35mm or 50mm?

go a 35 for crop, your zoom starts at pretty much 50 anyway

35 on crop is pretty much you standard everyday length imo

28mm on crop

40-45mm master race

43mm on FF master race

I recommend the 35 1.8 in your situation.

As an aside, 14-45, 45-175, and 25 1.8 was the three lens setup I was happy with for years, very similar to your 18-55, 55-200, and 35 1.8

50mm crop is patrician choice

85mm f/1.4

>>2902935
>>2903159
that's what I was thinking because the 35mm on a crop is essentially 50mm, right? And to me 50 seems like something I'd like a bit more so it's easier to isolate the background and I don't have to get up in people's faces and whatnot.
I don't think I'll have a full-frame anytime soon, I only recently got the one I have now just a couple months ago.

>>2903191
Fat chance

File: Portrait-Focal-Length-II[1].jpg (2MB, 2324x1728px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2324x1728px

>>2902904
>35mm or 50mm
>>2902935
>35
>>2902942
>28mm
>>2903068
>43mm on FF
>>2903159
>35
>>2903169
>50mm
ITT: anons who don't what facial distortion means.
On my full frame, nothing beats the 70-200 2.8 for portraits. I live at 200mm.
For portraits, OP, you want at least 85 on your crop. Better would be 100 and ideal would be 135. Longer focal range means less distortion, plus your models will be more comfortable because the lens isn't all up in their face, like a 35mm.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	576
Image Height	864
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2013:04:29 15:29:55
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2324
Image Height	1728

>>2905109
Alright I take back what I said about the 85mm. I never realised how bad the distortion can be for portraits... but $2.5k seems a bit pricey for a prime. Wouldn't it be better in the end to spend a little extra for the 70-200mm 2.8 like the one you have?

>>2905109
Focal lenght change with Apsc, so is the distance to subject, you fruit. Portrait at 35mm is ok as long as you don't get too close or try some akward poses.
> 200mm on crop
Lol no.

Op, get the 35mm. The 50 would be a better choice for portraits, but a normal prime is life.

>>2902904
>35mm or 50mm?
It all depends on what kind of photos you want to take.
50mm on crop sensor is quite close, works well for portraiture and shooting some details, your distance with the subject will be more than with the 35mm, this could be a good or bad thing depending on the situation
35mm will be more "all-purpose" giving you the chance to do more things, like landscapes for example, it brings you closer to your subject and it's easier to separate the subject from the background, but you'll have more distortion.
To cut it fast: buy both lenses

File: 50vs135.jpg (485KB, 1500x1114px) Image search: [Google]

485KB, 1500x1114px

>>2902904
Testing my lenses, this is straight out of the camera. I'm on full frame, I think your D3100 is 1.56 crop factor, so take that into consideration.
>left = 50mm
>right = 135mm

>>2905250
>that lighting
absolute garbage

>>2905109
>I only take photos of peoples faces

>>2905109
>TT: anons who don't what facial distortion means.
Considering that those are words you just mashed together is that super surprising? The term you're looking for is "perspective distortion". A related and acceptable term is "telephoto compression"...well, more acceptable than your "facial distortion".

>On my full frame, nothing beats the 70-200 2.8 for portraits. I live at 200mm.
It's like you don't know that compression is only flattering to certain kinds of faces.
>For portraits, OP, you want at least 85 on your crop. Better would be 100 and ideal would be 135. Longer focal range means less distortion, plus your models will be more comfortable because the lens isn't all up in their face, like a 35mm.
50mm is perfectly fine to use on a crop. I mean, it's not like the 85mm (on 135) is a common portrait length or anything. A 35mm on APS-C means you'll likely be framing at near to a normal focal length on a 135, which means minimal perspective distortion. Going longer than 35mm (ish) means you're increasing perspective distortion, just a different kind than going wider than 35mm would be.

Don't try to sound like you know some shit when you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

>>2905109
50 looks best.
200 looks like a man.

>>2905263
It's facial distortion because only faces can be distorted by lenses you idiot

>>2905266
The Poe's Law is strong with this post.

>>2905260
Good thing its a test that has nothing to do with lighting.

>>2905261
>What is a headshot? What is a comp card?
is this nigger serious?

File: _98A0618.jpg (97KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1000x667px

>>2905260
>>2905283
In those test shots, I was setting up to do the Dylan Patrick cinematic headshot technique. I'll explain.
It's all about having that super blurred background, sort of like you saw on the right hand test image.
So forget the model for a moment. I'm just exposing for the background and trying different compositions to see what background works best.
pic related: I'm using a 135mm prime, ISO 100, 1/3200 sec @ f/2.0
Now here's where Dylan Patrick's technique comes in.
First I got my shot exposed for the background, and then I light my model to match the background exposure. I come from real estate photography and we do the same thing inside rooms with bright windows: we expose for the brightest object (the windows) and use speedlites to light the room to match.
The real trick is getting around my camera's limit of 1/200 shutter speed so I can shoot at 1/3200 sec. To do that, I put my speedlites into High Speed Sync mode (Nikon calls it Auto FP, Canon calls it HSS).
That's the technique in a nutshell.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	75 dpi
Vertical Resolution	75 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:17 21:42:06
Exposure Time	1/3200 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	135.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: DPP_0369-Edit[1].jpg (315KB, 2048x1363px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 2048x1363px

>>2905563
cont.
>pic related is example of Dylan Patrick headshot.
Anyone interested in this technique, the gear used, or more headshot examples, I recommend his site
http://dylanpatrickphotography.com/

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D700
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Dylan Patrick
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	200 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2015:02:11 08:18:32
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/3.2
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/3.2
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory, Return Detected
Focal Length	200.00 mm
Comment	Eds d700
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Portrait
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2905563
dude the problem isn't exposure but more about how the flash you used was harsh as hell, made her face looks oily and unflattering. I mean, look at your image and then the Dylan Patrick example for god's sake

>>2905529
I'll take not the only two fucking forms of photography, alex

>>2905635
>not understanding the meaning of test shot
Listen, Charlie, why you give round eye such hard time? Hanoi number ten, America number one. Di di mau!

>>2905109
that only holds true for headshots. Try shooting a sitting person and you'll need a megaphone (not exaggerating)

>>2905563
all that to end up with shitty lighting and poor framing?

>>2905643
>hurr durr forms of photography
Per OP, he wants to shoot "portraits and closeups."
Learning how to take a proper commercial, theatrical, and corporate headshot is like bootcamp for portrait photography. Good headshot photographers are always in demand.
>>2905660
here's your (((you)))

>>2905664
>here's your (((you)))
Oh, you meant to go to >>>/pol/ but hit enter two letters too early.

Btw, if you're going to use pol memes, try to use them in a way that makes sense.