Portrait lens

[rbat]

Would love to hear your favourite for flexibility and sharpness.

[jjphoto]

1/ Leica R 180/2.0 (on Canon FF body)
2/ Leica R 80/1.4 (on Canon FF body)
3/ Contax 135/2.0 (on Canon FF body)
4/ Various enlarging lenses on a helicoid such as TTH (Taylor, Taylor & Hobson) Ental 3.25" F4, Schneider Xenotar 80/2.8, Meopta Meogon 80/2.8, mainly for their harsh bokeh and the interest they add. It's not everyones taste.

None of the above (or probably any other manual focus primes for that matter) have any 'flexibility' in that you have to use them the way each lens needs to be used for best performance, be it Bokeh, wide open sharpness, minimum focusing distance or perspective that each lens imposes. Some people like long tele's for portraits, others like relatively normal focal length's. It comes down to preference, not right or wrong.

If you want 'flexibility' then use a 24-70/2.8 zoom, that's what I tend to do. Optically it's a fine lens and the fact it's a zoom and has AF are both a bonus. Even if the resulting images don't stand out, they are none the less excellent.

Regarding sharpness, you already have all you need from the 100 Macro in your sig. Sharpness isn't everything, especially in portraits, although I do prefer to have razor sharp wide open performance in a lens, especially at portrait distances.

JJ

[rbat]

Thanks JJ, I don't think I can afford the 24-70 f/2.8. My budget is $1000. My 100mm is awesome for portraits I agree but outside only. I would like something for inside that is not 50mm as I really do not like the length at all.

[Brian500au]

The problem with inside is if 50mm is not of your liking, and 100mm is too long you are left with either the 24-70 or an 85mm. In some cases the 85mm is too long and this is where I definitely pick up my 50mm. I have the 85, 50 and the 24-70 and I use them in that order for portrait work inside. If you only have the one lens for inside then you are going to need a zoom. The other alternative is the 24-105 but at f4 it is very limited what it can do inside.

[William W]

On an EOS 450D and within a Budget of $1000, my favourite Portrait Lens, for use inside would be the EF35F/2 (new) or, preferably the EF24F/1.4L, if possible to get in good condition for $1000, second hand.

WW

[Xenedis]

Would love to hear your favourite for flexibility and sharpness.

My 85/1.2L II is my main portrait lens.

If I want a longer lens, I tend to use my 135/2L.

If I want to shoot a wider, environmental portrait, I'll use my 35/1.4L.

(I shoot with an EOS 5D Mark II.)

[agb]

I don't have one, but I think you would be hard pressed to do better than the 85mm f 1.8 USM
Have a look at some of these shots, not all portraits though.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...40371&page=486

[Xenedis]

I don't have one, but I think you would be hard pressed to do better than the 85mm f 1.8 USM

Having owned both the 85/1.2L II and the 85/1.8 previously, in my experience the 85/1.2L II is a huge leap ahead of the 85/1.8.

However, I do agree that the 85/1.8 is a great lens. It is very sharp and fast to focus, and won't disappoint.

For the budget-minded, it is an excellent choice.

[rbat]

Thanks everyone, I think the 85mm f/1.8 is too narrow for inside work particularly on a crop sensor? Perhaps a zoom might work better?

[Xenedis]

Thanks everyone, I think the 85mm f/1.8 is too narrow for inside work particularly on a crop sensor? Perhaps a zoom might work better?

85mm on your camera provides the equivalent of 136mm framing in the old money.

It can be too tight for interior work, but it all depends on the distance.

In this case the question isn't whether to choose a prime or zoom; it's what focal length would be most suitable for the environments in which you wish to shoot.

Certainly a zoom which includes 85mm (eg, a 70-200) will be more flexible, but it all does depend on the distance.

[agb]

Having owned both the 85/1.2L II and the 85/1.8 previously, in my experience the 85/1.2L II is a huge leap ahead of the 85/1.8.

However, I do agree that the 85/1.8 is a great lens. It is very sharp and fast to focus, and won't disappoint.

For the budget-minded, it is an excellent choice.

Especially since his budget was $1000, so the f1.2 is out of the question.

[rbat]

Especially since his budget was $1000, so the f1.2 is out of the question.

Very true
If only I had unlimited budget, that would be bliss.

[Xenedis]

Especially since his budget was $1000, so the f1.2 is out of the question.

Missed that.

In that case, the 85/1.8 would be an excellent choice, and falls well short of his budget.

[agb]

Having owned both the 85/1.2L II and the 85/1.8 previously, in my experience the 85/1.2L II is a huge leap ahead of the 85/1.8.

However, I do agree that the 85/1.8 is a great lens. It is very sharp and fast to focus, and won't disappoint.

For the budget-minded, it is an excellent choice.

Especially since his budget was $1000, so the f1.2 is out of the question.

[rbat]

As I mentioned in a previous post, I really am not sure that the 85mm is the best choice for inside shots. The inside I'm thinking of is a house where I take photos of my son/family. But it is definitely within my 'her' budget and something I will keep in mind.

I was thinking sub 50 in terms of zoom. I already have a 100mm (great) and 55-250 which give good results. My 18-55 not so much inside but ok with good outside light. The 50mm is ok but I'm not a fan of the length. I'm not sure if the 1.4 would be any better but I'm thinking it still might be a bit tight.

[Xenedis]

As I mentioned in a previous post, I really am not sure that the 85mm is the best choice for inside shots. The inside I'm thinking of is a house where I take photos of my son/family.

Unless you have a very large room, you'll probably struggle to get anything below the chin, and that's with your back to the wall.

I was thinking sub 50 in terms of zoom. I already have a 100mm (great) and 55-250 which give good results. My 18-55 not so much inside but ok with good outside light. The 50mm is ok but I'm not a fan of the length. I'm not sure if the 1.4 would be any better but I'm thinking it still might be a bit tight.

I hear you re 50mm. It's a focal length I cannot stand and do not even have.

As far as focal lengths, it seems you've already got the focal lengths that will work for indoor portraits with a crop camera.

You'd simply be buying a sharper and faster lens if you opted for a 50mm prime or the 17-55/2.8 IS that Terry mentioned.

[jjphoto]

...I hear you re 50mm. It's a focal length I cannot stand and do not even have...

And I have more than a few. Each to his own.

JJ

[KeeFy]

And I have more than a few. Each to his own.

JJ

So do i . I absolutely love the 50mm focal range.

[rbat]

Thank you for the continued discussion, it has actually really helped me sort out exactly what I am looking for as it goes beyond just a 'people' issue.

I’m contemplating a few different lenses for my inside photographs as this is somewhere the kit lens really falls flat. As I've mentioned, I find the 50mm too long at times, it is fine for general shots but group shots ie at a birthday party with a few people and cake, it is too tight and I can’t frame the shot I want.

I’m happy to get an external flash such as a 430 but not knowing too much about flash photography yet, I’m not sure if this will be enough to get the quality of shot I want inside with my kit lens or if I need another lens to complement the flash?

There are a few options I am considering:

17-40 Canon – It is f/4 but with flash that doesn’t really matter? No IS but does have USM. I also love landscape photography and I thought this might be a good upgrade from my 18-55 which I currently use. It is also quite wide for the family shots I was after.

15-85 Canon – Good range but variable aperture of f/3.5/5.6 which annoys me on the 18-55. Has IS & USM. As with the 17-40, has good reviews for crop sensor. Will also encompass more range. It is not compatible with full frame which I'm hoping to purchase in the next 12-18 months. However my husband is keen to take over my 450D, so will not go to waste if it is the best option.

28-75 Tamron – Has f/2.8 and reasonable reviews. Would still need fairly good light to make this work indoors I would think on it's own anyway? I've looked at photos on Flickr taken with this lens and am very impressed. Have not been keen in the past to move away from Canon but the IQ looks good. My biggest concern would be the 28 inside, not sure if that is still too tight? Biggest plus is the price.

Thanks, Rebecca.

[terry.langham]

If you have no immediate plans to go full frame, the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 would be worth a look. They are just under $1k on some grey market sites. There are quite a few glowing reviews of this lens around.