Lens for portraits

DrGed

DrGed

Messages
843
Name
Ged
Edit My Images
Yes
I feel I should start by saying I'm not a total beginner but I'm certainly no expert either.

Anyway, up to now, all my photography has been done on a Cannon 1000D and the kit lens that came with it. I like doing portrait photograhy and have enjojed a certain amount of success with that gear but I've thinking for a while about getting another lens. My first idea was to get a "nifty fifty" but I'm wondering now if there are any better alternatives.

What do people think?
 
Thanks, Phil. I did wonder about the 50mm being long enough. When using the 55mm kit lens I have to get quite close which often feels too close if you know what I mean.
 
My favourite focal length on a 35mm SLR for 'portraits' is 135mm. 85mm is about the closest equivalent on your crop camera. 85x 1.6 = 136

BTW if you've got the budget, the Sigma 85mm(s) are better lenses
 
For head and shoulders portraits, 85mm all day long on crop or full-frame.
 
Thanks for the replies. Sorry it's taken me a few days to get back on here. As we get near the end of term it gets more and more chaotic at work!
 
The 100mm macro is also a good "long" portrait lens, and not too expensive either.

It's a dual purpose lens really.
 
GreenNinja67 said:
The 100mm macro is also a good "long" portrait lens, and not too expensive either.

It's a dual purpose lens really.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've toyed with the idea of getting a macro lens because I also occassionally photograph, well, ...small things. However, with a crop sensor that would make 100mm 160mm. Would that be too long for portraits?
 
DrGed said:
Yes, I've toyed with the idea of getting a macro lens because I also occassionally photograph, well, ...small things. However, with a crop sensor that would make 100mm 160mm. Would that be too long for portraits?
Click to expand...
Not really, maybe a bit longer than I'd use as a 'go to' but certainly usable.
 
Phil V said:
85 1.8

The fifty isn't really long enough, and the 85mm is the best bang for buck lens on a crop Canon. Not perfect but lovely all the same.
Click to expand...
:agree: I got mine because when I used my Tamron 17-50 2.8 for taking some photos of my kids playing on the beach I found it wasn't long enough. I absolutely love my Canon 85mm 1.8. I use it on a 60D. :canon::snaphappy:
 
On a 5Diii I use 85mm 1.4 for portrait (occasionally for street photography)
The 50mm 1.4 is mainly for street photography.

I have heard several Pro using during wedding (outside) the 70 - 200mm 2.8 for portraits (again not on crop camera)

Let us know what you are buying.

Arno
 
I eventually bought a Sigma, 105mm, f2.8 DG Macro HSM lens. The thought was that I could kill two birds with one stone, i.e. portraits and macro stuff which I also enjoy.

I've done a little macro work with it and the results are encouraging but there is significant room for improvement on my part.

One thing I did wonder, however, was whether or not a new body would be advantageous. I currently use a Canon 1000D and I don't know whether an entry level body like this will get the best out of my new lens.
 
DrGed said:
I eventually bought a Sigma, 105mm, f2.8 DG Macro HSM lens. The thought was that I could kill two birds with one stone, i.e. portraits and macro stuff which I also enjoy.

I've done a little macro work with it and the results are encouraging but there is significant room for improvement on my part.

One thing I did wonder, however, was whether or not a new body would be advantageous. I currently use a Canon 1000D and I don't know whether an entry level body like this will get the best out of my new lens.
Click to expand...

A new camera body 'could' be advantageous, but only if you would make use of the different features the more modern body had. For example, say you don't need to do any big prints, you only really use single point/manual focus, and you either shoot in well lit conditions or use lighting - an upgrade may not be worth it. Usually when you go paying extra, its for better high ISO performance, bigger image sizes or better focusing systems. You maybe in a position where you could make use of one or all those things, but only you can make that decision :D There's also the full frame argument... but probably best not opening that can of worms right now!
 
The biggest advantage in terms of image quality from a new body would be a better sensor, with less noise & greater dynamic range. For macro & portrait work any reasonable AF system should cope, and you've no need for high-speed shooting.
 
The Voightlander 75mm/f1.8 VM Heliar Classic is a superb and razor sharp portrait lens for £500 plus an adapter to put it on a Sony (if you don't have Leica).

I also have the Leica 135 f/3.4 APO Telyt-M ASPH, it's a stunning lens but I prefer 75 or 90 for portrait.
 
Many thanks for the replies.

On the basis of what's been said, I think I'll stick with what I have for the time being at least. I think the thing for me to do now is to concentrate on learning how to get the best out of the equipment I have before "upgrading" in any way.
 
The longer the better for portraits. Just make sure you have room. If you're shooting outdoors you're fine. Indoors depends on the room/studio.
 
Thanks, Ryan.

Does there ever come a point when perspective becomes an issue when using a telephoto lens for portraits?
 
DrGed said:
Thanks, Ryan.

Does there ever come a point when perspective becomes an issue when using a telephoto lens for portraits?
Click to expand...
Not for me. Sometimes I have a 500mm lens on my crop sensor camera, photographing ships in the distance or whatever while friends chat nearby. Sometimes I'll get bored with the ships and turn the camera round and catch a few candid head and shoulder portraits. Some of them have been quite good, approved of with pleasure by the subjects. And I often shoot portraits of speakers at conferences etc.. with a 200mm f2.8.
 
DrGed said:
Thanks, Ryan.

Does there ever come a point when perspective becomes an issue when using a telephoto lens for portraits?
Click to expand...
Technically Yes.

In reality not so much.

Beyond 200mm and you're flattening to the point of unreality, but most people would never complain. However, at 200mm communication with a subject becomes an issue, and that ought to be a serious consideration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top