Portrait lens help

Messages
165
Name
Jessica
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a cannon 100D looking at getting a lens with a wider appature as f4 is my current widest. My question is do I go for a 50mm 1.4 , 50mm 1.8 or 40mm 2.8? My main aim is to get the soft background in portrait shoots more often than I am doing. My nude is only a few hundred dollars as I'm currently travelling and trying to build on photography at the same time so looking into a second hand lens is the something you would recommend or better to buy new?

Also confused with all the EF, RF-S ect, will an EF lens fit my EOS 100D (also known as Rebel SL1)
 
Last edited:
Your camera can accept both EF and EF-S Lenses...

Purchasing a used lens (No 'e' on the end btw) is not a problem as long as you buy from a reputable source.

Getting an OOF background involves more than just the maximum aperture of your lens, distances (both from you to your subject and from your subject to the background) play a big part too. You also need to consider the sharpness of the lens whilst shooting wide open, a slightly 'soft' result in the centre can be desirable, but not too much.

Of the lenses you have listed my choice would be the low cost 50mm f1.8, preferably the STM version and then treat it as an f2.8 max aperture (you may be lucky and get a copy that is sharp wide open).

Bare in mind too that with shallow depth of field you need to be focused accurately...
 
I'd go with the advice above, the 50mm 1.8 STM is great value, and I much prefer mine to the 1.4 I had before, I'd also say that I get more consistent results with it than my 1.2L.
 
The 50mm is too wide to be used as a portrait lens even on an APC sensor camera like your 100D. If your budget can stretch to £200 you should be able to get a used 85mm f1.8.
 
The 50mm is too wide to be used as a portrait lens even on an APC sensor camera like your 100D. If your budget can stretch to £200 you should be able to get a used 85mm f1.8.

Really? I'm not so sure about that. I guess it's subjective, but I'd say a 50mm on a crop has been used with great success by many people. Yes an 85mm is also great, but I don't think it is necessary.
 
@rick448 you are correct It Is subjective. Personally I don't like the 'big nose effect' that the perspective of a 50mm lens gives when shooting head and shoulders and closer portraits. Maybe it's just me but I think portraits should flatter the subject.
 
It is indeed subjective, perhaps a bit more information from Jessica as to what style of portraiture she has an interest in would help....
 
Thank you for all your advice, I am drawn to the 50mm 1.8 lens mostly.

It is indeed subjective, perhaps a bit more information from Jessica as to what style of portraiture she has an interest in would help....

Phil I'm generally looking at traditional and family/children portraits at the moment and then advancing on to newborn photography in the future (maby a year or too after training/courses ect.
 
To keep within budget the 50mm 1.8 II, can be had for about £60 used in the UK, cheap as.

You could probably add an 85mm 1.8 for a further £200 then you have the best of both.

Not sure what prices are like in Aus though, things are more expensive there I’m told.
 
To keep within budget the 50mm 1.8 II, can be had for about £60 used in the UK, cheap as.

You could probably add an 85mm 1.8 for a further £200 then you have the best of both.

Not sure what prices are like in Aus though, things are more expensive there I’m told.

Yes a lot more expensive over here, looking at $200 for a new 50mm 1.8 Hence looking at getting a pre loved one which will be between $80-$130.

Not looked at 85mm prices over here but I'll be having a look
 
I wonder if setting your current lens to 50mm (or 55mm) and seeing if the focal length produces images you like. I realise you will not get the swallow depth of field you are after but you will see if the 50mm lens gives the "big nose" pictures that Redsnappa suggested.
 
Both would be nice if you can... otherwise get the 50mm and save for the 85mm, neither is fantastic wide open but for portraits that isn't a great problem, nailing the focus on the eye could be ;)
 
The 100D is a 1.6 crop is it not, in which case it is the equivalent to 80mm on a FF. The 85mm 1.2L is generally classed as a superb portrait lens is it not, hence I'd say the 50mm on a crop is a fine start.
 
Sure, classic, or old school is 85 to 135 but there is no rule.

I think 200 is way long, you end up shouting at the model and loses that connection and intimacy. I even like 35mm too, but use your imagination and shoot to context, don't get box in with focal lengths.
 
Yep, no rules, and a 50mm on an APS-C body is fine and makes for a very good starting point.
 
I do wonder if people get a bit too hung up on primes?

Yes if you want razor thin dof you're maybe going to struggle at f5.6 with a variable aperture zoom but as has been said dof is also affected by the special relationships in the composition and camera to subject etc and sometimes f5.6 can be too wide an aperture...

I think one way forward would be to decide on the composition and focal length and then decide what aperture gives the desired effect. It may be that the op needs a 50mm f1.4 or it may be that the desired effect could be achieved with a perhaps more versatile zoom at f2.8 to 5.6.

Just sayin' :D
 
With those 16mm portraits the model on the left looks like she is wearing clown shoes and the model in the red top, her right hand looks so huge. Personally it's not how I would like my subjects portrayed.

The 100D is a 1.6 crop is it not, in which case it is the equivalent to 80mm on a FF
You are right the equivalent focal length is 80mm. The lenses angle of view and therefore the perspective remains the same no matter what camera you attach the lens.
 
Yep, no rules, and a 50mm on an APS-C body is fine and makes for a very good starting point.

Agree, and Canon 50/1.8 STM is also a very good lens at a bargain price.

Just for the record, perspective (ie big nose, clown feet look etc) is a function of (too close) distance, not focal length. The advantage of a longer lens for portraits is it allows you to shoot from a little further away but still get a nice frame-filler. I like 5-6ft for head and shoulders, which avoids unflattering perspective, is not too close and intimidating, and allows good rapport.
 
Thank you for all your help... I'm going to try out the 50mm 1.8... I mean I can always sell it if it's not for me. :)
 
Back
Top