Advice needed on a good portrait lens.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 40499
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 40499

Guest
I'm currently using the canon 'nifty fifty' on my Eos 400d for studio portrait work and am looking to upgrade, as I have some (low) paid headshot shoots, for actor friends, comming my way. Hopefully these will really kickstart my portfolio and lead on to some more work.

I have access to a large portrait studio that is kitted out with Bowen Gemini 500/500R kit, backdrops and all the accessories, so good quality lighting is available.

I'm looking to spend around £400, and am considering:

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Lens.
Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Telephoto AF Lens.
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens.

I'd like to hear recommendations from the Canon fraternity about these lenses. I would consider other makes, though I do love the Canon brand.

Hope you can help.

P.s. Sorry, but I can't afford a luxury lens, so recommending one won't help.
P.p.s.don't forget, I'm only using an Eos 400d. I'm looking to upgrade from my xxxd to a xxd next year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Any of the three will happily do it, with macro being more versatile, and the other two slightly sharper wide open and faster. For £400 you could easily get 70-200mm f/4L which probably would be my first choice for most shoots (I've got all of these except 100/2).
 
On a cropper, Canon 85 1.8. Or perhaps the pick of the whole bunch, Sigma 85 1.4. If you're going for a custom portrait lens, you need the lowest f/number you can reasonably get.
 
Last edited:
Just checked out the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens at around £500. I didn't know there was a luxury lens that cheap. It certainly adds new options, but may be a little over my budget.

As for the Sigma 85 1.4. If your talking about the Sigma 85mm f1.4 EX DG HSM Lens, then at £800, it's way out of my budget. Thanks for the advice though.
 
The f stop, focal length and focus distance will all define what happens to your background (and how far away it is), think dof. If your backdrop is quite close and you want it oof then you'll need a fast lens e.g. f1.8 to blow the background away.
In the old film days an 85/135 length was regarded as ideal, mainly to get distance from the model so they dont feel intimidated. Although a 50mm will give the same apparent angle of view on a cropped body as an 85 (on Full Frame) you may find it distorts the face slightly and a better perspective can be had with something approaching 85mm.
I have an 85 and a 100 macro, both are excellent portrait lens (particularly the 85 on FF, in case you are thinking along those lines at somepoint) the 85 has of course a faster apperture (1.8 as opposed to 2.8) so taking the dof into consideration will drive which way you go.
The 70/200 is a great lens and very versatile, I have an f4 IS but the dof at f4 (its sharp even wide open) may prevent you from wanting to use that lens.

2nd hand lenses are really good value, especially an L lens that has had light amateur use.
I would also seriously consider a second body, even an old 10D will be of use in case your main body fails, especially if this is paid work.
No doubt the pros will come along shortly and start to advise about insurance (and here we are talking public liability not equipment insurance, in case you hurt someone etc)

Matt
 
Last edited:
It's a shame about the price of the Sigma because the reviews are excellent.

Andy

Sigma 85 1.4 is £700 from most places, but still way higher than the Canon 85 1.8 which looks like a no-brainer at £300. For serious portraits, you at least need the option of very shallow DoF effects.

Canon is £229 here, but that looks like a typo and is out of stock anyway :lol: http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod85.html
 
On a crop body, the Sigma 50mm f1.4 is a wonderful lens for portraits. Within budget new and can be found for less than £300 used.

If you think you really need longer, the Canon 85mm f1.8 is good option.

If you can handle manual focus:
1. The Samyang 85mm f1.4 is cheap and very highly regarded.
2. Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm F1.4 T* Contax/Yashica mount with a £20 adaptor is a truly superb lens for under £250. Lovely portrait lens on a cropper.
 
Ok dumb question, why would you NEED a 1.8 lens for headshots (asking peole who replied) as surely you want to be using 5.6--8.0 to ensure the entire head is in focus and not just the nose? I'd use 2.8 etc further out (i.e distance shot, full body) but close up surely this would put too much out of focus?

Also I'd go with used as suggested. A prime would also be my choice.

Sorry if my question was dumb.......happy to be 'told'.

Thanks
 
Ok dumb question, why would you NEED a 1.8 lens for headshots (asking peole who replied) as surely you want to be using 5.6--8.0 to ensure the entire head is in focus and not just the nose? I'd use 2.8 etc further out (i.e distance shot, full body) but close up surely this would put too much out of focus?

Also I'd go with used as suggested. A prime would also be my choice.

Sorry if my question was dumb.......happy to be 'told'.

Thanks

Because very shallow depth of field, with only the eyes in focus, is rather a good creative portraits technique.

TBH it's the only reason you would buy a prime, when otherwise any old mid-range zoom will do the job just as well.

Having said that, 70-200 f/2.8 zooms are very popular for this because they deliver pretty shallow DoF and nice bokeh at 2.8, plus they're so versatile of course. But a good one of those costs many times more than the 85 1.8 three hundred quid bargain.
 
Oh oh, appreciate the answer. I always write off pics where the whole face is not in focus, maybe I need to try some sub 2.8 pics and see how they turn out, as you say going for the eyes as a focus point.

For me primes are good becuase of the quality for the money and also for their low light abilities, great lenses :)
 
I've got to say I'm leaning towards the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens.
 
Back
Top