Portrait Lens

cngim · April 16, 2010

hi to all, I am currently looking for a portrait lens for my Canon 50d, and still in dilemma of which to opt for. Perhaps I could seek your expertise to suggest.

These are the 2 portrait lenses i was recommended so far by the camera shop's representatives, but i am not certain about the beneficial for both, pros and cons....etc. Or are there any other alternate optional lenses besides these 2 you could suggest, are welcomed to bring to light.

(1) 50mm/1.4 prime lens (2) 85mm/1.8 or 85mm/1.2L

Your inputs on this would be more appreciated. Thanks in advance!

cheers, jenny gim

bueh · April 16, 2010

<a href="../photo/10875311"><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/10875311-sm.jpg" border="2" alt="" hspace="20" align="right" /></a>The <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=783085">50mm</a> has a very nice working distance. This allows casual conversation with your subject, which is an important part in my portrait photography. With the longer lens you are just not as near, which may or may not fit your shooting style. All three are excellent lenses for portraiture with nice background blur, but the 85mm L is the most heavy and most expensive.

There is also the Sigma 30mm (normal lens on APS-C) and various Canon lenses with similar focal lengths (28mm, 35mm). For longer working distances (with stronger bokeh) I use the EF 100mm f/2 USM and EF 200mm f/2.8 L USM. There is also the upcoming Sigma 85mm f/1.4 lens, which sounds very interesting if priced right.

matthijs · April 16, 2010

Well... what's your idea of a portrait? And what is your working distance? What is the light you expect to work with?

Personally I like tight portraits, headshots and even just fractions of a face plus eyes.

For me a portraitlens can't be too long. My current favourite is the 100L macro and before that I used a 70-200. Both on a 50D.

However, if space is cramped or if you like to show the environment you'll want considerably wider lenses. With the right technique (focal plane in line with the length of your subject) you can even shoot good portraits with an ultra wide...

Lighting / aperture: when shooting available (low) light you'll generally want the fastest lens you can afford. Just remember that very wide apertures yield a very thin depth of field so oftentimes you won't need anything faster that F4.

My advice would be to try and rent or borrow a few lenses. I certainly would not advice you to buy an 85/1.2 until you know for certain that's what you need.

Have fun! Matthijs.

markonestudios · April 16, 2010

Gim, how about doing a search on this forum first? Some very useful threads on this topic... http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00VbRT

buffdr_rasouliyan · April 16, 2010

I'm not a big fan of the Canon 50 1.4. Sorry. I would rather use my 35 1.4 or 70-200 2.8 IS for my portrait work. The 35 1.4 on my crop body is really a sweet focal length and the 70-200 2.8 IS on my full frame is pure magic. From your choices, I would pick the 85 1.8. v/r Buffdr

jim_j2 · April 16, 2010

I only recently acquired the EF 100mm Macro f/2.8 IS L and haven't done any dedicated Portraits yet, but in the shots I have taken of our dogs playing and so forth, I can say that it's Bokeh with the additional blades it contains appears to be fantastic.

Of course, the Bokeh desires would depend on your backdrop and shooting distances. The 100mm may be to long for your situation.

paddler4 · April 16, 2010

In addition to how close/tight you want to be, there is an issue of perspective. Long lenses tend to flatten perspective (just as they make near and far things look closer together). Short lenses do the reverse. That is one reason why a traditional length for portrait lenses in the film days was ~90mm. Of course, you would have to adjust for the crop factor.

mark_pierlot · April 16, 2010

For informal indoor portraiture, I tend to use my 50/1.4, 24-70, and 85/1.2 on my full frame bodies. Outdoors, I go up to 200mm. The portrait "sweet spot" for me is 85mm, so the 50/1.4 would be my choice for use on a crop frame body.

And despite what some might claim, the 50/1.4 is optically superb, with decent AF.

william_markey · April 16, 2010

I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE my 85mm 1.8 lens for portraiture! If I had only one lens...this would be the one. Here's a sample with the lens on my Canon 10D (yes, I STILL use it...it takes pictures now JUST like it did the day I bought it! <grin>):

robert_hall2 · April 16, 2010

The "ideal" portrait lens for a full-frame 35mm is about 100 mm. The canon 100 mm macro works well as a portrait lens but you want one that is fast, a small max f-stop to get a narrow depth of field (selective focus). I think the 50D has a magnification factor because of the smaller sensor so an 85 would probably be ideal. Fast is best.

charlessalomons · April 17, 2010

85 mm 1.8 is my favorite lens. L Quality glass, super sharp, fantastic color, fast, good bokeh. My next favortie would be the 50mm 1.8.

William Michael · April 17, 2010

“I am currently looking for a portrait lens for my Canon 50d . . . are there any other alternate optional lenses besides these 2 [50 F/1.4 and 85F/1.8] you could suggest.”

Yes there are many other options.

What other lens(es) do you have already?

Will you be shooting portraits inside, outside, or both?

Will you be using Flash, or not?

Will you be shooting, one, two or groups of People?

A new lens needs to fit into a kit, and provide a purpose: “a portrait lens for my Canon 50d”, does not provide enough information to give adequate alternatives.

***

Both the 50 F/1.4 and 85F/1.8 lenses are very nice portrait lenses for the 50D. I have both.

WW

cngim · April 18, 2010

Thanks guys. Thanks for your sound inputs and hindsights :)

To answer to WW's questions, here are the answers as below :

(1) What other lens(es) do you have already? In my posession, i have owned 2 lenses : 17-85mm/4-5.6 & EF 50mm/2.5 Compact Macro.

(2) Will you be shooting portraits inside, outside, or both? Both, inside and outside.

(3) Will you be using Flash, or not? Nope. Not using flash most of the time.

(4) Will you be shooting, one, two or groups of People? Preferably one or two. Seldom in group shooting.

Any feedbacks on this would be welcomed too...

cheersy,

jenny gim

jim_krupnik · April 18, 2010

For a crop camera, the EF-S 60 f/2.8 macro is a nearly perfect prime portrait compromise. It delivers a useful "compression effect" that is so important to much portrait photography, and at a distinctly more noticeable level than shorter lenses can deliver. It allows a comfortable working distance for either head shots, or head and shoulders shots that lenses in the 100 mm range can only match when mounted on a FF digital, or film camera, while shorter lenses need to be too close, and add perspective distortion as a result. It's aperture blades are optimized for smooth bokeh. To top the list, the 60 f/2.8 is close to flawless at the optical level.

Many people skip over this lens when considering an optimum portrait prime for an APS-C camera, as they still remember the old lens formulas, but curiously forget the fact that they are using cameras with a 1.6 fl multiplication factor. The only limitation of this lens is that it isn't an f/1.2. That would be awesome, but f/2.8 DOF isn't too bad at all, and on a crop camera, this lens kicks the other f/2.8 competition to the dirt. As a bonus, it is also a super quality 1:1 macro lens. What a resume....

Here is a portrait I shot with the EF-S 60 from about 5.5 feet. It is of a bride-to-be getting prepped for her wedding ceremony a few weeks ago. I'm close enough to fit in the cramped space, yet not so close as to be in the way. The other pic is a simple crop of the first jpg image to illustrate how sweet the optics of the 60 were designed.. No funky distortion, no chromatic aberration, no surprises. Just a clean capture.... It's a perfect lens for every crop camera kit.

William Michael · April 18, 2010

Well I too think the EF-S 60 f/2.8 macro is a good option, but not if we alrady own the 50F/2.5 Macro.

***

1) What other lens(es) do you have already? In my posession, i have owned 2 lenses : 17-85mm/4-5.6 & EF 50mm/2.5 Compact Macro. OK – you should set the zoom to 85mm and us it to view the various portrait framings (Field of View & Compression) you get if you buy the 85/1.8. Also you can use the 50mm macro to do the same to mimic what framing and Compression you will get if you buy a 50/1.4

***

(2) Will you be shooting portraits inside, outside, or both? Both, inside and outside.

Inside the 50mm might be too long (Too telephoto) you should consider the 35F/2 or the 28F/1.8. Use your zoom lens and set it to 28mm and 35 mm to view what you can do with those Focal Lengths.

***

(3) Will you be using Flash, or not? Nope. Not using flash most of the time.

The lens speed is important, when inside to achieve a suitable Shutter Speed (Tv). I think that F/2.5 is at about the limit at which you can use for Indoor Portraiture in most low light, Available Light conditions.

So I think that you already have a very nice 50mm Portrait Lens.

Some will advise that a Macro lens is “Too Sharp” for Portrait work – I think differently – I think Sharp is good.

The 50/2.5 is one of the sharpest lenses in the Canon range . . .

I like sharp because it can be used wide open at very slow shutter speeds and even become “acceptable” with a slight Subject Motion Blur.

This is a portrait with the 100/2.8 Macro: <a href="../photo/10738709&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/10738709&size=lg</a> Shooting: F/2.8 @ 1/8s @ ISO1600 HH, Spot Meter, Manual, Available (room) Light, AWB.

***

(4) Will you be shooting, one, two or groups of People? Preferably one or two. Seldom in group shooting.

Well, you will need a large room when inside to shoot two people, full length with a 50mm lens – so consider a 35 or 28 . . . as I mentioned you already have a 50mm.

You need about 15 feet (clear) to pull a Full Length Shot, Vertical Format, with some air top and bottom using a 50mm lens on an APS-Camera – that usually means a room about 20ft to 25ft long (allowing for furniture and stuff).

***

Maximum aperture for the 50mm lens. . . now there might be some argument about F/2.5 being too small for narrow Depth of Field and Subject Separation . . . and that you will “need an F1.4 lens” . . . well for a tight head shot (Vertical) you will be shooting at about 5ft: at F/1.4 you will get about 2 inches DoF . . . using F/2.5 you get about 3½ inches DoF . . . for a tight Head Shot I use around F/4 if I want “Shallow DoF” which is about the width of two eyes, in half profile

For an Half Shot you will be shooting at about 8ft: at F/1.4 you will get about 5 inches DoF . . . using F/2.5 you get about 9 inches DoF . . . for an Half Shot I use around F/4 if I want “Shallow DoF” which is about the thickness of an human head.

For a Full Length Shot you will be shooting at about 12 ft (one person): at F/1.4 you will get about 11 inches DoF . . . using F/2.5 you get about 20 inches DoF . . . for a Full Length Shot I use around F/2.8 if I want “Shallow DoF” which is about the thickness of an Human Torso, in half profile.

So IMO F/2.5 is not too slow for Shallow DoF and Subject Separation.

***

Bokeh . . . Some will argue about Bokeh and the quality of it. Well I think that it is important to get the bits in focus, first. Yes, the out of Focus bits do matter, but the in focus bits are more important.

***

Bottom line recommendation considering what you have: Consider the 85/1.8 and the 35/2.

You have a nice 50mmPortrait Lens and it will suffice for most indoor shots and all outdoor shots: F/2.5 is quite suitable, unless you really go crazy and want to do extreme Available Light Capture like this: <a href="../photo/9567754&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/9567754&size=lg</a> Shooting F/1.6 @ 1/50s @ ISO3200 HH (Jpeg out of the camera) – DoF is about 1½ inches.

The 85F1.8 is quite an incredible lens when used wide open: <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=925231">http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=925231</a> (those are on a 5D, but as you have an APS-C camera you get the guts bit of the glass and can expect even better detail, just using the middle bits of the lens).

The 35F/2 is nice too, this is at F/2 on an APS-C camera, for the Bokeh Buffs: <a href="../photo/9899178&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/9899178&size=lg</a>

Also you could look at the 100F/2, by all reports it is nice glass, (I have not used one) but consider that it is 15mm longer than the 85. . . and do you want that extra reach . . . ? ? ?

WW

jim_krupnik · April 18, 2010

William,

I could be comfortable with a 50 mm portrait lens on a crop camera, but I think the little bit extra helps when you have to get close, as it keeps perspective distortion at bay. No matter though, there are plenty of choices out there....

William Michael · April 18, 2010

... Perspective is created by the distance to the subject not the by lens, but I do get what you are driving at I believe: there is little difference in Foreshortening at 50mm vs 60mm even in a Tight Head Shot from a skew camera angle. However, I agree that when working up close, the 50 gives less Compression (on the face for example) from a normal camera angle and that is obvious to the trained eye – usually noticed by the nose length, relative to the other facial features. But at a tight Half Shot, and longer, it would be difficult for most Photographers to pick the difference as to which lens was used, IMO. *** I think to argue the value of the EF-S 60mm macro over the EF50mmMacro: - the 60mm has FTM (Full Time Manual Focusing) - the 60mm (apparently) has a quieter AF motor and has faster AF - the 60 has 7 blades and the 50 has only 6. (IMO even blades are more flexible and more useful for Portrait work, especially at night-time Available Light Shooting. But then again the 50/F1.4 has eight Blades and FTM, albeit without USM and it does have FTM *** My two reasons for referencing your comments about the EF-S 60 macro, was firstly I agree that a macro lens should not be dismissed for Portrait Work - (and some are passionate that they should be dismissed) and secondly, to draw your attention to the fact that the OP seems to own the 50Macro (and I thought you might had not have noticed that fact). *** BTW, speaking of “distortion” you second image on my monitor is squished in at the sides. Perhaps this might be so for other too? That might be because, as you inserted it, it was more than the allowed 700 wide – I have resized it so it renders the correct shape: WW

William Michael · April 18, 2010

RRRR, here it is:<div>

00WGks-237527584.jpg.3387cfd5ef8d12103bbe024cda154838.jpg

</div>

jim_krupnik · April 19, 2010

I usually make a note for folks to save the image, and then view it on their PC if I post a larger image meant to offer detail. It depends on the browser though. For example, IE squishes the sides of a larger image, while Opera resizes and renders it correctly. By the way, you mentioned the 50 f/1.4. I use that lens quite often on both crop and FF cameras. It's a very sweet lens. I did not pick up on the fact that the OP had the macro version of the 50 at first, and my promoting the 60 was sparked by it's multi-talented nature, and hence, value.

Give it a few years, and the OP will likely own a selection.. :).

William Michael · April 19, 2010

Hi, Yes, I was / am using IE, and your image looked funny all squished up. Yes also, I use my 50/1.4 a lot, on both camera formats - more on the 5D, nowadays since I don't do weddings any more and I have an 85mm lens, anyway. My lightweight, go everywhere Wedding Kit: 5D / 30D / 20D + 24L, 50F1.4, 135L and 16 to 35. Swapping 50mm lens on the APS-C and the 5D made for about 80% of all the "Controlled Portrait Style" shots for the day - that's the economic 80 / 20 rule: 80% of the shots from 20% of the equipment. Nice chatting to you . . . yes whatever the Jenny buys now, she will likely own more, next year - I concur. WW

cngim · April 19, 2010

Thanks both William and Jim, again, for the sound feedback on this.

I am rather impressed with your sound knowledge into camera and lenses, this truly amazed me :)

Yes, i will definitely own more, it's a matter of time. But by learning over here in this forum indeed allowed me to know more and appreciate more.

I am sure i know what i am going to get in this stage of time.

Once i would like to say thanks to all contributors up here.

cheersy,

jenny gim

Sign In

Portrait Lens

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in