Why do I need 1000$ portrait lens (24-70 or 24-105)

[zafar1]

I don't usually shoot portraits or picture of people but when I do I use the

cheap 28-135 IS lens and I am satisfied with its performance.

 

Now I am becoming more serious in people pictures and am considering if I should

invest in a L quality zoom (24-70/f2.8 or 24-105/f4).

 

On paper, I don't see any reasons to upgrade. For people portraits, sharpness is

usually not desired (in fact the default camera sharpness has to be turned down

even for 28-135), I am mostly not shooting in low-light situation and even if I

am I need to be using flash anyway.

 

The only benefit I can see with pro lens is that with an f/2.8 lens low light

focusing will be faster. However I don't see this as much advantage in f/4 lens

as my 28-135 is f/5 at 105mm and actually faster at 28mm!

 

So please help me understand why would I (or anyone else) shell out $700 extra

for pro-quality lens for people pictures?

 

Thanks

[bobatkins]

You don't. Get an 85/1.8.

[kari v]

I wouldn't, shelling out around $200 for a used 85/1.8 or 50/1.4 makes more sense to me.

[tdigi]

the 2 zooms you mention are top quality all purpose zooms not really portrait lenses.

 

As suggested above for portraits you should go the prime route. I love the 50 1.4 on a 1.6

crop body but the 85 1.8 100 2.0 will all work very well and perform much better then any

zoom can for portraits. I am even considering a 24 1.4 for wider shots when low light is

an issue.

[g dan mitchell]

Get a prime. (Is that an echo I hear?)

[david_wu6]

Since you didn't mention what body you are using, I'll not attempt to suggest any alternative.

 

One thing you didn't consider is DOF. In many portrait cases when a shallow DOF is desired, a fast lens is needed.

 

BTW Many great lenses are not L lens; so L or non L should not be a factor for investment.

[zafar1]

FYI - I am using 5D.

[._._z]

Buy a used 50/1.4. That might be all you need.

[eric_l._tillman]

I would agree w/ the idea of a fast prime - 85/1.8 or 100/2.0 are excellent

choices(personally I like the 100/2.0) but I do find that I use either the 24-70 or 24-105

quite frequently for portraits.

[jim_larson1]

If your portraits are against a "fake backdrop" where there is nothing to be in focus. . .a F4 zoom will work fine.

 

If you want to isolate your subject and throw the background out of focus. . .you want a F1.8 prime. F1.2 prime would be better. For a 5D, the 85/1.8 and 100/2 would be ideal choices.

 

The 2.8 zoom is designed for weddings where you can't carefully pick the portrait situations and flexibility is key. The F4 zoom need not apply.

[Spearhead]

I shoot most of my portraits with either the 35/2.0 or the 50/1.8. You can see some of them <a href="http://www.spirer.com/People/">here.</a> For studio shoots, I use to use the 17-40/4 on a 1.6 body, a good example is <a href="http://www.spirer.com/images/keri2.jpg">here</a>. Since I mostly shoot on a 1.3 body now, if I really need a zoom, I use the 24-70/2.8., usually between 30 and 60mm.

[nhut-nguyen]

".... picture of people but when I do I use the cheap 28-135 IS lens and I am satisfied...."

 

Cheap? dude that's 400 bucks you're having there..

 

How about one of the 70-200s?

[jason_hall4]

85mm f1.8

 

nuf said

 

Jason

[alan_myers]

Since you are using a full frame camera, yes... Get the 85/1.8 or 100/2. The 135/2 is also good, but getting up there in price again.

[chrisjb]

Depends what FL you mainly use, this can be sorted by checking the exif data of your favourite shots. I use 28 135 for some out door sloow sports, but I find my 135 2.8SF runs circles around it at 135mm. reason is the background can be seperated a lil more, drawing the viewer of the image straight to the subject and removing some distracting clutter you may not want in a shot. You don`t need `L` I make heaps just with 50 1.8/85 /135 2.8, and many daily sales with a Tamron 17 50 2.8 (this lens is better on my 20d`s). Long as the folks you shoot are happy, But I agree explore the prime root and enjoy the difference :)

[keith_lubow]

In my opinion you should get one of those lenses only if you want wider apertures, and all that comes with them. The lens you have is fine as far as optical quality goes.

 

You stated that you are satisfied with what you have. That's all you need to be.

 

If you are going to add anything to your bag, I would make it a fast fixed-length lens before another zoom. The 100mm 2.8 macro would be the most versatile. It is moderately fast, ultra sharp, and focuses close. Go for the 85 1.8 or 100mm 2.0 if you want something faster.

 

Keith

[brian_baum]

If you are using an APS-sized sensor, I highly recommend the 24-70 L Lens. What you are surely missing is the stunning colors and the high contrast this lens brings. Especially for portraits. Here is one example.

[JDMvW]

Just as another alternative, consider some other portrait lenses. One of the best Nikkors ever made was the 105mm f/2.5. It will work beautifully on a 5D with, of course, manual focusing and stop-down metering. However, your eye can better judge focus than even the best AF for portrait work anyway, and you will often be shooting portraits wide open for that lovely bokeh. You have a nice, big viewscreen on your 5D.

 

You can get non-AI Nikkors very inexpensively (I got mine for about $50 on eBay). An adapter can cost as little as $10 (stay away from focus confirmation adapters, though)

[mike_earussi1]

50 f1.8, cost $75.

[robert lee]

"Now I am becoming more serious in people pictures ... should invest in a L quality zoom (24-70/f2.8 or 24-105/f4)."

 

No. I have both the 24-70 f2.8L and the 85 f1.8. The 85mm f1.8 is the superior portrait lens by far.

 

Actually, I've found the most satisfying portrait machine to be an RB-67 with the 127mm and Fuji Acros, but that's a whole 'nother story ain't it...

 

"On paper, I don't see any reasons to upgrade. For people portraits, sharpness is usually not desired"

 

That's probably because you've been shooting with a slow zoom all this time. Spend a few hundred and try the 85mm f1.8 prime. The point of of the fast lens is selective focus, not focusing speed nor faster shutter settings.

 

Shoot this lens wide open. Light and meter properly. Place focus on the eyes. The lens will resolve sharply out to the tip of the lashes and the patterns of the iris. Out of focus areas become creamily smooth and specular highlights sparkle.

[keith_lubow]

"The point of of the fast lens is selective focus, not focusing speed nor faster shutter settings."

 

Er...I thought it was all three of these things...not to mention a brighter viewfinder.

 

Keith

[pjmeade]

I'm about to get my self an 85/1.8. The 24-105 is a general purpose lens, not portrait. I can't comment on the 24-70, I don't have one.

[steve_crist]

On a 5D the 100f2 is more than sufficient. It always gets great reviews. I've used that with much success with my 5D. The 85Lf1.2 and 135Lf2 are a bit too sharp for portrait work - they're great lenses however.

[EddieF1]

I don?t understand this, to sharp for portrait work, idea. I can always make a sharp image softer, but I can?t make a soft image sharp. Some of the best portraits I have seen have been razor sharp. Sharp is not always what you want, but sometimes.

[bob_osullivan]

Neither the 24-70 nor the 24-105 are portrait lenss. That's not to say you can't use them, but they are all around zooms.

 

The main issue is Depth of Feild DOF. You want something at least as fast as F1.8. And I have to dissagree with Jim here. Especially wiht studio backdrops you want to blur the bacground. Nothing says "shot is studio" like a backdrop that you can see each wrinkle in. Those backdrops look more flattering when they are quite blurred. In a small studio you do this buy using very open aperture 1.4, 1.8.

 

For your body (5D) a 85 F1.8 for upper half shots, A 50 1.8 for full length or small groups, a 100F2 or 135 for headshots and maybe a 35F2 for larger groups.

 

If you have to choose only one to start with I'd get the 85 1.8 and use my feet to compensate.

 

Apply softness in post processing.