Desmond Lin wrote:
hi everyone, just taken this hobby recently and am wondering which nikon lens is good for prof photoshoot. there are just so many types of lens and am really interested to find out which is the best lens with prof shoots. im using D3200. guys help advise. many thanks )

While since you're using Nikons cheapest DSLR it's kind of hard to guess what you'd consider a pro photo shoot & what your $$ budget is.

Desmond Lin wrote:
not even the best of lens?

Try a fixed lens, although, I am not familiar with your camera's menu in terms of settings. For my Nikon d7000 I bought a 50mm 1.8f D and the 85mm 1.8f. As I'm not sure what lens your camera takes-mine takes a lot of different lenses--it is good to check your lens compatibility list and performance.

The 85mm 1.8 f D I really like for fashion and swimsuit. The 50mm 1.8 has worked well for me in an 10 x 12 room and also at the house of blues and in a studio.

Don Olson Imagery wrote:
Invest in lighting and learn how to use it. That's what it's all about. There is no magic elixir to take the place of experience.

So you think learning about & using just natural / available light is a bad idea?

Desmond Lin wrote:
seen many beautiful pic of the photoshoot, so how could i improve my shoots to theirs? does that means changing of lens? so long as the shoots is like prof i dun mind forking out more $$$ )

I think it's hard to give advice one which lens would work best for you.   I'd assume it depends on what you're wanting to shoot.

If you're shooting people then maybe start with the nikon 50 f1.8G along with attending some photography work shops.

Charlie-CNP wrote:
OP: For starters, I would suggest to invest into some photography/lighting classes that will give you experience shooting. Once you can produce reasonably decent images with the equipment that you have, then consider gear upgrades, but only because they are a new tool that will allow you to add something to your skill set.

Just buying gear for the sake of buying gear will not make you a better photographer. Knowing how to light, and how to use the gear is the first step. Next step is how to work with people which is a whole different ball game. Start small and work your way up with lighting. good luck

+1

Desmond Lin wrote:
hi everyone, just taken this hobby recently and am wondering which nikon lens is good for prof photoshoot. there are just so many types of lens and am really interested to find out which is the best lens with prof shoots. im using D3200. guys help advise. many thanks )

Pretty much any f/2.8 or larger lens and you'll be pretty well set.

if you're on a tight budget, go for f/1.8 primes.

JonPhoto wrote:
I'm going to say if you have to ask, you are not ready to get a pro grade lens just yet. There are just so many options that it depends on what you like to shoot. I would suggest getting studying more, practicing with what you have, and see what direction you go with your practice. Once you get a better idea of your style or how to shoot, then you will be able to answer your question.

I disagree.  Since lenses, regardless of quality, do not really require a learning curve, everyone is ready for a pro lens.  Nothing is hurt by having one other than the pocketbook.

Christopher Hartman wrote:

I disagree.  Since lenses, regardless of quality, do not really require a learning curve, everyone is ready for a pro lens.  Nothing is hurt by having one other than the pocketbook.

The lens recommendations are going to be all over the place. If you learn with what you got, then you can narrow down and get the lens you need, not what another photographer thinks.

There are many variables that need to be answered before even a good recommendation can be made to begin with.

1 Budget

2 What kind of photography

3 Weddings? etc.

The photographer that gets to the point of being able to answer their own question will be ahead of the curve.

Christopher Hartman wrote:
I disagree.  Since lenses, regardless of quality, do not really require a learning curve, everyone is ready for a pro lens.  Nothing is hurt by having one other than the pocketbook.

I pretty much agree with this.

I draw an analogy to when I was learning rock keyboard years ago. I had a couple "combo organs", but it wasn't until I bought/invested-in a Hammond B3 and Leslie that my playing capability just took off, because it had the to-die-for sound and that made me practice non-stop. Even though one could say my skills were not at that level yet - they got there much much faster.

Desmond Lin wrote:
hi everyone, just taken this hobby recently and am wondering which nikon lens is good for prof photoshoot. there are just so many types of lens and am really interested to find out which is the best lens with prof shoots. im using D3200. guys help advise. many thanks )

When you are a professional you'll know. You certainly don't need to know until your 100,000th exposure. Then you won't have to ask.

Desmond Lin wrote:
hi everyone, just taken this hobby recently and am wondering which nikon lens is good for prof photoshoot. there are just so many types of lens and am really interested to find out which is the best lens with prof shoots. im using D3200. guys help advise. many thanks )

Instead of telling you that it doesn't matter about this or that, or you'll know or not know when your a professional this or that or get a good rugby or soccer team... I'll answer your question directly...

These are the Nikon lenses that you want to consider…

70~200 2.8G

24~70 2.8G

14~24 2.8G

Mac Intosh wrote:

These are the Nikon lenses that you want to consider…

70~200 2.8G

24~70 2.8G

14~24 2.8G

Yep - I own two of those and I'd own the third except I don't do architectural work. Also, for the OP, I'd encourage zooms as opposed to primes.

JonPhoto wrote:

The lens recommendations are going to be all over the place. If you learn with what you got, then you can narrow down and get the lens you need, not what another photographer thinks.

There are many variables that need to be answered before even a good recommendation can be made to begin with.

1 Budget

2 What kind of photography

3 Weddings? etc.

The photographer that gets to the point of being able to answer their own question will be ahead of the curve.

And that's why I didn't provide a focal range, but instead mentioned apertures of f/2.8 and larger.

From my limited knowledge of Nikon, all of their 2.8s are quality lenses.  Maybe they have some stinkers, but those are probably in the past.  Their current lineup, I suspect, is pretty solid.  My experience with the 50 /f1.8 is that it was just as good as my 17-55 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 (top of the line at that time, respectively).  Not bad for a $120 lens (D version) versus $1300+.

I suppose I could have just said, any Nikon lens that has a constant aperture setting versus variable aperture.  But I do not have any experience with their recent f/4s to know if those are of good enough quality to "my amateur needs".  They are probably pretty good too though and likely, I bet, better than the variables.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
Yep - I own two of those and I'd own the third except I don't do architectural work. Also, for the OP, I'd encourage zooms as opposed to primes.

I almost got the 14-24 and then I would have that very kit...but I decided to go Macro and bought the 105mm.  The 14-24 will, I believe, be my next lens...but I think I'll be upgrading my body first...starting to really crave the D800.

oh yeah...since the OP is on a Nikon cropped body...if you need the widest angle possible on a standard zoom, then instead of the 24-70, you can consider the 17-55 f/2.8.  Personally VERY experienced with it and it's VERY good.  I'd give it 4 out of 5 stars. If you think some day you'll want to go FULL FRAME (FX body), then you can future proof yourself with the 24-70 f/2.8.  You'll get more reach while losing out on the wide angle.

Christopher Hartman wrote:

I disagree.  Since lenses, regardless of quality, do not really require a learning curve, everyone is ready for a pro lens.  Nothing is hurt by having one other than the pocketbook.

What is hurt is the cycle of learning.  He has it backwards.

Michael Zahra wrote:

What is hurt is the cycle of learning.  He has it backwards.

Are you not allowed to start with good equipment?  Is that something that needs to be earned first?

Christopher Hartman wrote:
Are you not allowed to start with good equipment?  Is that something that needs to be earned first?

Having good equipment isn't a bad thing to have when you are starting out. It's just a waste of good gear because you are clueless and don't know what your doing with it.

I've seen so many beginners with wicked gear that have no idea how to shoot or use those babies like they are meant to be used.

It's like buying a crazy racing car because you want to learn how to drive. Sure you can learn with it but it be a waste of it's amazingness.

*I'm half asleep, hopefully this makes sense* lol zzzzzZZZZZ

Charlie-CNP wrote:
OP: For starters, I would suggest to invest into some photography/lighting classes that will give you experience shooting. Once you can produce reasonably decent images with the equipment that you have, then consider gear upgrades, but only because they are a new tool that will allow you to add something to your skill set.

Just buying gear for the sake of buying gear will not make you a better photographer. Knowing how to light, and how to use the gear is the first step. Next step is how to work with people which is a whole different ball game. Start small and work your way up with lighting. good luck

+1

Christopher Hartman wrote:

And that's why I didn't provide a focal range, but instead mentioned apertures of f/2.8 and larger.

From my limited knowledge of Nikon, all of their 2.8s are quality lenses.  Maybe they have some stinkers, but those are probably in the past.  Their current lineup, I suspect, is pretty solid.  My experience with the 50 /f1.8 is that it was just as good as my 17-55 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 (top of the line at that time, respectively).  Not bad for a $120 lens (D version) versus $1300+.

I suppose I could have just said, any Nikon lens that has a constant aperture setting versus variable aperture.  But I do not have any experience with their recent f/4s to know if those are of good enough quality to "my amateur needs".  They are probably pretty good too though and likely, I bet, better than the variables.

And the reason I think the OP should learn with what he has is all the range of options he has been given so far. Some of these lenses I have, some I don't, and some I don't need. Do you know why I don't need them? Because I know what I like to shoot. How would a beginner even know what they need based out of all these suggestions?

Erlinda wrote:

Having good equipment isn't a bad thing to have when you are starting out. It's just a waste of good gear because you are clueless and don't know what your doing with it.

I've seen so many beginners with wicked gear that have no idea how to shoot or use those babies like they are meant to be used.

It's like buying a crazy racing car because you want to learn how to drive. Sure you can learn with it but it be a waste of it's amazingness.

*I'm half asleep, hopefully this makes sense* lol zzzzzZZZZZ

I'm going to disagree with the analogy in part.

if we were talking about camera bodies, I agree.  But when it comes to lenses, nothing is lost, other than money, by having a high quality lenses.  Lenses do not have difficult to learn functions (except maybe, a tilt-shift lens).  They are exactly like the lower quality lenses...but better.

So what if they are not good at taking photos.  Whatever they ARE taking WILL look better than if they had used the cheaper lenses.

Christopher Hartman wrote:

I'm going to disagree with the analogy in part.

if we were talking about camera bodies, I agree.  But when it comes to lenses, nothing is lost, other than money, by having a high quality lenses.  Lenses do not have difficult to learn functions (except maybe, a tilt-shift lens).  They are exactly like the lower quality lenses...but better.

So what if they are not good at taking photos.  Whatever they ARE taking WILL look better than if they had used the cheaper lenses.

Is a 24-70/2.8 better than the kit lens at f/11 under many situations? We dont know what situations the OP plans on using them in.

JonPhoto wrote:

And the reason I think the OP should learn with what he has is all the range of options he has been given so far. Some of these lenses I have, some I don't, and some I don't need. Do you know why I don't need them? Because I know what I like to shoot. How would a beginner even know what they need based out of all these suggestions?

That is a really good argument for zooms as opposed to primes - and much of the reason I encouraged the OP to consider zooms rather than primes. However, it's not a particularly compelling argument for low-end lenses versus premium lenses.

Christopher Hartman wrote:
So what if they are not good at taking photos.  Whatever they ARE taking WILL look better than if they had used the cheaper lenses.

Maybe, maybe not. A well executed shot with a crap lens will look better than crap taken with a great lens.

Charlie-CNP wrote:
OP: For starters, I would suggest to invest into some photography/lighting classes that will give you experience shooting. Once you can produce reasonably decent images with the equipment that you have, then consider gear upgrades, but only because they are a new tool that will allow you to add something to your skill set.

Just buying gear for the sake of buying gear will not make you a better photographer. Knowing how to light, and how to use the gear is the first step. Next step is how to work with people which is a whole different ball game. Start small and work your way up with lighting. good luck

This is your answer.

JonPhoto wrote:
A well executed shot with a crap lens will look better than crap taken with a great lens.

Another platitude - MMer's sure like their platitudes. Unfortunately, it has no real relevance to a beginner choosing his first lenses, which is what this thread is about.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:

Another platitude - MMer's sure like their platitudes. Unfortunately, it has no real relevance to a beginner choosing his first lenses, which is what this thread is about.

How so? The OP wants lenses to look like a pro. To look like a pro you have to know how to shoot and study composition, lighting, exposure and how to use a camera. The least factor in all of this is the lens.

Learn how to shoot and then the OP will be able to answer the question himself.