Considering swapping to Canon for portraiture

[Ksanti]

At the moment my kit (minus tripods etc.) is:
D5000
18-55 VR AF-S kit
Tamron 70-300 Macro (the cheaper one)
35mm f/1.8G AF-S

Only the 35mm is mine, the rest is my dad's, so I couldn't sell the kit except that.

What I've considered doing is buying a 500D/40D to start building up a Canon lens collection, as my primary interest lies in fashion/portraiture, so the 85mm range is pretty important (With Nikon there is no real 85L equivalent, and there's no Nikon 85mm until £600 that will AF on my dad's D5000). After a while I'd probably want to sell the crop body for a Mk1 5D Classic.

I don't know tbh... I have about £700 saved up at the moment, which is about enough for the crop body + 85mm, though what I'm also considering is saving up longer then just getting the 5D and the 85 together. Obviously on it's own, a crop body and an 85mm is hardly versatile, but I'd still have access to the d5000 + 35mm f/1.8 as a walkabout so (though I accept that swapping between systems is less than ideal) I think I could manage.

I don't see myself being able to afford a D700 any time soon, and even then I get the feeling I'll always be lusting after the 85L

As expensive as it would be to swap without selling, I'd need to buy my own camera at some point, and given the lack of cheap-ish Nikon full-frames (bar the monstrous Kodaks), and 85mm prices, I don't want to invest in the system properly then always be wanting of the f/1.2 full frame bokehliciousness...

Someone talk some sense into me?

 

[woof woof]

I'm a bit confused that you're looking at both full frame and crop bodies and 85mm as the lens will give different fields of view on each.

If you like the 85mm field of view on FF then on crop it's about 50mm, but if you like the 85mm view on crop then it's 135mm on FF.

Would you be happy with 50mm on APS-C and 85mm on full frame? If you would then you could get either the Siggy 50 or 85mm f1.4 which are considered by some to be amongst the best in their respective ranges with some saying that the 85mm is better than the Canon L that you're lusting after.

Either way, I don't see any point in swapping from Nikon to Canon.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

You would love canon 85 f/1.8 usm. I hardly see the point of 1.2 unless shooting wide open all the time - since 1.8 is sharper in the corners, and just as good in the centre. Just be aware due to calibration issues, some cameras / lenses may need AF-microadjustment to set it right - particularly obvious at f/1.2-1.8. When it comes to bodies I actually feel 1D3-4 is the best for such lenses.

 

[SimonUK]

Look second hand and get a cheap older body- 20D/350D somthing like that, which is easily do-able for under 200. That leaves 500 to get len's and mem cards and stuff. Again if you look second hadn and your smart you could get a 50 1.8 plus the 85 1.8, maybe even a 50 1.4 instead. Plus you can pick up older 1gb/2gb cards cheap here aswell

Second Hand FTW

 

[akr]

You would love canon 85 f/1.8 usm. I hardly see the point of 1.2 unless shooting wide open all the time - since 1.8 is sharper in the corners, and just as good in the centre. Just be aware due to calibration issues, some cameras / lenses may need AF-microadjustment to set it right - particularly obvious at f/1.2-1.8. When it comes to bodies I actually feel 1D3-4 is the best for such lenses.

Also keep in mind the cameras you are thinking about, do not have micro adjust i.e 40D and below or 5d Classic. I believe the 50D does though.

I think a 1Dmk3 is a little over the £700 budget....

 

[Ksanti]

Hmm yes, the crop + 85 combo is a bit null... The 135 equiv. length is different, but if I'm going to be aiming towards full frame, I don't want to put my money into 50mm glass which will end up being too short.

 

[Jelster]

Before jumping ship, have a good hard think about what you're doing. If you have access to other people equipment (i.e. your Dad) then why change systems ?

When I started with my 350D I already had a couple of lenses as I had an old EOS 620 as a film camera and it seemed pointless to look at Nikon as I had lenses at home. My Brother-in-Law also shoots Canon and we often borrow each others kit.

So, is there not a suitable Nikon body that you could look at ? I don't know that much about Nikon, but a used D90 perhaps :shrug: Surely sticking with the system you have makes more sense than starting afresh.

If I started from scratch again, even though I believe Nikon has a lot to offer, I'd still run with Canon as I know the system. To me it doesn't make sense when you have the opportunity to pool resources with somebody else.

Steve

 

[Ksanti]

Before jumping ship, have a good hard think about what you're doing. If you have access to other people equipment (i.e. your Dad) then why change systems ?

When I started with my 350D I already had a couple of lenses as I had an old EOS 620 as a film camera and it seemed pointless to look at Nikon as I had lenses at home. My Brother-in-Law also shoots Canon and we often borrow each others kit.

So, is there not a suitable Nikon body that you could look at ? I don't know that much about Nikon, but a used D90 perhaps :shrug: Surely sticking with the system you have makes more sense than starting afresh.

If I started from scratch again, even though I believe Nikon has a lot to offer, I'd still run with Canon as I know the system. To me it doesn't make sense when you have the opportunity to pool resources with somebody else.

Steve

Well for one, the 18-55 and 70-300 are hardly lenses I'm glad to use. And then on Nikon I don't have any way to get a full frame body I can afford other than the 2005 Kodak pro cameras which are horrible. I could get a D90, but if I'm spending that much on another crop body, I'd want to move over to a system where I could go full frame reasonably cheaply

 

[woof woof]

Hmm yes, the crop + 85 combo is a bit null... The 135 equiv. length is different, but if I'm going to be aiming towards full frame, I don't want to put my money into 50mm glass which will end up being too short.

I still don't think that you've thought this through enough.

From what you've said so far the motivation seems to be so that you can use the Canon 85mm f1.2L. Forgive me if I'm wrong but if I'm right that doesn't make sense to me personally are there must be a Nikon lens that's about the same and if there isn't there's the Sigma 85mm f1.4 which some think is better, but not f1.2, obviously, but I wonder if you'd really miss the extra little bit of wideness? I could understand changing systems to get acess to a more specialist lens like the 65mm MPE but is the 85L really that tempting?

If you stick with crop, at least for now, to take a full length shot at 50mm you're going to have to be what? 30 to 40 feet away? Too short? Plus if you buy a popular lens you'll be able to resell it if you go full frame and want an 85mm at some point in the future.

 

[HoppyUK]

I'm not sure you've thought it through either, but if you are going to change systems then specific lens choice is probably the best reason. Either because of spec, or price or used options or whatever.

Big bokehlicious portraits are not just about f/number. If you move the subject away from the background as best you can (throws it more out of focus) then move back and shoot with a longer lens (to narrow the field of view, which enlarges the background) then you can get pretty good bokeh effects event at quite modest apertures.

Low f/numbers help of course, but then there's the Sigma 85 1.4 mentioned above, which is arguably a better choice than the Canon 1.2, regardless of price. On a Nikon cropper, that would deliver a field of view and DoF equivalent to 128mm f/2.1 on full frame. That is damn close to something like the Canon 135L 2 on say a 5D which has got to be the ideal portrait bokeh machine.

Alan, where do you get you distance estimates from? More like divide by 2!

 

[Ksanti]

Sorry, I made a bit too much of a deal out of the 85L.

The focus is getting into full-frame sooner, a D700 is a long way off for me, and building a lens collection with a view to going full frame for me would mean a fair few AF-D lenses, which wouldn't AF on my d5000

 

[woof woof]

Alan, where do you get you distance estimates from? More like divide by 2!

I said "full length." If you try and take a "full length" portrait on APS-C at 50mm you have to back off.

If you can take a full length shot at 15 feet... as I said in another thread... they must be very small people

 

[freecom2]

Although you've said you made too much of a deal out of the 85L, I would like to point out there is the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 AF-S G which will autofocus on the D5000. Sure, it's f/1.4 rather than 1.2, but it is several £100s cheaper, and it satisfies that urge.

Surely if you care for the focal length between 70-90mm the most, any of the 50mm AF-S lenses (the new f/1.8, the 1.4 G) on a crop body will fulfil that criteria?

 

[Ksanti]

Although you've said you made too much of a deal out of the 85L, I would like to point out there is the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 AF-S G which will autofocus on the D5000. Sure, it's f/1.4 rather than 1.2, but it is several £100s cheaper, and it satisfies that urge.

Surely if you care for the focal length between 70-90mm the most, any of the 50mm AF-S lenses (the new f/1.8, the 1.4 G) on a crop body will fulfil that criteria?

It's a £1300 lens; I don't intend to be on a d5000 when I'm spending £1300 on lens. The 85mm f/1.4/2 discussion is one for a very long way down the line.

The length works, but you still get slightly more unflattering perspective distortion, and the crop sensor leaves the bokeh always wanting, as far as I've seen

 

[HoppyUK]

It's a £1300 lens; I don't intend to be on a d5000 when I'm spending £1300 on lens. The 85mm f/1.4/2 discussion is one for a very long way down the line.

The length works, but you still get slightly more unflattering perspective distortion, and the crop sensor leaves the bokeh always wanting, as far as I've seen

See post #10. In terms of bokeh, DoF, field of view, perspective and shooting distance, 85 1.4 on Nikon crop is exactly the same as 128mm f/2.1 on full frame - both figures x by crop factor for equivalence.

Sigma 85 1.4 is £700. Bang on your budget. My guess is that lens would also hold its value well. It's a really classy lens and I would honestly take it over the Canon 1.2 which is, shall we say, quirky.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

See post #10. In terms of bokeh, DoF, field of view, perspective and shooting distance, 85 1.4 on Nikon crop is exactly the same as 128mm f/2.1 on full frame - both figures x by crop factor for equivalence.

Sigma 85 1.4 is £700. Bang on your budget. My guess is that lens would also hold its value well. It's a really classy lens and I would honestly take it over the Canon 1.2 which is, shall we say, quirky.

But on crop there are no more mushy soft corners, and no bad vignette! That probably has a strong perceived effect, and this is why I personally favour 1.3x 1D for such lenses.

To be honest, I would much rather keep my 85 f/1.8 rather than get Sigma or Canon 1.2 helL. It is much more consistent across the frame, fast to focus and sharp as hell. Nikon one is an old AFD design, but hopefully will get an update just like the 50.

 

[Ksanti]

Sigma 85 1.4 is £700. Bang on your budget. My guess is that lens would also hold its value well. It's a really classy lens and I would honestly take it over the Canon 1.2 which is, shall we say, quirky.

Perhaps, but my ultimate target is full-frame 85mm, not crop 85mm. If I spent £700 on the Sigma I'd have to save another £1300 or so for a D700, whereas swapping to Canon I could have a 5D Mki, nifty fifty and 85mm f/1.8 for about a grand, then move up to a f/1.4 or f/1.2 if/when funds allow.

 

[Ksanti]

Oh and before someone calls me out on it: I do realise that the same lens on a FF and Crop will give exactly the same DOF, but to get comparable images on a crop you have to move out with the lens, which in turns increases DOF so in all real situations, full frame gives less DOF for the same image FOV (or at least as comparable as you can get).

 

[HoppyUK]

But on crop there are no more mushy soft corners, and no bad vignette! That probably has a strong perceived effect, and this is why I personally favour 1.3x 1D for such lenses.

To be honest, I would much rather keep my 85 f/1.8 rather than get Sigma or Canon 1.2 helL. It is much more consistent across the frame, fast to focus and sharp as hell. Nikon one is an old AFD design, but hopefully will get an update just like the 50.

When was the last time you actually had anything that was even in focus in the corners at f/1.8? Vignetting - if it's not fixed automatically in camera, then it's a mouse-click in post procesing.

Perhaps, but my ultimate target is full-frame 85mm, not crop 85mm. If I spent £700 on the Sigma I'd have to save another £1300 or so for a D700, whereas swapping to Canon I could have a 5D Mki, nifty fifty and 85mm f/1.8 for about a grand, then move up to a f/1.4 or f/1.2 if/when funds allow.

In which case, a 50 1.4 on a cropper will give you equivalence of 75mm f/2.1 on full frame. The two will be identical, as described above. The only thing that doesn't change is f/1.4 stays the same for exposure.

Oh and before someone calls me out on it: I do realise that the same lens on a FF and Crop will give exactly the same DOF, but to get comparable images on a crop you have to move out with the lens, which in turns increases DOF so in all real situations, full frame gives less DOF for the same image FOV (or at least as comparable as you can get).

Well no. In terms of DoF, you get more of it on crop cameras, when the image is framed the same, from the same position, at the same f/number. Because you will have changed the lens to achieve that. To repeat, the conversion to equivalence is f/number x crop factor.

 

[Ksanti]

Well no. In terms of DoF, you get more of it on crop cameras. To repeat, the conversion is f/number x crop factor.

No it's not. Real DoF is exactly the same.

DoF is a function of focus distance, focal length, and aperture. Changing the imaging plane/sensor does not change any of that.

In practicality, crop has more DoF for the same (or as close as possible) field of view due to either

• Stepping back to get the same image framing
• Using a shorter focal length lens

Stepping back means that the focus point moves further away from the lens and sensor, thus increasing DoF, and using a shorter lens has a similar effect.

 

[HoppyUK]

No it's not. Real DoF is exactly the same.

DoF is a function of focus distance, focal length, and aperture. Changing the imaging plane/sensor does not change any of that.

In practicality, crop has more DoF for the same (or as close as possible) field of view due to either

• Stepping back to get the same image framing
• Using a shorter focal length lens

Stepping back means that the focus point moves further away from the lens and sensor, thus increasing DoF, and using a shorter lens has a similar effect.

Matt, your post crossed with my edit to explain further. But to be strictly accurate, changing the format, even if you change nothing else, does change the DoF because the magnification required for final output is altered.

Have a look at www.dofmaster.co and input some figures. When you switch format (which changes the circle of confusion) the DoF changes in one direction, and then when you adjust focal length to regain the same framing, it goes back the other way, and then a bit more.

These comparisons are identical in terms of DoF, framing, shooting distance and perspective.

50mm f/1.4 on 1.5x crop, same as 75mm f/2.1 on full frame.

85mm f/1.4 on 1.5x crop, same as 128mm f/2.1 on full frame

 

[Ksanti]

Matt, your post crossed with my edit to explain further. But to be strictly accurate, changing the format, even if you change nothing else, does change the DoF because the magnification required for final output is altered.

Have a look at www.dofmaster.co and input some figures. When you switch format (which changes the circle of confusion) the DoF changes in one direction, and then when you adjust focal length to regain the same framing, it goes back the other way, and then a bit more.

These comparisons are identical in terms of DoF, framing, shooting distance and perspective.

50mm f/1.4 on 1.5x crop, same as 75mm f/2.1 on full frame.

85mm f/1.4 on 1.5x crop, same as 128mm f/2.1 on full frame

i'm not talking about fov here, just bokeh/dof blur, and in terms of bokeh/dof blur, exactly the same lens, focal distance and aperture will give exactly the same amount of blur/bokeh on a 5D as a 50D

 

[woof woof]

With DoF v focal length, framing and distance etc the numbers are one thing but it's just as important to consider how you perceive what you're looking at and what you prefer. For example, we may accept that 20mm and 200mm give the same DoF but they're different pictures and we may prefer the look of one shot over the other and in photography perhaps what we perceive and prefer is the important thing and much more important than what the numbers tell us.

 

[Ksanti]

With DoF v focal length, framing and distance etc the numbers are one thing but it's just as important to consider how you perceive what you're looking at and what you prefer. For example, we may accept that 20mm and 200mm give the same DoF but they're different pictures and we may prefer the look of one shot over the other and in photography perhaps what we perceive and prefer is the important thing and much more important than what the numbers tell us.

Yep, and I'm saying that I prefer the flattering look of 85mm lenses as well as the DOF, but on a crop sensor, that's just too long for me

 

[HoppyUK]

Yep, and I'm saying that I prefer the flattering look of 85mm lenses as well as the DOF, but on a crop sensor, that's just too long for me

Then get a 50 1.4 then - that's the point I've been trying to make. Put that on a cropper and you've got an identical image to 75mm f/2.1 on full frame. Which is as close to 85 1.8 on full frame as makes no difference.

 

[paulcamcas]

What he said! Crop body + 50mm f.14 is a great portrait combo.

 

[lensflair]

I'm not sure you've thought it through either, but if you are going to change systems then specific lens choice is probably the best reason. Either because of spec, or price or used options or whatever.

Big bokehlicious portraits are not just about f/number. If you move the subject away from the background as best you can (throws it more out of focus) then move back and shoot with a longer lens (to narrow the field of view, which enlarges the background) then you can get pretty good bokeh effects event at quite modest apertures.

Low f/numbers help of course, but then there's the Sigma 85 1.4 mentioned above, which is arguably a better choice than the Canon 1.2, regardless of price. On a Nikon cropper, that would deliver a field of view and DoF equivalent to 128mm f/2.1 on full frame. That is damn close to something like the Canon 135L 2 on say a 5D which has got to be the ideal portrait bokeh machine.

Alan, where do you get you distance estimates from? More like divide by 2!

+1
I often shoot portraits with a 70-200 on a full frame at f4 and the background is beautiful. I also like the nikon 85 1.8 not a huge difference to the Canon 1.2 to be honest, sure its there but not enough to change systems and the 1.4 will get you so close its just a non issue.

BTW I also use these lenses on a crop body as well as a 50 1.8 and the 50 is like using the 85 on a full frame.

Vignetting can be fixed in camera depending on model or done in post as hoppy mentioned, but I never understand why people care for portraits as its a good thing IMO, I'm usually adding a slight vignette rather than removing one

 

[petersmart]

I recently bought a Canon 1Ds II which is FF.

I use my 28-135mm IS USM lens and the 50mm f1.8 and vignetting is much less than you'd think even at 28mm.

And the 50mm f1.8 is an excellent lens for portraiture on that camera and is also incredibly sharp (when focussed properly).

Don't forget that in the days of film 50mm was the standard lens on most 35mm cameras (FF) and millions of pics were taken with that combo.

.

 

[Ksanti]

Then get a 50 1.4 then - that's the point I've been trying to make. Put that on a cropper and you've got an identical image to 75mm f/2.1 on full frame. Which is as close to 85 1.8 on full frame as makes no difference.

Note that I'd be using a 50mm for general use as well; a 35mm f/1.8 on a DX crop gives about an equivalent of a 52.5 f/2.9, which is hardly great. Both full frame lenses give more blur. And after the 50 1.4 on a crop, there's no upgrade path, whereas an 85mm f/1.8 can become an f/1.4 or 1.2, which simply isn't matched by any crop lens combo, unless I start shooting at really long lengths which I don't want to do.

 

[HoppyUK]

Note that I'd be using a 50mm for general use as well; a 35mm f/1.8 on a DX crop gives about an equivalent of a 52.5 f/2.9, which is hardly great. Both full frame lenses give more blur. And after the 50 1.4 on a crop, there's no upgrade path, whereas an 85mm f/1.8 can become an f/1.4 or 1.2, which simply isn't matched by any crop lens combo, unless I start shooting at really long lengths which I don't want to do.

LOL You do seem to have jumped about in this thread but you now have all the options, maybe none of them perfect without spending a lot, so I'll just say this.

When making tricky decisions about which way to jump, always get the format right first. It dictates everything and will be cheapest in the long run, so save for a nice used 5D classic and 85 1.8.

I which case, this will sound like a bit of a contradiction but meanwhile, you could pick up a used Nikon 50 1.8 for very little money which would get you close to the effect you want now, and you could sell it on for zero loss.

 

[freecom2]

You seem intent on going for it - then go for it. It's your money

 

[Ksanti]

The spanner in the works is summer: I hoped to be shooting a fair bit of portraiture in summer to build up a portfolio to send to modelling agencies, but I don't really have an appropriate lens at the moment. I could hire a lens for a couple of weeks, but that would be c. £80 (sigma 50 1.4), which is a pretty big amount for me to spend on a hired lens.

I'd ideally want to save up for a 5D + 85 1.8, but I won't have the money by summer unless I get a random donation.... I'd need about £1000 and at the moment I'm saving up about £100 a month... I might ask my dad if he'd be willing to chip in for me to pay him back later...

 

[HoppyUK]

The spanner in the works is summer: I hoped to be shooting a fair bit of portraiture in summer to build up a portfolio to send to modelling agencies, but I don't really have an appropriate lens at the moment. I could hire a lens for a couple of weeks, but that would be c. £80 (sigma 50 1.4), which is a pretty big amount for me to spend on a hired lens.

I'd ideally want to save up for a 5D + 85 1.8, but I won't have the money by summer unless I get a random donation.... I'd need about £1000 and at the moment I'm saving up about £100 a month... I might ask my dad if he'd be willing to chip in for me to pay him back later...

If a loan is an option, it gets you where you want to be now. Go for it

And speaking as a dad, if that got your nose out of my friggin camera bag, I'd jump at it

 

[Ksanti]

If a loan is an option, it gets you where you want to be now. Go for it

And speaking as a dad, if that got your nose out of my friggin camera bag, I'd jump at it

Haha he's not that into his photography, but he does seem a little peeved that I get so much more use out of his gear than he does

Okay conclusion then:

1. Hope I find a really really really rich desperate girl
2. Failing that, ask dad for money to buy s/h 5dc + 85mm 1.8 + 50mm 1.8
3. Failing that, loan a Siggy 50mm 1.4 for my two weeks abroad and a little longer in summer, and just keep saving for the 5d long term

Sound reasonable?