Dad’s Photography Corner: OMG…SO…MANY…LENSES!!!
It’s been one heck of a ride thus far…that is, in terms of photography. Since my last article, I’ve shot and edited many a photo. I came up with a name for my photography quote unquote “business”, went out and bought Adobe Photoshop Elements 11, and have now begun seriously considering expanding on my lens collection.
At the moment, I have the following lenses:
18-55 mm, f/3.5-5.6 G, VR, AF-S
55-300 mm, f/4.5-5.6 G, VR, AF-S
The 18-55 mm is great for landscapes and taking shots in which there isn’t a lot of room to work. The 55-300 mm is great for its zoom, catching things from pretty far away without too much of a problem. I use it for macro photography, even though it’s not a macro lens. I simply have to stand far away from the object, push the zoom to its fullest, and hope the autofocus can hit its mark.
I’m seriously picking up one or two of the following lenses:
50 mm, f/1.8 G
85 mm, f/1.8 G
85 mm, f/3.5 G, Macro Lens
105 mm, f/2.8 G, Macro Lens
The former two, I read, are great for portrait photography. The low aperture number (f/1.8) makes photos sharper and provides a lot of background blur (called bokeh). I want the 85 mm as it would allow me to not be so up and close and personal with a client, but it’s almost twice as expensive. The 50 mm normally goes for about $125-150, but because my camera does not have an internal motor, I’ll need the AS-F lens (one with an internal motor) for the autofocus to function. That adds about another $100, on average. The 85 mm, I’ve researched, goes for over $500. Ouch.
The latter two, I’ve read, are great macro lenses. They do make macro lenses below 85 mm, but the less of a zoom you have, the more of a chance you’ll scare away insects and moving targets since you’ll need to be closer. Unfortunately, the 85 mm is over $500, and the 105 mm hits into the $700 range. Again…ouch. I have to wonder though, if a macro lens is able to get up close and personal, how would it fare as a portrait lens?
If any of you pros out there know the answer to that or have worked with both portrait and macro lenses, feel free to leave a comment and help a budding photographer out. Lenses are expensive, and if a portrait lens can do the work of a macro or vice versa, I’d like to know.
In the meantime, I’m awaiting test prints from WHCC and am considering opening up an account over at Zenfolio. I do have a Facebook page, but I’d like something a bit more professional, not to mention my own URL. Oh yeah, and Adobe Photoshop Elements 11 isn’t a bad product…confusing since I’ve never owned any version of Adobe Photoshop, but it’s user-friendly enough to where I can do a lot of things easily and quickly. I haven’t messed with layers yet, but I have been able to remove blemishes, add a watermark, and the like.
If you feel inclined to know more about the experiences of an amateur photographer, then stay tuned!