Portrait lens help please - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G

07/30/2010 05:54:14 PM · #1

Hey all,

as much as i LOVE my 50mm 1.4 im looking for another potentially more versatile portrait lens

currently im really focused in on

Canon 28-70 2.8L
Canon 24-105 IS f/4 L
Canon 85mm 1.8
Canon 70-200 f/4 (or preferably 2.8 non-IS if i can find a cheaper used one)

alot of my stuff is artificially lit but i really like to have a USABLE large fixed aperture (thats what makes me most hesitant about the 24-105). what are your thoughts on these lenses? currently i shoot 1.6 crop factor but in the future i will be looking at full frame cameras (most likely the 5DII), or the 1.3x crop 1DIII.

the 24-70 is a little too pricey for me (although with the potential of a 24-70 IS coming out in the fall i might be able to get one a bit cheaper then) and i have my wide range covered already (if i move to FF i will sell my 10-22 for a 17-40 most likely).

-im hesitant that the 70-200 is too long for me right now on the crop body.
-im also wondering if the 28-70 will be too short on a FF.
-is the 85mm going to be TOO similar to my 50mm? is it noticeably sharper/better built/more contrasty? (if so i will sell the 50 and get one even if i decide on a zoom)
-hows the focus on the 24-105 (speed-wise) since it isnt a 2.8 and cant take adv of that feature on canons?
-ive looked at the tamron 28-75 and the 17-50 but the corners are SUPER soft so thats currently a no go for me unless someone has info on them that i dont know about.
-also i would be buying any one of these lenses USED and am in no rush to buy a new lens, ive just been thinking about it and wanted to get some valued opinions.

Thanks :)
-Max

JamesA

Nikon D800

07/30/2010 05:55:44 PM · #2

You can do anything with a 50mm! Well not anything but its certainly not limited.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

07/30/2010 10:22:14 PM · #3

Originally posted by michaelmonn:

-im hesitant that the 70-200 is too long for me right now on the crop body.

Well, yes, it is going to be pretty long, but at the wide end it is not all that much longer than the 50, so you won't have that much of a gap. At these focal lengths, you may find that f/4 gives adequate DoF control for portraiture, unless you are into very shallow DoF as a technique. The f/4 version is if anything sharper than the f/2.8 versions, though the difference is small.
ETA: focal lengths up to and beyond 200mm are great for portraiture, contrary to (some) popular opinion as long as you have the room.

Originally posted by michaelmonn:

-im also wondering if the 28-70 will be too short on a FF.

Well, it sure won't give you much beyond 50mm, and you aren't really that interested in the wise end for portraiture, unless you shoot a lot of groups, in which case it may give you a range you need.

Originally posted by michaelmonn:

-is the 85mm going to be TOO similar to my 50mm? is it noticeably sharper/better built/more contrasty? (if so i will sell the 50 and get one even if i decide on a zoom)

Is it similar? somewhat. I have both the 50/1.4 and a 75mm, and find them different enough to use them both. Is it notably better or worse in IQ? Not really. It's on a par with the 50/1.4.

Originally posted by michaelmonn:

-hows the focus on the 24-105 (speed-wise) since it isnt a 2.8 and cant take adv of that feature on canons?

f
You would see a difference in AF performance if you compared the 24-70 and 24-105 in low light, since the 24-70 is f/2.8 and therefore both a stop brighter and able to use the cross sensors. In a studio environment, I don't think the difference is of any importance.

Originally posted by michaelmonn:

-ive looked at the tamron 28-75 and the 17-50 but the corners are SUPER soft so thats currently a no go for me unless someone has info on them that i dont know about.

For FF, I think your information is accurate. SInce you are going there eventually, probably not the best choice.

Message edited by author 2010-07-30 22:23:05.

chromeydome

Nikon D7000

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

07/30/2010 11:35:13 PM · #4

If I am just doing head/shoulder sorts of portraits, I only use my 85mm prime. I LOVE that lens.

24-70 2.8 is very nice, too, and lets you get wider shots without backing up to the next county. So if you want to do full length shots, it is nice. But you can get that with your 50 prime, so an 85mm prime is a good bet. I think Canon's 85mm is also good (I am a nikon guy, and have the 85mm 1.4). The 85mm 1.2 canon is stellar. Check out the 85mm 1.8 reviews, though.....

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

07/31/2010 12:03:30 AM · #5

Thanks for the feedback!

ive been looking at the 28-70 mostly because i do like to do some wide/environmental portraits and im getting more and more into band promos/ group portraits so 28 mm would be nice when i dont want to go as wide as 22m (on my 10-22).

the canon 85 1.8 is a BEAST IQ-wise so im really leaning heavily toward that. thanks for the perspective Chromey. i was really worried that the 50 and the 85 might be too similar that it wouldnt be worth it. (FYI by all tests that ive seen, the 1.8 is sharper than the 1.2 at similar apertures)

at first i was leaning very heavily toward the 28-70 but now im taking a second look at the 24-105 and the 85 1.8

in what indoor "studio" space i have i dont have room to shoot at much more than 85mm but shooting at 200 would definitely be interesting on location... in fact for the same price as a 28-70 or a 24-105 i could get a 85 1.8 and a 200 2.8L....hmmmmm

JustCaree

Canon EOS-1000D Rebel XS

07/31/2010 12:20:32 AM · #6

haha this cracks me up... the next thing I am saving for is a 50mm to funny! everyone here wants something different!!!

RamblinR

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

07/31/2010 12:22:02 AM · #7

I have a Tamron 28-75 2.8 and am very surprised at your comment 'SUPER soft', as this has not been my experience.

This lens at f3.2 is sharp right across the image on my crop camera.

I tried the Canon 24-105 and was very disappointment with the sharpness of this lens (probably just a bad copy)the Tamron beat it hands down for sharp images at the far right and far left focus points every time and I really wanted to replace the Tamron with the canon 24-105.

Message edited by author 2010-07-31 00:24:36.

07/31/2010 01:36:01 AM · #8

RamblinR i definitely agree with you about the sharpness on a crop body but i was concerned about the sharpness on 1.3x or FF. sorry for not clarifying

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III

07/31/2010 01:37:32 AM · #9

Originally posted by JustCaree:

haha this cracks me up... the next thing I am saving for is a 50mm to funny! everyone here wants something different!!!

i LOVE my 50 no doubt about it but id like something that could go a bit wider and a bit longer. a flair for the group portraits and a tight crop for the head and shoulders shots.

RamblinR

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

07/31/2010 01:51:14 AM · #10

Originally posted by michaelmonn:

i LOVE my 50 no doubt about it but id like something that could go a bit wider and a bit longer. a flair for the group portraits and a tight crop for the head and shoulders shots.

This is exactly why I can't let my Tamron 28-75 go. It offers the lengths that other primes would (sigma 30mm, canon 50mm and just short of the canon 85 1.8) and it don't have to swap lenses. Admittedly it doesn't open as wide but for now it works for me.

spiritualspatula

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

07/31/2010 03:12:16 AM · #11

Obviously, I shoot Nikon.
Owning both the 50 1.8 and 85 1.8... I vastly prefer the 85. If honestly, I'm considering selling the 50 because I just don't use it, as I prefer the 85 leaps and bounds above it. I should clarify that I'm not saying they're the same thing, but that I'm saying I prefer that lens, period. I've also got the Nikon 28-70, and it's been my go-to lens lately, so it's difficult to say anything bad about it.
But to me, comparing a 70-200 to a 28-70 for portrait work is sorta apples and oranges. The biggest thing is going to be "do you have a desire to compress the background," because you cannot do that with a shorter lens.

chromeydome

Nikon D7000

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

07/31/2010 03:49:56 AM · #12

I agree. I got the 50 1.4 first, liked it. Then I got the 85 1.4 and have probably never used the 50 again since.

I bet you'll never regret buying the 85