[giselag]

I currently use a K3 and I have the following lenses.
Kit lenses 18-55mm and 55-200mm
Pentax 16-85mm f3.5-5.6
Pentax 50 mm f1.8
Sigma 10-20 mm f3.5-5.6


I am planning to purchase a new portrait lens for my K3 with plans to upgrade to a K1 in near future. What would be the best lens to buy for portrait photography and why?
Please send me your advice (a photo sample would be awesome)


Thank you

[Adam]

The FA 77mm is a solid choice of you want to upgrade to the K-1 eventually. The DA* 55mm gives a slightly more optimal portrait focal length on APS-C and does cover the FF image circle, but you'll likely find it a tad short on the K-1.

[hcc]

+1 with Adam on the FA77mm. You cannot go wrong with the FA77mm. The colour rendering for portrait is fabulous. The FA77mm was at a time called the 'The Best (Autofocus) Lenses Money Can Buy": sm-02-05-02 - Luminous Landscape.

[Fenwoodian]

+1 with Adam on the FA77mm. You cannot go wrong with the FA77mm. The colour rendering for portrait is fabulous. The FA77mm was at a time called the 'The Best (Autofocus) Lenses Money Can Buy": sm-02-05-02 - Luminous Landscape.

Yeah, back in 2002 the FA77 would have been my choice too.

But you said "BEST". The "BEST" is the Zeiss ZF Milvus 85mm f/1.4. And yes, I own the Zeiss Milvus 85, and I formerly owned the A85/1.4 and the FA77. Being probably the only person who's shot both the FA77 and the Zeiss Milvus 85 on a Pentax K1, I can assure you the Zeiss 85 Milvus is much better in every lens characteristic than the FA77.

If you NEED auto focus for slow moving portraits, then you probably don't really need "the best" lens. If you can't afford the Zeiss 85 Milvus, then you should have qualified your question by asking for the best portrait lens for whatever your price range is.

[UncleVanya]

While I own the FA 77 and think you can't go wrong with it - it doesn't really match the lenses you have in terms of price or overlap. I would suggest you consider either the DFA 24-70 (which would pair well with a future K-1 and which I have no experience with) or a DFA 100 Macro. While the DFA 100 WR is a bit sluggish due to focus misses and the long throw you can use quickshift and back button focus to eliminate a lot of this issue or just live with it. It gives you a nice fast medium telephoto that is a bit longer than tradition dictates - many have shot with 105 or 135mm on Full Frame in the film era and not felt bad about it. This is about the same perspective (140 on apsc and 100 on full frame).

In any case I offer this picture as an example of what this lens can do - this is without any lighting support - no fill flash and no reflectors. I was just in the right place at the right time:



Also note this was shot at f/11 - subject isolation was not the goal here - texture and character was more important in this shot.

[FreeSpirit9]

Tamron SP AF 90mm F2.8 Di Macro Lens Reviews - Tamron Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

Manufacturer description: The SP 90mm F/2.8 Di enjoys enviable DNA from Tamron's original SP 90mm F/2.8, further refined for the demands of high-resolution digital imaging. Extraordinary 1:1 (life-size) close up capacity, combined with what many consider an ideal portraiture focal length (when used on full-frame DSLR or 35mm SLR cameras) this prime optic was nicknamed "the portrait macro." Equally at home on APS-C DSLRs, rendering a picture angle equivalent of the 140mm lens on a full-frame DSLR or 35mm SLR camera, photographers appreciate the resulting increase in front element-to-subject distance and close-up photography. In addition, this 135mm-like picture angle is well-suited for environmental portraiture. Extraordinary sharpness, striking contrast and a remarkable absence of distortion combine to produce images of exceptional caliber.

[JimJohnson]

Depends on the type of portraiture is intended. Glamour photography calls for soft focus, and other subjects call for as much sharpness as you can pack. Will there be an artificial backdrop or a natural background that needs lots of creamy bokeh? Will the purpose be candid or posed subjects? How much light and is it harsh or soft? AND what is your budget?

I kinda like the F35-70 (often with bounced flash) for candid portraits at family social occasions. The range is ideal for such environments. It works well on both my K-3 and my film cameras and for a lens that doesn't see constant use, I don't feel bad about the investment sitting on the shelf.

[Billk]

+1 for the FA 77mm

[Sandy Hancock]

I'm no expert, but portraiture is about so much more than lens choice. Lighting, posing, makeup and hair, setting, mood, and many other factors are at least equally important. I have made memorable portraits with focal lengths from 20mm to 450mm (full frame equivalent).

That said:
The FA77/1.8 is spectacular on both crop and full frame.
The DA*55/1.4 is great on crop, and is an excellent fast normal on the K-1. Your DA50/1.8 is an admirable alternative.
The FA*85/1.4 is amazing on full frame, but a bit long for most portrait applications on a crop camera.

[UncleVanya]

I'm no expert, but portraiture is about so much more than lens choice. Lighting, posing, makeup and hair, setting, mood, and many other factors are at least equally important. I have made memorable portraits with focal lengths from 20mm to 450mm (full frame equivalent).

That said:
The FA77/1.8 is spectacular on both crop and full frame.
The DA*55/1.4 is great on crop, and is an excellent fast normal on the K-1. Your DA50/1.8 is an admirable alternative.
The FA*85/1.4 is amazing on full frame, but a bit long for most portrait applications on a crop camera.

I'd have to agree with the first part of this post. I have made portraits using just about every lens. Everything other than the lens makes more difference until you get to fringe cases. Personally I looked over the lenses this person already has and figured the DFA 100 WR fit, particularly if they are moving to the K-1 in the near future.

---------- Post added 07-12-17 at 10:42 AM ----------

Currently use a pair of K3II bodies with a K5IIs as backup. I've no plans to add a K1 so the two portrait lenses I live on are my Tamron 28-75/2.8 and DA 50-135/2.8. The 50-135 is my first choice, if I have room. Wonderful lens . Mine is 8 years old, been on a bunch of K bodies.

If I did get a K1, the Tamron would work fine full frame and the DA 50-135 in crop mode. You don't really need 36 MP portrait files. Or I'd pick up a used Tamron 70-200. All constant aperture.

Lots of examples on my website & blog. Lighting, posing and communication matter more than the lens. And anytime I can, I shoot on tripod, it makes every lens better.

This example was done with a DA 17-70

Brooke you and I love the same lenses. I have a DA 50-135 and it was my first thought but given the K-1 upgrade I would expect it would not be the first choice for someone who wants to take advantage of the K-1. I would likely keep using my DA 50-135 for a while on a K-1 if I upgraded but I have no idea what the long term experience would be. The DA 17-70 is a lovely lens and I agree wholeheartedly that it makes great pictures. Tripod - great advice as well.

[SpecialK]

A) There is no "best", B) It's all subjective, and C) There much more that goes into getting the shot than just the lens.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I think it'd be hard to beat my Sigma 85mm f/1.4 for a portrait lens, but on FF it would be shorter than I'd like. The 77mm even more so. And on my m43, I've found the Olympus 75mm to be wonderful for portraits, but on FF that would be a 150mm equivalent.

So for a K-1, I would probably look to a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens for portraits. It gives you the long focal lengths that are flattering for portraiture, and don't require you to get too close to your subject, and the 70mm end would be good for half-body shots, or even for a group photo, depending on how much room you have. And a 70-200mm could also do double-duty as a good action/sports/performing arts lens, so you'd almost be killing two squirrels with one stone.

[giselag]

+1 for the FA 77mm

What camera did you use for this portrait?

---------- Post added 07-12-17 at 06:24 PM ----------

+1 for the FA 77mm

Disregard my last question. I just saw the file info. Shot with K3ii.
Thanks

[RoccoStiglitz]

While the DFA 100 WR is a bit sluggish due to focus misses and the long throw you can use quickshift and back button focus to eliminate a lot of this issue or just live with it. It gives you a nice fast medium telephoto that is a bit longer than tradition dictates - many have shot with 105 or 135mm on Full Frame in the film era and not felt bad about it. This is about the same perspective (140 on apsc and 100 on full frame).

Throughout the entire focal range the throw is pretty long but that only really applies to macro shooting distances. Minimum distance to 2' is a good 80% of the range. Past macro distances the throw is not at all long and if you get the ring in the general area of where you're focus point is hunting isn't a problem (at least on a K-1).

That said it is an excellent short telephoto lens and I've found it a joy to use for headshots. The only thing I don't like about it is focus breathing.

[LeRolls]

I'm no expert, but portraiture is about so much more than lens choice. Lighting, posing, makeup and hair, setting, mood, and many other factors are at least equally important. I have made memorable portraits with focal lengths from 20mm to 450mm (full frame equivalent).

That said:
The FA77/1.8 is spectacular on both crop and full frame.
The DA*55/1.4 is great on crop, and is an excellent fast normal on the K-1. Your DA50/1.8 is an admirable alternative.
The FA*85/1.4 is amazing on full frame, but a bit long for most portrait applications on a crop camera.

Agreed. Plenty of samples on my Flickr for both the 77 and the 85.