Is this lens good for wide-angle landscape shots or more for portraits?
879553
I use it almost exclusively for architecture and landscape shots. It's fast enough for some indoor work, too, if it's fairly well-lit.
879554
It is a more versatile wide lens. It isn't super wide, just really wide. There is no fish-eye effect. It is far too wide for most portraits. However, it isn't quite sharp enough for landscape in my opinion. It is nothing more than an affordable lens that gives you a somewhat quality product for the price.
879555
I would say this lens is better for portraits as I use it on a 1.6 crop body. The F2.8 is good at low light too.
2227139
I used the lens extensively for landscape photos but also for interiors. It works pretty well with reduced, if any, distortion. Colors are consistent with white balance settings. Highly recommended also for interiors photos from "strange" or "naive" perspectives such as very high or very low positions, e.g. floors and ceilings to produce a different view of the rooms. Good photos also without any tripod by increasing the ISO to 800 and switching on the lights even with NO FLASH.
583901
Long autofocus speed is an issue for landscape shots, but besides macros, it excels at portraits and close up shots. Furthermore I don't see anything either bad or good about landscape and general photos taken with this lens. I would definitely not recommend it for a general purpose lens, but as a fantastic portrait lens.
2027169
Thomas. This is your basic "kit lens" for many cameras. It gives you a 3X zoom and is relatively distortion free for most apps. I think for most of us an 18mm lens is wide enough for many landscape projects. In time, if you are a serious photographer, you may decide to go to a shorter focal length but that will be expensive.
2137908
No, it's not a wide angle lens, it's a close-up lens. It's an excellent prime lens that I use routinely but it has the bonus capability of getting in very very close. There have been situations that I have had the thing I was shooting under the lens hood, it gets that close. It's my favorite utility lens and use it on my D7000 as well as my D600.
1549363
I've used this lens for macro photography for two+ years and it produces excellent results. It is also fine for portraits. However, it would not be my choice for action shots such as dance programs where the photographer may not be able to adjust his/her distance from the subjects. A better choice might be a good zoom lens from Nikon or Tokina.
896646
Any lens can be used for landscape as long as you have the proper distance. Last night I just shot a landscape with 70mm using a 70-200. I also shot landscapes with 300mm with 70-300. But definitely the 50mm can be used for landscapes but its strength really is taking photos in street and low-light. It's a good lens that allows you to be creative.
1833853
I would assume that it would be great for the group photos, where wide-angle is important. I have only used it for landscape photos, so far, but for weddings...why not?
1311667
This is one awesome lens. No barrel roll distortion. You could get quite a landscape view, but remember, all things in the shot will be very small because there's such a wide angle of view.
1297839
I would think so, but I have to say I mostly do landscape photography and I'm not great at portraits. I just did a trip across southern Utah and northern Arizona and I got a lot of great shots of the desert with this lens. But things I've read in photo magazines suggest that for portrait photos you might want something where the range of focal lengths is shifted up a little. The really wide angle is usually not so important for portraits. You might find that a 24-105 or something like that is better. Don't know what your price sensitivity is, but although I don't regard myself as a camera tech geek or anything, I can definitely see a significant difference between the lower end lenses and the more expensive ones. My approach to cameras is that I buy the low end body but the high end lenses. A good lens makes EVERY picture look hotter and sharper, whereas the high end bodies only really help on 5% of the pictures where they can deal with a complicated light or focus situation that a cheaper body can't do. So if you have the cash, you might think of a lens like this one: EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. The "L" series lenses (the ones with the red ring around them and a name like "f/4L") are Canon's "luxury" series. They do cost a good deal, but once you shoot some pictures with one you'll be kicking yourself that you used cheaper lenses - the photos are so much hotter and sharper. And you'll use the lens for years while you do multiple body upgrades, so it's something of an investment for the future. Also, is your body full frame (the single digit model numbers like 7D) or ASCP (all the others - Rebel or 70D for example). The EF-S lenses don't work for the full frame bodies, but the EF series work great for both types. Hope that helps. Steve
1125762
If taken outdoor pictures then this will be wonderful lens. I do most landscape and occasionally indoor portraits. It give you very sharp pictures and autofocus is so quick at dark environment. Remember this is a prime lens, not 24-70 nor 70-200 mm F2.8, you have to be very creative and zoom in/out by your foot. I sold mine Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 to get this one and no regret (I like the Sigma very well and was too heavy when hiking, nothing wrong with that lens, just to clarify)
2058088
It is a lovely lens, but I cannot see it (or any lens) doing really well with low light and fast action. I use it for landscape photography, where things kindly hold still.
464335
Absolutely. It is a beautiful portrait lens. It's actually much more than even just 2 lenses in one. It's a beautiful general medium telephoto too.
342852
Overall I am delighted with the image quality of this lens. I'd prefer to use the 24mm setting to minimize distortion in a group of people (if conditions permit). I use it mainly as a landscape lens and still use it extensively.
858189
Hi, thanks question. I think this lens is good for portraits. My recommendation is AF-S 50mm F1.8G, AF-S 35mm F1.8G. If certain distance is short focus , would be good if necessary zoom can afford. Thanks in advance.
1381524
Like any tool, it depends on what you want to use it for. This is probably the best lens out there for wide angle, night sky photography (although the 35mm 1.4 is very good too), and will be good for a wide variety of applications. Either one will do well in low light, but since I usually take photos of people, I have a preference for the 35mm. Either lens, when used in bright light, loses a lot of their advantages unless you intentionally place your camera in aperture priority mode and keep shooting in wide apertures.
1530821
I use this lens to shoot sports photography and it's a sharp lens. You should have no issues shooting portraits