Best budget dslr for portraits

Alright everyone, I'm curious... Which is your favorite dslr for taking portraits and why? I shoot with Sony and I love them dearly but my photographer friends suggest other brands see to do better jobs.

Personally, I think the person behind the camera makes the picture. The camera is just the added tool.

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ricardo Gomez on February 7, 2012 at 6:12pm

I use a 35mm with my Canon 50D which magnifies the image to 55mm equivalent due to the sensor. I use it at least 90% for everything which includes flowers, portraits, fashion to landscapes. It's extremely versatile. Really, I would only need a zoom lens for group events and a macro lens for flowers and portraits for people with perfect skin. Three lenses total....

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lisa Reid on February 29, 2012 at 6:41pm

I'm a little late to the discussion but it just caught my interest because I am in the process of looking to upgrade my back up camera. I have several Sony's but my main Sony that I do most of my photography with is the A900, it is 24 mg pixels of BEAUTIFUL! color, I have the A350 as a back-up camera and that is the one I want to upgrade.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Melissa Wilkinson on March 1, 2012 at 7:44am

I was looking at the the a900 as well. How do you like that camera?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Brooks on March 1, 2012 at 11:32am

I can tell you that within the next month, the price on that camera will go way down. Sony is getting ready to rollout the newest camera, the A99, which is going to replace tha A900. Rumors are rampant right now that the A99 will have all of the features of the A77, with a Full-Frame sensor at 36.5 MP. It will also have the video capabilities of Sony's top of the line video cameras. I have heard that the asking price is going to be right around the $5k mark for the body only, and the "kit" will contain a 35mm 2.8, 50 mm 1.8, 70-300 2.0, and the 500 4.0, for the asking price of $8,500. Just rumors at this point, but if you have the money and the patience, that is a pretty good package deal.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Brooks on February 7, 2012 at 6:04pm

"but you get the best lenses and options with Canon and Nikon"- Is this based on quantity or quality. There may be a ton of lenses out there for both of these manufaturers, but I am of the opinion that manufacturer lenses are not on the top of the list for glass- any body will do if you want high quality glass from a optics company like Carl Zeiss, FujiFilm, or Sigma. IMHO, the glass from any of these will be pricey, yes, but will also be something that is fully warrantied, does what you need, and will not need replacement for quite some time. I agree with the low end $$ amount, and as she has already stated, she has a decent lens collection already going.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ricardo Gomez on February 7, 2012 at 6:20pm

Sorry.. Canon and Nikon "bodies". I am a Zeiss man myself.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Brooks on February 7, 2012 at 6:22pm

It's all good...That's what I thought you meant, but it didn't come across that way.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tim Morris on March 2, 2012 at 10:23pm

As for budget you might consider Nikon, a D300 or D700 (Full Frame) as compared to Canon's comparable bodies. I'm not familiar with Canon except for giggles and nostalgia ... I have an old 35mm Canon AE-1 Program with a really good 50mm prime attached to it that I take out occasionally. It's fun, takes really good crisp and sharp photographs and gets one back to basics. It's actually a good training tool to keep one on their toes, because your limited to only so many shots before the film runs out - so they had better be good.

Canon, in my opinion, is highly over rated ... more pixels doesn't necessarily make a better photograph, and it's my understanding that Sony makes many of the internal components of both Nikon and Canon - don't quote me on that. Canon's lenses are definitely comparable to Nikon's Nikkor lenses from what I have gathered from users of both. Nikon makes some top notch glass and even many of the older lenses that are of better quality construction than today's can be used on many current Nikon DSLR bodies.This is an excellent portrait lens: AF DC 135mm f/2D

As well you might want a 35mm or 50mm prime as well as a 70-200mm f/2.8. This way you're covered when situations want allow one or the other.

Full sensor or full frame DSLR's are, again in my opinion, better suited for landscape photography. So, to sum up my argument.

For what you might pay for a Canon 5D Mark II body alone, you could buy a Nikon D300 and a couple of the aforementioned Nikkor prime lenses and be set for portrait photography.

Good Glass, good lighting - timing is the key - and of course your intuition and you'll produce good results.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ron Lashley on March 9, 2012 at 2:44pm

Melissa, don't be too concerned about the camera brand. You need to use a mild telephoto lens and take some classes in portrait photography and lighting. That will do much more for you. I would suggest you visit this web site and look at the portraits that Nikki does. It is lighting and composition and if you learn to do it like her you will be great.

http://www.nikolaidesigns.com/#