85mm F1.8 or 50mm F1.4 on a crop sensor?

Amin

Amin

Messages
261
Name
Amin
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,

looking to do some portrait photography/amateur wedding shots, (not paid or business, just to build skill, so these will be weddings i'm invited to as a guest, of course i'll be staying out of the main photographers way!) or freebies for close friends/families. In fact I have a child's 16th birthday party to photograph soon, it's a FOC shot, no expectations/liabilities involved. Although I've made it clear if the shots are good I will be using them in my portfolio for that reason I'll ensure contracts are formed with children's parents etc. This is all in order and not an issue, now to move onto the part which I'm having trouble reaching a decision on...:

Currently my kit consists of the following:
Canon 500D
Canon 70-200 F4L
Canon 18-55 IS
Canon EX430 II Flashgun

For portrait pictures I was going to buy a Canon 85mm F1.8, but then got thinking, shooting at 70mm with my 70-200 requires me to step back quiet a distance which isn't helping, people in the way etc.

So I can imagine it will only be worse if I shoot with a 85mm, so that brings the 50mm F1.4 into the mix (as they're not priced too differently).

The dilemma I face is, there is a strong likely hood that a full frame body will be added to the kit in the near future, probably a few months to be precise. For that reason, I feel a 50mm will be too wide on a full body and a 85mm will be too long on my crop sensor.

I'm trying to build a portfolio therefore need something to take decent portraits with, while my 70-200 does well, F4 just doesn't offer the bokeh I'm looking for.

What would you wonderful people advise?

Edit:

Given the above, a part of me is saying just buy a 50mm F1.8 for now, some decent filters, i.e. red filter, polarisation filter, stofen flash diffuser and practice and learn. Once I'm ready to step up, look at full frame/85mm & etc. I've used a 50mm F1.8 in the past, and found it to be rather slow, that's my only concern with that specific lens, but for £75 I don't think one could buy a better lens!

Hmm, decisions, decisions!
 
Last edited:
I'm not thinkin of goin full frame, but have been asked to do the before wedding shoots for my mates big day (ie follow the bridge gettin ready ect). I've got a d3100, kit lens ( soon to uupgarded to a tamron 17-50 vc or sigam 24-70 both 2.8 ), 70-300, sigma 10-20 and a nikon 50mm 1.4 witch I love an with an sb400 flash/diffuser it's get for portraits of my kids ect but will it do the job at the wedding? Or is it best to stand bk a bit let people be more natural and use my 70-300 or I've been lookin at 85mm prime too?
 
Last edited:
I swear by my 85mm on crop, rarely use the 50, but loads of other people tell me that the 50 is perfect and the 85 is too long.

Is it confusing? Are they right? Am I right?

Or is it down to personal taste / style.
 
Hi Amin,

Tough call! I love my 50mm 1.4 on my crop but have heard and read that the 85mm is a great lens too. The 50mm should suit your short term plans and won't be useless if you go FF in the future, after all it is a 'standard' lens on a FF. As Phil says, it kind of depends how you shoot and what you are trying to achieve. For me, the 85mm would be too close at the moment but I am not a pro.!

Good luck

J
 
I'd go for the 50mm, cheaper to start with, should be a fine length on crop and if not, sell it on with little loss, even buy second hand to save a few quid?
 
Last edited:
I think both lenses should be in your collection - I'd get the 50mm first on a crop though.
 
I'd want to know which sensor size first, and beyond that it's down to personal preference. A 50 on crop is pretty versatile, whilst being a bit ambiguous on ff. If you're sure of a migration to ff then an 85 is a better bet across both formats.

Thing is, it may be as much or more about the light, & how you interact with your subject ...
 
I am with Phil V : 85mm on crop is my pref as it is better at loosing backgrounds.
 
I was i your exact boat, had the 500D, 50/1.8 and 85/1.8. Then I bought full frame.

Don't forget that when you go to full frame, you need to spend a fair bob on a lens to cover the wider range, so the 50 is good for a 'temp' wide-ish starter..

In your current position I'd buy the 85/1.8 (or 1.4 :D ). As at weddings that will give you a bit more reach (135mm effectively).

50mm f2 on full frame:

Project 100 - 6/100 by ^Joe, on Flickr

85mm f2 on full frame


Project 100 - 5/100 by ^Joe, on Flickr


85mm 2.2 on 500D

IMG_0012 by ^Joe, on Flickr

50mm 2.8 on 500D


IMG_0039 by ^Joe, on Flickr




Given the above.. the 85mm on crop really loses the background, better than the 50 does.

All this said though, I've not used the 1.4
 
Last edited:
Personally I would love the 85mm. As a thought why not get the 85mm f1.8 and the 50mm f1.8 rather than 1.4?

The nifty is so cheap but delivers excellent shots, at the moment it's the only lens I have - the 85mm is next on my list!

The tele aspect of the 85mm is going to offer you a more natural view of your subject, maybe you just need to shoot in more space ;-)
 
Last edited:
Oh wow, the 85mm really shines...

Hmm, now I'm thinking buying both 85mm F1.8 and 50mm F1.8...Also as rightly said on here these awesome bits of glass don't tend to lose much value when it comes to re-sale...

Thanks all, you've done an awesome job at advising!
 
Hi Amin - I am in a similar position to you and have pondered what lens for quite a while.

However I have now decided on the 50 F1.4 simply because on my cropped 600D I think it will give enough reach for what I am intending.

Although no plans to go full frame yet. :)
 
Edit:

Given the above, a part of me is saying just buy a 50mm F1.8 for now, some decent filters, i.e. red filter, polarisation filter, stofen flash diffuser and practice and learn.

Hmm, decisions, decisions![/QUOTE]
Whats the red filter for ?
 
Hi

I had an 85 f1.4 and a 50 f1.8 on the D90. Most used was the 50 but the 85 f1.4 had a wonderful feel to the portraits - a bit like the 135 f2 on a Canon.

Still love the 85 on FF

S
 
I'd definitely get the 50mm f1.8 as a cheap effective lens. It's optical quality is as good as the f1.4. I've had both. It doesn't cost much so no reason why you shouldn't buy it, try it and if you find you need larger focal length you can buy the 85mm later

As Phil says its a matter of choice. If I had to pick just one of these on a crop frame, I would definitely go for 50mm but that's just me :)
 
I would not get the canon 50mm 1.4. It is soft wide open and af can sometimes be spotty at that aperture as well. It's much better at 2.8, but then again so is the much cheaper 1.8, and most primes. The sigma 1.4 is sharper wide open, but only if you get a good one. I don't fancy playing the sigma lottery. Call me crazy, but I think the 60mm Tamron f2 macro might be the most suitable for your portrait needs, especially on an aps-c sensor.
 
Last edited:
Amin said:
Oh wow, the 85mm really shines...

Hmm, now I'm thinking buying both 85mm F1.8 and 50mm F1.8...Also as rightly said on here these awesome bits of glass don't tend to lose much value when it comes to re-sale...

Thanks all, you've done an awesome job at advising!
Click to expand...

The 50mm 1.8 is horrible, be warned.
 
Personally, I'd say just use the lenses you have. Using an f/1.x from short distances for "bokeh" leads to a lot of issues (it's not bokeh, it's shallow DOF). Want the BG more OOF? Move the subject further away from it...Want it to look like less DOF? Use a longer lens from further... Want the BG less distracting? Choose a less distracting BG...

You said "taking portraits." If you're doing portraits then there is nothing that isn't w/in your control. I own one f/1.x lens (85mm Zeiss) and it is the least used lens in my kit...even in low light.
 
I agree with Phil. 85mm for portraits on APS-C. 30mm for walkabout.

50mm on APS-C is a bit of a two-bears lens for me. Too long for everyday walkabout, too short for portrait. You need a certain amount of distance between the camera and the subject for portraits.
 
Alastair said:
I agree with Phil. 85mm for portraits on APS-C. 30mm for walkabout.

50mm on APS-C is a bit of a two-bears lens for me. Too long for everyday walkabout, too short for portrait. You need a certain amount of distance between the camera and the subject for portraits.
Click to expand...

It's odd that lots of people recommend the nifty for crop cameras, yet there's no real history of it as a useful focal length. On 35mm film we jumped from the 50mm standard to 85 or 90mm, on medium format the next focal length was often double the standard lens. The 50mm on crop is a bit 'meh' IMO.
 
I think a lot to do with it is the price, 50mm f1.8 af-s Nikon for £150 vs 85mm f1.8 af-s Nikon £379, quite a price difference.
 
Phil V said:
It's odd that lots of people recommend the nifty for crop cameras, yet there's no real history of it as a useful focal length. On 35mm film we jumped from the 50mm standard to 85 or 90mm, on medium format the next focal length was often double the standard lens. The 50mm on crop is a bit 'meh' IMO.
Click to expand...

I supect it gets the nod purely because it's the cheapest route into trying a prime. And there are no cheap 85mm options, even if you look at MF vintage glass the 85mm is a rarity. But it's full frame FOV equivilant is plentiful (135 mm).
 
It still makes no sense, it's like recommending a Lada Riva to someone so they can get a feel of owning their own car 'because it's cheap'. It's still a rubbish choice and doesn't really prepare them for owning a Fiesta or an Audi.

I understand it's cheap, but I've probably taken less than 100 frames on my 50mm in about 6 years. And I keep it because it's worth very little and I know it'll come in handy if I get a 5d.
 
For me 50mm is a must have for crop sensor. but the 85mm 1.8 is also a great lens with good value. If i could give recommendation, buy the 50mm first and then 85mm later.
 
Phil V said:
It's odd that lots of people recommend the nifty for crop cameras...
Click to expand...
Personally I think it's odd that so many recommend f/1.x primes... Like f/1.x solves anything...
Just maybe, something like a f/2.8 macro is a worthwhile consideration. I.e. the Nikon 40mm f/2.8 Dx is a better lens than any of the 35/50 primes... and a 60mm macro isn't any worse than the 35/50 primes...Or what about a 100mm macro instead of an 85?

These lenses (in general) are sharper wide open than the f/1.x's are when stopped down to the same aperture; and macro's usually have better/more even "bokeh" than other lenses... They may (very likely) have less distortion/CA/flat field focus, etc. AND they do macro for the same types of prices....
 
Sometimes we need 1.x. (shooting in dark places where we're not allowed flash)

And I shoot people - pin sharp lenses aren't a priority, we spend a long time softening the effects of our sharpest lenses. My macro lens is sharp as a tack, is 'usable' for portraits, but the focus motor is woeful compared to my other lenses.

Which just goes to prove - horses for courses.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
Sometimes we need 1.x. (shooting in dark places where we're not allowed flash)
Click to expand...
Why? For SS to freeze motion? With a super shallow DOF they'll easily move out of?
IMHO, it's better to underexpose for the SS and fix it later (if you have to). I agree about "too sharp" sometimes; thats easy to fix and not "a common problem." (I'd much rather soften an image w/ pin sharp eyes). And I certainly understand crappy AF....
 
I really think you need to plan for the future here, and your lens purchase(s) should be geared to a FF body (that is planned), most photographers go through the cheap as chips glass and regret it later.

If you are planning on people photography with a FF body, then the 50mm F1.4 is a good starting point, particularly for group shots, but not so good for head & shoulders type. I find the 50 MM f1.4 is tack sharp from around F1.6, and provides a pleasing bokeh (not up there with the 85 mm f1.2 or 135mm F2 though).

My second lens purchase (again for a FF body) would be a 135mm F2, for me it's the almost perfect lens for those head shots, so sharp you cut yourself on it , with a bokeh to die for, and the focal length means you are still within communication distance with your subject.

For portraits (both street & posed) the 2 lenses I use almost exclusively are the 85mm F1.2 and 135mm F2, and if I had to choose just one lens for this type of work, it would be 135mm F2.

The lens line up you have at present is more than capable for what you require, the planning (and investment) for good glass should come with your progress to a good FF body (IMO)

A while ago there was an excellent thread regarding just how good the 135mm F2 is:-

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/135mm-f2-wow.411636/
 
Amin said:
Hi all,

looking to do some portrait photography/amateur wedding shots, (not paid or business, just to build skill, so these will be weddings i'm invited to as a guest, of course i'll be staying out of the main photographers way!) :

Hmm, decisions, decisions!
Click to expand...

For the upcoming shoot & too not p*** OFF the main togs I'd stay with your 70-200mm & stay out of the way. Remember you are a guest too..
You will soon realise that there is no magic right lens & the good togs use experience to ensure they have the correct lens on at the right time or have a plan 2 to deal with it.. Use the lens you have - it will teach you how to work around the limitations of each & will cost nothing.

Don't get me wrong I love lenses & also am after a 85mm for my studio - but then I'm greedy...lol
 
I have the Sigma 30mm 1.4, Canon 50mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8. It's rare i reach for the 50mm mainly due to the AF which at times isn't the best especially in low light. The 85 is streets ahead and while its tight indoors the quality and intimacy of it is superb. The 30mm Sigma while soft at 1.4 is fantastic a capturing a scene (indoors or out) and the bokeh is just sublime. Stopped down to 2.2 - 2.8 it sharpens up but then you lose a little subject isolation.
 
I love my 85mm 1.8 on my 60d. It's a fantastic quality lens for the price. You really can't go wrong

What I did was get the 85 and then later on I added the 50 1.8 just to cover the two off. I rarely use the 50
 
Super late reply, and I hope I don't fall into 'bumping dead threads' due to the time lapse. A massive thank you, I've not yet purchased anything as life became eventful so photography took a beat seat, but as the near year approaches it's time to re-light an old fire.

I've done quiet a bit of reading into the 50mm F1.4 and have ruled that out.

So now I'm in search for a 30mm/85mm, just my luck, a 85mm was sold on here earlier today :shifty:
 
Decided on a 35mm F1.4L for now, will add a 85mm F1.8 soon and then will be looking for a zoom in the lower ranges, possibly a 24-70mm F2.8L and replace my 70-200 F4L for a 2.8. A full frame body will be added some time soon. I think that'll have me covered nicely.

The 35mm is bit of an impulse purchase, but not one that I'll regret :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top