot portraits (family, engagement, bridals, boudoir). Unfortunately, I do not have the money for a 24-70mm right now. Are there any less expensive zoom lenses that would be beneficial?

Thanks!

Comments

  • ohyeaharohyeahar
    edited May 2014
    The 24-70mm f/2.8 is a full frame lens. On a crop sensor camera like the D3100, you may find that the focal range to be not as useful as it would be on a full frame camera.
    To get the same field of view on a crop sensor camera, you can actually use the 18-55mm kit lens. But the thing holding back the kit lens is the small variable aperture whereas the 24-70mm has a constant aperture of f/2.8 throughout the focal range.
    If you want this field of view with constant f/2.8, here are the options:

    1. The Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8. Just barely less expensive than the Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8. It’s big and heavy, but works absolutely great. I’d say getting it new isn’t really worth it, but if you can find one that’s used for a good deal, it may be a good idea.

    2. The Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. Significantly less expensive than the Nikkor 17-55mm; also smaller and lighter. You’re paying less but image quality and performance is very much on par with the Nikkor. You lose 5mm on the tele end of the lens but that’s insignificant.

    3. The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. I’ve not used this one, so I won’t say too much about it. I do know that the AF motor is a bit noisier than the Sigma.
  • NewbieNewbie
    edited May 2014
    Thank you very much. In looking up the Sigma, I noticed that some of them say for a certain camera body (for instance Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 for Canon). Are they really different? Should I make sure I get a Sigma that says it's for a Nikon?
    Also, while looking up the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8, I noticed there is a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8. Do you have any thoughts about this lens?
    Thanks!
  • ohyeaharohyeahar
    edited May 2014
    If buying 3rd party lenses like from Sigma or Tamron, definitely make sure it's for your camera! Nikon mounts are different from Canon mounts are different from Pentax mounts.

    The Sigma 17-70mm is another popular lens. The differences between this and the 17-50mm are:

    1. Focal range, obviously.
    2. Macro capability. The 17-70mm is a macro lens which basically means it can focus on objects that are very close to the lens.
    3. Fixed versus variable aperture. The 17-50mm is a constant f/2.8 throughout its range. The 17-70mm goes from f/2.8 on the wide end to f/4 on the long end.

    They're similarly priced, so you have to decide whether you value the constant f/2.8 or the extra 20mm of reach. Personally, I think the f/2.8 is more important.
  • NewbieNewbie
    Thank you very much for your help.
  • kravattisolmukravattisolmu
    edited June 2014
    Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 is good for portraits and everyday low light situations (though 17mm is beyond horrible!). I really like this lens but for outdoor events the 24-70mm would be better even on dx. The price tag of sigma is under 300€ and most of 24-70mm are close to 1000€ and they weight a ton.

    My verdict of people thinking fast zoom lens:

    Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 os

    Pros: Fast and silent af, great image stabilization, good results at portrait area 35-50mm.
    Cons: Won't replace your wide angle lens. If you ever put wide angle on your camera and compare it to sigmas 17mm, you will cry. The lens is bit heavy and has 77mm filter size (big lens for the D3100). Also the build quality is really bad! It feels like a toy, but don't worry it wont break.

    Tamron 17-50mm VC (image stabilization) and Tamron 17-50mm non VC

    Tamron 17-50mm VC was for a long time a good option when Sigma cost near 700€. It's a sharp lens but autofocus noise can be a real problem. It screams like a wild bee hive!

    Pros: Around same image quality as Sigma AF is fast and works great at 35-50mm.
    Cons: AF noise, big and chunky and Sigma is same price or even cheaper now.

    Tamron 17-50mm non VC

    Pros: It's the smallest of them all. Great image all the way to the zoom range. If you use flash in your photography you don't need VC! For flash users this is the lens to get. This lens can be found at a bargain price (150-200€).

    Cons: no image stabilization so without flash indoor photos are hard to get.

    Nikkor 17-50mm f/2.8 non VR

    Pros: color contrast, image quality overall to my eye seems to be always a bit better in Nikon lenses. Built like a tank and has a pro feel.
    Cons: Don't buy new. Now that sigma is around 300€ Nikon won't be 3 times better! This lens is big and heavy and hard to carry around. No VR.
Sign In or Register to comment.