Portrait lens

P

Pads

Messages
379
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Im thinking of upgrading my 350D to a 40D or 500D, but either way im going to need a new lens as currently i have the 18-55 kit lens from the 350D, and a tamron 70-200 lens.

I will mainly be shooting portraits of small groups, Couples, and Babies/Toddlers and mostly on location (i.e peoples houses/gardens)

Given a budget of approx £200-£300 what lens would you go for ??

Thanks.
 
First of all, given the choice between the 40D and the 500D, I'd go for the 40D... It's probably the best of the xxD series Canons and certainly very robust and reliable.

For a lens, I suggest you have a look for a Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC (not the bigger DG Macro one). It's slightly over your budget in places but I'm sure you could find it cheaper if you shop around. I have one of the older versions (with the 67mm front end as opposed to the newer one with a 72mm objective). Most of my portrait shots (and weddings) are taken with that lens. It's pin sharp with great contrast.

Hope that helps,
Si
 
I'd go for a 50 1.4 or 1.8. On a crop camera it will give you close to 85 which is a great portrait length.
 
In this situation, I think a prime would be too restrictive... Small groups, individuals, varied locations... Some of which are likely to cause problems for a prime. All three lenses mentioned are excellent choices in their own rights but unless the OP can afford at least two of 'em, the flexibility will be severely restricted.
 
sorry to be boring, but why do you think you need new glass?

It might not be the best glass in the world, but unless you know what it stops you from doing I'd say save your money and get to know your new camera
 
keirik said:
sorry to be boring, but why do you think you need new glass?

It might not be the best glass in the world, but unless you know what it stops you from doing I'd say save your money and get to know your new camera
Click to expand...

Mainly because all shots with the kit lens appear to be allot softer than anything taken with my Tamron lens.

Thanks for all your comments and Spiritflier has answered another question of whether a prime lens would be too restrictive.
 
it seems like the work will vary especially as its on location so i would opt for a tamron 28-75mm that way you have a nice 28-200mm f2.8 focal range and your ready for any situation. i would only ever get prime lenses if you know your going to have enough room to move around in.
 
For portraiture the sweet points in terms of focal length are between 35mm and 85mm, so you ideally with the camera you are looking to buy you need to get a 50mm. Don't get the 85mm as you're not going to be working with a full frame sensor so in reality the 85 becomes (guessing here!!!) about a 100 or 105, which is not a good focal length for portraits.

So I guess you need to search out a 50mm at your budget!
 
Did you mean you have Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8? Well that is as good as it gets for portraits, use it as much as you can.
18-55 has to go, you could get tamron 17-50.

For portraits I quite like primes, and 100mm macro is my favourite when it comes to headshots.
 
My 70-200mm f/4L lens at 135mm is my go to lens for portraits.

It takes stunning shots :love:
 
ZoZo said:
For portraiture the sweet points in terms of focal length are between 35mm and 85mm, so you ideally with the camera you are looking to buy you need to get a 50mm. Don't get the 85mm as you're not going to be working with a full frame sensor so in reality the 85 becomes (guessing here!!!) about a 100 or 105, which is not a good focal length for portraits.

So I guess you need to search out a 50mm at your budget!
Click to expand...

since when did this become true? the longer the better, just depends what your trying to do and how much space is available.
 
If 100/105 is such a poor focallength for portraits how come Nikon produced the dedicated portrait lens in the 105 f2 DC then? It was designed SPECIFICALLY for portraits and has the special defocus control to render the background (or foreground) even further out of focus than normal and make the subject stand out using focus contrast to so so - they also did a 135 version, also f2 also DC.

No, you are right, 105 is totally the wrong focal length for portraiture. :cuckoo:

I am not sorry if you are offended by my sarcasm - it serves you jolly well right.
 
I have to agree with Lensflare on this one, what is a portrait lens? I have shot portraits from 24mm to 300mm, it all depends on what you want, what the background is, how much you want to show (compress) each has its own peculiarities but if we all shot portraits at 50mm the world would be a boring place photographicly.

Mart
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top