DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Portrait Lense, which one?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 27, (reverse)
AuthorThread
08/03/2007 03:54:04 AM · #1
I have a 30D Canon. I am looking to buy a good Portrait lense..I have been told about and poss' thinking of Canon EF 24-105 f4L IS USM as a good allrounder...Can anyone give me any better advice..please..
08/03/2007 04:10:01 AM · #2
Hi,
The 85mm F1.8 is awesome for portraits, since getting that I am addicted to fast-glass. There is a F1.2 version, but you may have to sell a kidney for that. Also the EF-S 60mm Macro is a good choice, and has come down in price a fair bit. I look at fredmiranda when lens shopping.

Hope it helps
Mark

Message edited by author 2007-08-03 04:10:36.
08/03/2007 04:23:55 AM · #3
Whatever you do, take a fast prime, not a zoom. The best focal distance depends on your preferences, but for a 30D expect it to be between 50 and 100 mm. You might want to check your preference using a zoom lens

The 85/1.8 is great indeed, but the 50/1.8 is as good and much cheaper. You might also consider any of the macro primes in this range (Canon 60, 100, Tamron 90, Tokina 100, Sigma 70, 105, all of them f/2.8). These are all good lenses, both for macro and portrait.
08/03/2007 04:59:06 AM · #4
There is a in-between version (between 1.8 and 1.2). Its 50mm 1.4. Much better build over 50mm 1.8 and costs around 300$. It has eight blades and so the bokeh is sweet :)

On 1.6x crop it will be equivalent to 80mm which is ideal for portraits.

Message edited by author 2007-08-03 05:00:04.
08/03/2007 05:33:09 AM · #5
I got the 85mm f/1.8 & 50mm f/1.8, and I think you should go for the 50mm.
A 85mm is a little bit too zoomy on a 30D.
08/03/2007 07:22:06 AM · #6
Thanks guys...Just confused me more...lol...Going to look at prices now..cheers
08/03/2007 09:04:46 AM · #7
pick both.. 85 & 50 ;-)
08/03/2007 09:19:04 AM · #8
The best advice here so far is to 'check your preferences' as mentioned by another poster. The 50mm lens makes great portraits, but for a head/shoulders portrait, you will be getting very close to your subject. This closeness can affect your results in a negative way if the subject is not comfortable with the distance. You will rarely run into problems with longer focal lengths.

Ultimately, you will want more than one lens for portrait work. The 50mm lens may turn out to be a better solution for upper body shots that include more than the head/shoulders while a longer lens may be preferred for the closeups...

Just some food for thought :)
08/03/2007 11:15:55 AM · #9
50mm 1.4 or the 85mm 1.8 are both fantastic for portraits. The 50mm 1.8 is also good and really cheap. Possibly better off going with the 50mm with a 30D due to the crop factors, but both are great portrait lenses for the price.

I'd avoid a zoom for a few reasons.

1/ With portraits, your feet are usually good enough to get closer
2/ You'll get better portraits if you spend more time with the person and less time with the camera. A prime (non-zoom) lens gives you one less thing to fiddle with.
3/ Depth of field control is much better with a faster (wider aperture) lens

Mind you, the 70-200 F4 or F2.8Ls are also great portrait lenses, as are a 17mm wide angle or a 400mm prime. It depends a whole lot on the type of portraits you want to take.

Message edited by author 2007-08-03 11:18:52.
08/03/2007 11:24:55 AM · #10
Get both the 50mm and 85mm 1.8 primes, add a 24 or 28mm prime and you will have a great portrait lens kit.
08/03/2007 12:04:45 PM · #11
The Canon 85mm f/1.8 is a fantastic portrait lens. It's a bit long for working in tight quarters, but I don't think you can afford to not have it if you are shooting portraits. I also use the 50mm f/1.4 and 35mm f/2.0. The 35mm is a little noisy, but it's very sharp.

Do want some examples of portraits with the 85,50, or 35?
08/03/2007 01:10:12 PM · #12
Originally posted by brettt83:

I have a 30D Canon. I am looking to buy a good Portrait lense..I have been told about and poss' thinking of Canon EF 24-105 f4L IS USM as a good allrounder...Can anyone give me any better advice..please..


85mm can be tough on the 30D unless you have a lot of room to work with. 50mm 1.4 was a more comfortable focal length in my situation.

However on full frame, the 85 is unbeatable.

There's some cropping on these shots, but I think you can see that the 1.6x crop factor makes a pretty large difference. Both are taken at about the same distance from subject (5 or 6 feet).


85mm on 30D


85mm on 5D

The 24-105 you mention is certainly a killer general use lense. For portraits I find the F4 to be a bit limiting.

Message edited by author 2007-08-03 13:16:00.
08/03/2007 01:24:25 PM · #13
I use the nifty 50, and the 28-135mm f3.5-5 IS USM. I love that lens (Thanks Tucker's Mom!)!
08/03/2007 01:35:51 PM · #14
I just went for a walk & bought a Canon EF 50mm f1.8 on a fandango. Haven't tried it out yet, but from what I've seen it's very sharp and you can't beat the price. But oh man, you can FEEL the cheap when you hold that baby. It feels like it belongs on one of those Barbie P&S cameras, LOL!
08/03/2007 01:40:30 PM · #15
Originally posted by Strikeslip:

I just went for a walk & bought a Canon EF 50mm f1.8 on a fandango. Haven't tried it out yet, but from what I've seen it's very sharp and you can't beat the price. But oh man, you can FEEL the cheap when you hold that baby. It feels like it belongs on one of those Barbie P&S cameras, LOL!


That's one of the reasons I like the 50 1.4 more, balances the camera better, focuses faster and has slightly better contrast. The slight extra speed is nice too. But its hard to argue with the price of the 1.8
08/03/2007 02:15:51 PM · #16
If you're on the cheap, the 50mm f1.8 can't be beat for the price.

The 50mm f1.4 on the other hand will have much improved AF and a "smoother" bokeh, since it has more blades on the aperture.

The 50mm f1.2, well, it's faster still, but quite expensive.

The 85mm f1.8 is a great choice too and reasonably priced for what it is.

The 85 f1.2 is held as the gold standard for portrait lenses, but, it's 3-4 times the cost of the 1.8.
08/03/2007 02:29:41 PM · #17
I guess I'm going to buck the trend. I have the 50 f1.4 and 85 f1.8. They are both great lenses, but I use them only for natural lighting, when the lighting is a little low. In the studio, they don't give me the flexibility I need. Zooming in or out, depending on the pose, is indespensible. I have been using the 28-135 IS zoom. I want to get the 24-105 f4. I usually am stopped down to f9 or so, and the slowness of the lens won't be a factor. The IS is nice to have. If you have the resources, I would get the zoom and the prime of your choice. If not, I think the zoom will allow you much greater flexibility.
08/03/2007 02:29:45 PM · #18
Think the 85 1.2L runs around 2 grand actually. The 1.8 is about 300 bucks.
08/04/2007 11:22:40 AM · #19
El cheapo 50mm f1.8 II ($120 Canadian)

Low light, ISO 1600, f1.8, about 1/30 to 1/80 shutter.

08/04/2007 11:58:34 AM · #20
go with the 85mm 1.8 however if you are shooting inside with limited space you might want to go down to the 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 you can get a little closer to your subject.

I know I am not a canon guy but those 2 lenses are rated pretty much equal with their nikon counterparts which I have each and think both are outstanding glass.
08/04/2007 12:54:08 PM · #21
I bought my 50mm 1.4 to use as a portrait lens with my 20d, and I find it to be an exceptional lens for that purpose. I still use it as my primary portrait lens on my 5d, although I would love to try an 85mm on the full frame to compare the difference in the two lenses. You mentioned an interest in the 24-105mm, which I also have and absolutely love, and use as my (nearly) all-purpose walkaround lens. If you are strictly looking for an excellent portrait lens, a prime with a wider aperture is definitely the better choice. However, the 24-105mm can take great portraits and obviously offers you much more overall versatility in terms of its range. If the light is really good and I already have it on my camera, I'll most often keep it on for a portrait. In low light, or when I want to go for a more dramatic effect with a very shallow DOF, I'll use the 50mm 1.4.

Here's a portrait shot that I took using the 24-105 on my 5d. Aperture was wide open at f/4.

I think that the f/4 is still capable of producing some very nice background blur.

And here's an effect that I got using the 50mm 1.4 at f/1.8 which would not have been possible with the 24-105mm.

Good luck with your choices!
08/04/2007 01:28:17 PM · #22
Originally posted by jmsetzler:

The best advice here so far is to 'check your preferences' as mentioned by another poster. The 50mm lens makes great portraits, but for a head/shoulders portrait, you will be getting very close to your subject. This closeness can affect your results in a negative way if the subject is not comfortable with the distance. You will rarely run into problems with longer focal lengths.

Ultimately, you will want more than one lens for portrait work. The 50mm lens may turn out to be a better solution for upper body shots that include more than the head/shoulders while a longer lens may be preferred for the closeups...

Just some food for thought :)


This is, indeed, very good food for thought, but I'd like to throw another thought into the mix. What size room would you envisage shooting portraits in? Too small a room and you might not be able to go with the longer focal lengths, anyway. I was shooting pics of my sister and her new kid not so long ago and found that, given the space available in the room, using a 50mm lens meant that I had to back up almost to the far wall to fit all three of them into the shot. If you're shooting outside, then you're pretty much OK, as long as your 'foot zoom' doesn't leave you standing in the middle of the road.
08/04/2007 05:30:27 PM · #23
i recommend the 85 1.8 as well, it's an amazing, SHARP lens. can't go wrong with it :D
08/04/2007 06:02:52 PM · #24
Hey Brett I'd recommend the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, you get a great portrait lens AND a great macro lens. The 50 f/1.4 is also great on a 1.6x crop Camera, but for headshots and great bokeh I'd go with the 100mm f/2.8 Macro, the 85 f/1.8 is also a top choice. The f/1.2 version is prohibitively expensive but it IS THE reference lens when it comes to portraits. Look at what Larus does with the 1.2
08/05/2007 02:34:40 AM · #25
OK, first, thanks to everyones input, i have to go away now and ponder what is going to be the best investment for me..decisions, decisions..Thanks guys & gals...
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/19/2024 01:15:23 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 03/19/2024 01:15:23 AM EDT.