| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/14/2005 11:36:01 AM · #1 |
Out of the following lenses in my arsenal, which one would be the best for portraits of people and why?
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Tamron AF 19-35mm 3.5-4.5
Tamron SP AF 28-75mm 2.8 XR Di LD
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 11:45:58 AM · #2 |
I'd take the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, extremely sharp prime and good tele for Portraits. The 85mm f/1.8 is also good and so is the 50 f/1.8 if you can't backup fin small spaces.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 11:50:18 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by photomayhem:
Out of the following lenses in my arsenal, which one would be the best for portraits of people and why?
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Tamron AF 19-35mm 3.5-4.5
Tamron SP AF 28-75mm 2.8 XR Di LD |
All of them with the exception of the 19-35mm should make descent portrait lenses for the camera that you have. I would think, and for the way I do portraits, that the 85mm would be the most versitile. I keep one glued to my camera.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 12:18:34 PM · #4 |
Back in the old days, 85-105 mm was considered the "ideal" focal length for head shots; it renders the subject "naturally" as far as how little it distorts the features, and it allows serious control of DOF on the image with selective focusing and aperture adjustment. We used to not only bracket exposures, we'd bracket the apertures at which we shot in search of the ideal DOF.
I don't know if tastes have changed lately or not. I'd shoot the 100 mm if I could only use one.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 12:25:18 PM · #5 |
Wouldn't 85-105mm be equivalent to about 55mm (53.1) to 65mm (65.6) on the 10d because of the 1.6 crop factor in the field of view?
That's why I've heard that the EF 55mm 1.8 is a great portrait lens on a digital camera...
Message edited by author 2005-01-14 12:25:45.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 12:38:34 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Wouldn't 85-105mm be equivalent to about 55mm (53.1) to 65mm (65.6) on the 10d because of the 1.6 crop factor in the field of view?
|
No. It goes the other way. The crop factor increases the effective focal length, but in no way effects the DOF for a given lens.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 12:48:02 PM · #7 |
I normally use my EF 17-40 f/4 L for full body compositions and then crop the outer edges of the shots. I use the EF 50mm f/1.8 for some work but less and less frequently; it is a good, inexpensive lens to get started into portrait photography with. I love to shoot the EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS (although you don't have it listed) as it affords me the ability to change the field of vision a little once I get everything lined up; it also has some of the best bokeh that I've seen in 35mm format. I like to use the EF 85mm f/1.8 for headshots or if I'm shooting outside with a subject and I can move around more. This lens is much lighter than the 70-200 and it yields similar sharpness and bokeh.
Examples:
EF 17-40 f/4
EF 50 f/1.8
EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS
EF 85 f/1.8
I still am saving up my money to buy the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L to use as both a walk around lens and for portrait work. There are also two other lenses that people sometimes use for portrait work but they are slightly more suited to either film bodies/full frame sensor bodies (EF 135 f/2 L) or more abstract work (EF 200 f/2 L). I've seen shots from both of these and I would love to add either to my arsenal but both are pretty expensive.
Hope this helps.
Kev
Message edited by author 2005-01-14 12:50:21. |
|
|
|
01/14/2005 12:52:13 PM · #8 |
When I was shooting film, my favorite portrait lens was the 105 f1.8 Nikkor.
I have tried portraits with my 10D & 105 f2.8, but it's just a bit too long. I prefer my 50mm f1.8 to that, but I wish I had the 85mm f1.8, That would be closest to the 105mm I used to have.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 12:52:36 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Wouldn't 85-105mm be equivalent to about 55mm (53.1) to 65mm (65.6) on the 10d because of the 1.6 crop factor in the field of view?
|
No. It goes the other way. The crop factor increases the effective focal length, but in no way effects the DOF for a given lens. |
You misunderstood....when bear_music is talking about lenses "back in the old days", an 85mm would be like a 55mm on a digital now. I understand that the DOF is unaffected...
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 01:29:36 PM · #10 |
Cloud is correct. I had not taken that into account, as I use a prosumer, not a DSLR. The 85mm, then, would be my choice, as closest to the 105mm Nikkor 1.8 I so loved...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 01:38:29 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
105mm Nikkor 1.8 I so loved...
|
Hey! You're one of the only other people I know who also had one of those.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 01:40:07 PM · #12 |
LOL spazzy. I still got that lens (and the F1 body, and the 55mm macro, and the 24 mm) somewhere in my boxes...
How old are ya? I'm 58...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 01:44:53 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
LOL spazzy. I still got that lens (and the F1 body, and the 55mm macro, and the 24 mm) somewhere in my boxes...
How old are ya? I'm 58...
Robt. |
I sold mine along with my F3's, motordrives and a bunch of other lenses. I got mine used, don't remember how much I paid, but it was a lot for me at the time.
I'm 37, at least according to the calendar.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 03:46:17 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Wouldn't 85-105mm be equivalent to about 55mm (53.1) to 65mm (65.6) on the 10d because of the 1.6 crop factor in the field of view?
|
No. It goes the other way. The crop factor increases the effective focal length, but in no way effects the DOF for a given lens. |
You misunderstood....when bear_music is talking about lenses "back in the old days", an 85mm would be like a 55mm on a digital now. I understand that the DOF is unaffected... |
For the record, DoF is not unaffected. CoC (circle of confusion) also plays a part in the DoF equation and if we assume the final viewing size is the same, the magnification, and therefore the CoC, changes. End result: with regard to FoV and DoF, a 50mm lens acts like an 80mm lens on a 1.6 crop cam.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 05:30:04 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
but in no way effects the DOF for a given lens. |
I understand that the DOF is unaffected... |
For the record, DoF is not unaffected. CoC (circle of confusion) also plays a part in the DoF equation and if we assume the final viewing size is the same, the magnification, and therefore the CoC, changes. End result: with regard to FoV and DoF, a 50mm lens acts like an 80mm lens on a 1.6 crop cam. |
No. This is not for the record. The only thing that changes when you take a 50mm 1.8 off of a full frame DSLR and put it on 1.6 crop DSLR is that the image is cropped. If the depth of field, the area that is in sharp focus, is 6" at a given distance, f/stop and focal length with a certain lens on one camera, it will also be 6" if the lens is put on any other camera.
To give an example that may be easier to visualize, take a 600mm lens, put it on a full frame SLR or DSLR and take a picture of a person from 500 feet. Now, leaving the lens in the same exact position, on the tripod perhaps, remove the full frame body and attach a DSLR with a crop factor. Take the same picture. Blow both pictures up until the person in the picture is, say 12" tall. Now see if you can notice any difference, beside the obvious extra space around the person in the image taken with the full frame camera. DOF, CoC, contrast, it does not matter, there will be no difference.
The only thing different between the full frame DSLR and a DSLR with a smaller sensor is the crop factor. The nature of the lens is inherent.
Message edited by author 2005-01-14 17:35:16.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 05:47:17 PM · #16 |
Yes, OK, you are correct, in your example, *since you have held the subject magnification constant* instead of holding the FoV constant, the DoF will of course be the same.
My point was, since the FoV changes with the crop, the final magnification also changes, which affects the CoC calculation, which affects DoF. Please do the math.
|
|
|
|
01/14/2005 05:52:28 PM · #17 |
| I just love the portrait and especially the bokeh of that 85/1.8 shot. That would probably be my choice. |
|
|
|
01/14/2005 05:58:59 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
but in no way effects the DOF for a given lens. |
I understand that the DOF is unaffected... |
For the record, DoF is not unaffected. CoC (circle of confusion) also plays a part in the DoF equation and if we assume the final viewing size is the same, the magnification, and therefore the CoC, changes. End result: with regard to FoV and DoF, a 50mm lens acts like an 80mm lens on a 1.6 crop cam. |
No. This is not for the record. The only thing that changes when you take a 50mm 1.8 off of a full frame DSLR and put it on 1.6 crop DSLR is that the image is cropped. If the depth of field, the area that is in sharp focus, is 6" at a given distance, f/stop and focal length with a certain lens on one camera, it will also be 6" if the lens is put on any other camera.
To give an example that may be easier to visualize, take a 600mm lens, put it on a full frame SLR or DSLR and take a picture of a person from 500 feet. Now, leaving the lens in the same exact position, on the tripod perhaps, remove the full frame body and attach a DSLR with a crop factor. Take the same picture. Blow both pictures up until the person in the picture is, say 12" tall. Now see if you can notice any difference, beside the obvious extra space around the person in the image taken with the full frame camera. DOF, CoC, contrast, it does not matter, there will be no difference.
The only thing different between the full frame DSLR and a DSLR with a smaller sensor is the crop factor. The nature of the lens is inherent. |
Yup. At least that's what I've always thought.
One thing that kind of bugs me is when someone says that a 1.6 crop factor camera makes their 200mm lens into a 320mm lens. Sorry, but the resolving power of the lens doesn't change, your sensor just gets a smaller chunk of the same image and blows it up. Not the same thing at all.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/15/2025 12:33:40 AM EDT.
