Have Canon, need a lens....

[Jelster]

I recently hired (from StewartR) a 24-105 L for a studio portrait session and it was great. However, can anybody out there suggest another lens that I should try for portrait work ?

I think I would prefer a zoom, as I find it really useful in the studio.

My next lens purchase will be something that covers off my portrait work, so I want to get it right. I'll probably do a "try before your buy" with Stewart again as it's such a handy way to do it...

Steve

[natjag]

The 24-70L is better picture quality wise, but loses some reach. I borrowed fraggle's at the stevenage session for a few shots. I had to take it off, before I ran off with it. The quality of the picture compared to the other lens I was using at similar focal lengths (17-40L) is much, much better.

[FranchiseJuan]

Portrait work is such a wide ranging term? What exactly do you want to shoot? In a studio I use everything from a 35 F1.4 to 135 F2.

For me the 24-105 IS is completely useless for portrait work. It just has too much distortion at the long end, and I don't really want to add another step in my workflow for this lens.

If you talking half body, or head and shoulders I would go for a 24(28)-70 F2.8. If you want to spread the money a bit, the 28-105 F3.5-4.5 (or 24-85 F3.5-4.5) + 85 F1.8 (or 100 F2.8 macro) might be a good combo. The zooms actually work quite well in a studio where you are generally going to be at F8-11.

[Jelster]

OK, so I'm feeling that the 24-70 may be worth playing with next time around. I'll look into it.

I've also decided (sort of) not to go with the 40D, and save my money for either a 5D, or it's replacement, should we see one this summer.

Looking on here, full frame cameras just seem to have much better depth and feel than cropped, and for portrait & studio work that's what I'm after. I don't need 6.5 fps or additional reach.

I'll give the 24-70 some thought and maybe hire one for a weekend.

Thanks,
Steve

[pete.rush]

Portrait work is such a wide ranging term? What exactly do you want to shoot? In a studio I use everything from a 35 F1.4 to 135 F2.

For me the 24-105 IS is completely useless for portrait work. It just has too much distortion at the long end, and I don't really want to add another step in my workflow for this lens.

If you talking half body, or head and shoulders I would go for a 24(28)-70 F2.8. If you want to spread the money a bit, the 28-105 F3.5-4.5 (or 24-85 F3.5-4.5) + 85 F1.8 (or 100 F2.8 macro) might be a good combo. The zooms actually work quite well in a studio where you are generally going to be at F8-11.

FJ right, but you are also using a cropped camera, so this might also affect your decision for framing the image. The 85mm is a nice lens, maybe the 50mm f1.4 on a cropped body. Your probably doing the right thing and hiring the lenses out for the day to try them out.

[pearce_jj]

what about the 135mm f2.8 if you're going full-frame? It's only £150, has variable soft focus but is sharp without it.

[PapaLazarou]

50mm F1.8
50mm F1.4
50mm F1.2L
85mm F1.8
85mm F1.2L

[Jelster]

The 135 sounds interesting... I have a 50mm 1.8 which I'm going to use for some "outside" portraits I have planned - I just need to find the right location.

Steve

[pearce_jj]

Hi Steve, the 135mm SF has similar sharpness and contrast to the 50mm 1.8, more information here: http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/Reviews/065_Canon_135_F2.8_Soft_Focus/_Canon_135_2.8_Soft_Focus.html

[StewartR]

Or if you're thinking 135mm (for when you go full-frame), the 135mm f/2 L is sharper than a really sharp thing that's just been sharpened.