Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
  

Archive 2022 · 24-120 S For Portraits?

  
 
photomedic4321
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Has anybody tried the 24-120 S Lens for portraits. I have a session coming up this weekend and it has been a while since I have shot a senior session and I am debating what I want to use. Thanks everyone!

Edited on Oct 05, 2022 at 08:06 PM · View previous versions



Oct 05, 2022 at 03:15 PM
Ripolini
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


90% of portraiture is lighting. 9% the model. 1% the gear you use.


Oct 05, 2022 at 03:19 PM
RoamingScott
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


I actually really like using this lens and others like it around 80-90mm/4 for portraits. You still get a nice separation and the entire face is in focus, no worries about eyelash focus, etc.

Light it well and let it rip.

This one was at 105.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52262102682_a827b8a1b0_b.jpg



If you're wanting to do full body, it still softens the background up nicely at 120/4 (granted this is pulled further back than you'd probably do for a senior portrait)

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51942762274_0b87a6d0ef_b.jpg



It's a hard lens to beat for anything environmental.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52407592980_2832903527_b.jpg



Just depends on what look you're going for.

Edited on Oct 05, 2022 at 03:55 PM · View previous versions



Oct 05, 2022 at 03:29 PM
gear-nut
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


It's a fine lens for portraits -- as said above, the pose, lighting and overall composition are more important than the specific gear.


Oct 05, 2022 at 03:50 PM
JadedWriter
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Good strobe and softbox matters way more than the lens you're using unless you want specific bokeh characteristics.


Oct 05, 2022 at 06:36 PM
AmbientMike
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Certainly has excellent FL I'm just not a big fan of more mid range zooms for portraits at this point. Not that I do a lot of portraits or can really quantify that statement. What else do you have


Oct 05, 2022 at 11:58 PM
dalegaspi
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


No, you can't use it for portraits. In fact, you can get arrested here in NJ if you do that. Bills are being voted on as I write this to make this a federal offense.


Oct 06, 2022 at 09:37 AM
elkhornsun
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


The best perspective provided when photographing faces is one that is longer than "normal" or with the full size sensors a 70mm or longer focal length. The 24-120mm used at 85mm to 105mm focal length will provide a more natural perspective and this lens is not the sharpest but lens sharpness is not a good thing when photographing people's faces where one does not want every blemish or pimple or wrinkle to stand out.

Too many people use short focal length lenses for photographing people and are unaware and unobservant of the distortion that results. Ears, noses, hands, and feet can all appear to be very large and out of proportion. Good for photos of clowns at the circus but otherwise best to avoid.



Oct 11, 2022 at 04:13 PM
elkhornsun
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Ripolini wrote:
90% of portraiture is lighting. 9% the model. 1% the gear you use.


There was an article in a photography magazine a few years ago with a model shoot and using exactly the same lighting and the same model and the same camera and lenses but using a professional photographer and an amateur. It was stark how much better the photos were that the pro had taken and it was obvious that having great lighting and a great model and a great makeup person was not enough.

Many outstanding photos taken over the centuries using only available light. But even then a pro fashion photographer is going to use a pro level camera and as long a lens as possible for a shoot. The 70-200mm f/2.8 is a must have and not a nice to have lens much of the time.

Lighting also depends on "gear". A bare bulb flash can produce far better results indoors and outdoors for portrait photography and the first thing one should learn is to get the flash off the camera. Reflectors, flags, softboxes, etc. are all useful and they are "gear".



Oct 11, 2022 at 04:23 PM
runamuck
Offline
• • • • • •
[X]
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Indiana is really on the ball. Republicans banned the 24-120 a few months ago. Illinois is now welcoming all 24-120 users.


Oct 11, 2022 at 06:30 PM
dalegaspi
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Ripolini wrote:
90% of portraiture is lighting. 9% the model. 1% the gear you use.


"1% the gear you use." ah yes one of those gatekeeping comments...in a gear-related forum, no less. ironic.



Oct 11, 2022 at 07:40 PM
Ripolini
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


elkhornsun wrote:
There was an article in a photography magazine a few years ago with a model shoot and using exactly the same lighting and the same model and the same camera and lenses but using a professional photographer and an amateur. It was stark how much better the photos were that the pro had taken and it was obvious that having great lighting and a great model and a great makeup person was not enough.

Many outstanding photos taken over the centuries using only available light. But even then a pro fashion photographer is going to use a pro level camera and
...Show more

Agree with you; however I include reflectors, flags, softboxes, etc. in the "lighting" category. If you prefer to include them in gear, you can change the relative proportions. With "lighting" I mean also the way the photographer does use "lighting gear", and therefore his/her ability to master the light. The article you mentioned does demonstrate that two different photographers can obtain quite different results using the same gear, model, lighting equipment, etc.
Lighting is also related to composition, IMO. If I had taken the picture below at a different hour (i.e. with different available light), the final result would have been much different.

https://download.nikonimagespace.com/9c0235c613d45a75a689974adbf7c068/EUR_20220309_31_1600px.jpg


Nikon Z6 w/Zeiss ZF.2 135/2 Apo Sonnar @ f/5.6, 1/250 s, 100 ISO



Oct 12, 2022 at 02:37 AM
huddy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Absolutely it is a great lens for portraits. I have used it at 105 and 120 f/4 and have been very pleased. As Scott mentioned it is very handy for environmental portrits as well.

I have always favored compositions where I can shoot at something like 105mm f/5.6 instead of f/1.4-2.8 just to ensure sufficient DoF to have the full face and as much of body as is included in the composition in focus. I prefer to find environments to shoot in that work for that. That isn't always possible of course and light isn't always so available so faster lenses exist; I have a few 58/1.4 shots wide open on my D700 that are just dreamily gorgeous too and work well with the subject. Horses for courses sd the light/pose matters a lot.



Oct 12, 2022 at 10:51 AM
elkhornsun
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Shooting portraits outdoors with the 70-200mm f/2.8 lens I was initially suprised by the soft OOF backgrounds even at f/5.6 with the longer focal lengths I was using. We know in theory the DOF depends in part on camera to subject distance but it is a bit of a leap to understand that with longer focal lengths a smaller aperture can be used and have reduced DOF.


Oct 15, 2022 at 02:37 PM
sum1sgrampa
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


I think there's a distinction between "taking pictures of people" and "portrait" photography. As the posted examples illustrate, you can certainly take pictures of people with a 24-120 f4, that was never in doubt, but if you want to separate yourself from the cell phone crowd there are much, much better options. 24-120 f4's, F or Z mount, are about as lifeless as you can get.
Gary



Oct 15, 2022 at 02:57 PM
Ripolini
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Can or can not the 1st picture posted by @RoamingScott be defined as "portrait"


Oct 15, 2022 at 03:00 PM
sum1sgrampa
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


In my mind that's a picture of a person. Grab pretty much any camera and lens, entry level, kit, what have you, and you get that picture. As I said, flat, lifeless.
In contrast, horrible light and on camera flash with a simple diffuser attached and a $300 lens.
My intent is not to crap on Scott's photos. I stand by my original thought, there are much, much better options.
People here seem to think everything "Z" is magic. If I was shooting portraits right now I'd use my 35 F2 D, 50 1.4 D, 85 1.4 D, and 180 2.8 D. All 4 would cost far less than a 24-120 S and would easily outperform the zoom for portraits. Of course, if your only option was sticking them on a Z body, no AF. Which is why I still love my D810

Edited on Oct 15, 2022 at 05:31 PM · View previous versions



Oct 15, 2022 at 03:10 PM
NissanPatrol
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


sum1sgrampa wrote:
In my mind that's a picture of a person. Grab pretty much any camera and lens, entry level, kit, what have you, and you get that picture. As I said, flat, lifeless.
In contrast, horrible light and on camera flash with a simple diffuser attached and a $300 lens.
My intent is not to crap on Scott's photos. I stand by my original thought, there are much, much better options.


Very nice photo.

I never was able to take a portrait that I like. Freezing a bird in flight much easier than making a portrait that tells something.

A bif is a more technical while a portrait is more art than technical





Edited on Oct 15, 2022 at 03:36 PM · View previous versions



Oct 15, 2022 at 03:31 PM
sum1sgrampa
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


NissanPatrol wrote:
Very nice photo.

I never was able to take a portrait that I like. Freezing a bird in flight much easier than making a portrait that tells something.



Thank you. I shot portraits years ago but I'm very much out of practice. A friend asked me to take some pictures of their family the other day. Windy, cold, grey, 3 kids under 6 yrs old. Reminded me of why I stopped



Oct 15, 2022 at 03:35 PM
RoamingScott
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · 24-120 S For Portraits?


Watch out, an old guy has opinions on the internet!

I’ve used the 100-400 for portraits too. Better hang me from a tree!

If you EVER manage to post a photo that doesn’t look like you accidentally hit the shutter, that will be the day perhaps your opinion will mean anything more than the typical shouting at clouds it tends to be.



Oct 15, 2022 at 04:05 PM
1
       2       3       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.