| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/23/2010 03:46:38 PM · #1 |
I am going to buy a new lens and can't decide what to get. I was thinking about the canon 70-200 2.8 but then I wondered about the 85mm 1.2 and realized it wasn't that much difference in price.
What I really want is a lens to do portrait photography outdoors both full body as well as headshots... I'm not wanting something for wildlife etc. suggestions, comments?
|
|
|
|
08/23/2010 03:56:20 PM · #2 |
The 70-200 f/2.8 is a general purpose zoom lens. It takes great photos, yes, but it's not a portrait lens.
The 85mm f/1.2 is a portrait lens by design. It's made for doing portraits.
Personally, my 85mm lens is my first pick for most shoots involving people, from full-body to head-shots, although you might want to pair it with a 1.4x tele-extender for those tight head shots..
Message edited by author 2010-08-23 16:03:16.
|
|
|
|
08/23/2010 04:08:36 PM · #3 |
Ive been thinking about the same thing Tehben and looking at test results and hearing other peoples opinions has made me lean HEAVILY toward the 85 1.8 because of its super fast and spot on focusing and its phenomenal sharpness. before hearing what people had to say about that i was also leaning toward the 70-200 2.8 (non IS). note: this research was done taking into acct that i am looking to go FF (probably 5DII in the future).
|
|
|
|
08/23/2010 04:49:46 PM · #4 |
While not designed specifically for portraits, the 70-200 is a damn good portrait lens. What it will not do is produce the extremely narrow DoF that the 85/1.2 will produce. The DoF at f/2.8 is still pretty narrow though, so for tight headshots, you still have a lot of artistic freedom.
At the same f-stop, the 85/1.2 is going to be the sharper lens, but both will probably out-resolve the sensor over most of the frame at f/2.8. Not sure that sharpness is really a differentiator.
The bokeh of both is very good, but do bear in mind that the IS on the 70-200 can produce funky and unpleasant bokeh when it is active.
If I were looking for the best possible lens at 85mm, with portraits specifically in mind, I would buy the 85/1.2. If I were looking for a very versatile lens with portraits in general in mind, I would not hesitate to buy the 70-200/2.8, though if portraits were my main "focus" I might well buy the non-IS version. FWIW, I *love* long focal lengths for portraiture, and often shoot candids at 200mm. Very flattering to the subject, and really separates the subject from the BG. |
|
|
|
08/23/2010 05:14:02 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
While not designed specifically for portraits, the 70-200 is a damn good portrait lens. What it will not do is produce the extremely narrow DoF that the 85/1.2 will produce. The DoF at f/2.8 is still pretty narrow though, so for tight headshots, you still have a lot of artistic freedom.
At the same f-stop, the 85/1.2 is going to be the sharper lens, but both will probably out-resolve the sensor over most of the frame at f/2.8. Not sure that sharpness is really a differentiator.
The bokeh of both is very good, but do bear in mind that the IS on the 70-200 can produce funky and unpleasant bokeh when it is active.
If I were looking for the best possible lens at 85mm, with portraits specifically in mind, I would buy the 85/1.2. If I were looking for a very versatile lens with portraits in general in mind, I would not hesitate to buy the 70-200/2.8, though if portraits were my main "focus" I might well buy the non-IS version. FWIW, I *love* long focal lengths for portraiture, and often shoot candids at 200mm. Very flattering to the subject, and really separates the subject from the BG. |
I agree with all Kirbic said.
|
|
|
|
08/23/2010 10:37:27 PM · #6 |
I have a friend with a 70-200 I'm going to check out and see what I think, certainly more versatile but I dunno that prime looks awesome...
Kirbic is there any difference between the IS and non IS version if the IS is turned off?
|
|
|
|
08/24/2010 12:15:28 AM · #7 |
I think the 70-200 is too long if you are interested in full length and portrait shooting. The 85 prime is a superb choice,, and you might consider the 24-70 2.8 instead of the 70-200.
But if you take your camera to the store and put all three on and try them out, you'll probably have an easier decision. Or rent the ones you are interested in over a weekend.... (course, you might end up with more than one new lens if you do that :-) |
|
|
|
08/24/2010 12:46:23 AM · #8 |
 85MM F1.2 wide open on my 1DMKIV.  85MM F1.2 also with my 1DMKIV. I love the lens, however on my 5DMKII the AF is miserably slow. I have a version I but version II wasn't a whole lot better on it. That being said I do use it quite a bit for portraits. However my go to lens for portraits is my 70-200 especially on a full frame camera.
Matt
Message edited by author 2010-08-24 00:48:35. |
|
|
|
08/24/2010 02:34:53 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by MattO:
However my go to lens for portraits is my 70-200 especially on a full frame camera.
Matt |
ah--missed the full frame part of the equation. So the 70-200 would definitely be worth considering, too, then. |
|
|
|
08/24/2010 04:35:02 PM · #10 |
Took the plunge and ordered the 85mm 1.2!!!
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 08:58:08 AM EDT.
