Lens-Dilemma Portrait/Documentary

[david_christoffersson]

<p>Hi!<br>

I'm going to shoot alot of documentary photography in third-world countries and I dont have alot of experience in this area. So what I have is a Canon 5dMK2, 35/1.4 and 50/1.4, what I need is something longer towards a portrait focal-length.<br>

For starters I've tried the Canon 85/1.2 and completly hated it, so that is not even close to an option.<br>

The lenses I have in mind right now is:<br>

Canon 85/1.8<br>

Canon 135/2<br>

or maybe<br>

Canon 100/2</p>

<p>I'm sure there are hundreds of topics regarding this, but I can't get any good argument.<br>

What do you think considering what I need to do?</p>

 

[Matt Laur]

<p>70-200/2.8 or 70-200/4 depending on your budget and camera-bag-logistics.</p>

[danield]

<p>What did you hate about the 85mm f/1.2? Just trying to understand - otherwise one would have a hard time figuring out why you're considering the f/1.8 version instead. One of the 85mm would have been my suggestion as well as the 135 f/2. The decision is yours though.</p>

[david_christoffersson]

<p>they are to heavy</p>

[david_christoffersson]

<p>The 85 1.2 is extremly heavy and has one of the slowest AF I have ever experienced on a digital camera.</p>

<p>Yes of course it's my decision, but it's hard :) Trying to get som pros and cons. </p>

[danield]

<p>AF-wise, the newer version II of the 85mm f/1.2 USM L is supposed to be twice as fast as the older one - not sure which one you tried. But it sounds though like the 85 f/1.8 would be your next best choice... it's less than half the weight of the f/1.2 version. AF speed is quoted to be even faster than the f/1.2 II (photozone). I don't have direct experience comparing the two, or the other lenses. I'm sure others can comment more.</p>

 

[david_christoffersson]

<p>Ok! I tried the older version, but I cant really justify the cost of the 85/1.2 either.<br>

The 85/1.8 is really cheap and seems like a great lens aswell</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>85/1.8 is the cheapest and really good. The 100/2 is also good. The 135mm is perhapa a little long esp. for indoor use but marvellous. 35/50/85 is a "classic" prime combo.</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>All three of those primes are fine lenses. I use the 85mm f/1.8 and the 135mm f/2, but have no experience with the 100mm lens. The 85mm lens is a great performer and is also smaller, lighter, and a lot less expensive. I regard the 135 as one of Canon's finest prime lenses, but it is larger, significantly more expensive, and heavier. </p>

<p>If you are bound and determined to shoot primes, a dynamite set that is small, light, and a lot less expensive but which can provide first class results is the 35mm f/2, the 50mm f/1.4, and the 85mm f/1.8. Of course, by the time you start carrying multiple primes, especially for handheld shooting, using a single prime starts to look like a much more interesting and flexible option.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>Hard to go wrong with the 85 F1.8 - it is (50 F1.4 excepted) probably the best bargain in the Canon range - fast AF and very high IQ (although it lacks the drama of the F1.2 lens). It is cheap although you should buy the hood. If you want a zoom and do not need the speed (or size and weight) the 70-200 F4 L IS is a very good performer and approaches prime quality.</p>

[matthew_moran]

I have the 100 f/2.0 and its a great

lens. If I know I'm going to be doing an

outdoor portrait, that is my goto lens.

 

But for travel and documentary style

stuff like you describe I'd just stick with

the 50 f/1.4.

 

I hate changing lenses in the field.

 

If the 50 f/1.4 is too limiting and you are

willing to give up the shallow DOF, the

24-105 f/4 L is probably a good choice,

assuming it's in your price range. It's

not in mine :-).

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Given you seem to value lightweight and fast AF, both the 100/2 and 85/1.8 would be ideal. Of the two, given your specifics, I'd probably go w/ the 100/2.</p>

 

[sravan]

<p>Dont discount the 100 L Macro lens. It has IS also to boot and you can get real close if you need to. It is an extremely sharp lens and that is just icing on the cake.</p>

 

[matthijs]

100L gives more options and is sealed...

 

+1

[scott_ferris]

<p>Use the 50, stand back three steps and crop, you then have a top class 35, 50 and effective 85 without the weight or lens changes.</p>

[Brad_]

>>> So what I have is a Canon 5dMK2, 35/1.4 and 50/1.4, what I need is something longer towards a

portrait focal-length.

 

I think you already have it. When shooting with my 5DII, I use a 35/1.4 exclusively. With the 35, the 50

will give you additional flexibility.

[Ian Taylor]

<p>I go with the 35L + 135L combo myself. </p>

[ed_avis2]

<p>If you don't mind manual focus consider 90mm TS-E.</p>