The ultimate bokeh monster portrait lens

cuthbert

cuthbert

Pugh Pugh Barney McGrew Me Dibble and Grubb
Messages
2,042
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
i've been looking through my own lightroom library, flickr, pixelpeeper and a few other places and whilst conventional wisdom pretty much dictates that the 85 1.4 or 85 1.2 lenses on a full frame body are the way to go for wonderful bokehness i'm wondering whether the bokeh from an 85mm lens is too 'busy'?

the more i look at the bokeh and background separation of the 200 f/2 lenses, the more i think this is perhaps the ultimate portrait lens. the way they render the background and out of focus areas is just gorgeous.

i'm just daydreaming of course, my wife would never let me splurge £4500 on a lens. mind you... she won't know if i don't tell her.

what are your thoughts? what's your ultimate portrait lens?
 
Last edited:
I haven't got a favourite portrait lens. I'm not a big portrait shooter. I do have 50 and 85mm f1.4's but I wouldn't classify those or any of my lenses as my favourite portrait lens or rather my favourite people lens. TBH I'd use any of my lenses to shoot a portrait so as I have lenses covering 12 to 300mm it could be at any setting but it just so happens that my favourite portraits at the moment were taken with a 5D+ Siggy 50mm f1.4 at f3.5 and f4 or a G1+25mm f0.95. I don't usually take tight head shots and usually I like to include some context.
 
Last edited:
Although never used one, would love the Nikon 105 or 135 f2 DC lenses, supposed to be the best for portraits. I think the 85 1,4 would be a good one, I know I like my 50mm 1.4!
 
I think you've called it right. The background separation you can get with a 200mm f/2 is awesome and beautiful.
 
The longer and faster the better. I wouldn't mind seeing a portrait done with the Nikon 300 f2...
 
manualfocus-g said:
Pentacon 135/2.8 preset is special.
Click to expand...
Is it really any better than the Canon 135mm f/2, though, or the Sony/Zeiss 135mm f/1.8? Sure, it's got a stupid number of aperture blades and a cult following, but I'd have thought the extra stop you get from the more modern lenses (plus the generally improved modern optics, plus the ability to AF) would tend to counter that.
glaw89 said:
can you use an adapter for this to fit a d90 or d3100?
Click to expand...
Yes, but it's not ideal. Either you have an adapter with a built-in corrective lens, in which case you can focus to infinity but the image quality may be compromised; or you have an adapter without a corrective lens, in which case your image quality is unaffected but you can't focus to infinity.
 
A couple of posters at Nikon Cafe have the 300mm f/2, it produces some very distinctive images, but it is enormous. The usual suspects have been named so far like the 200mm f/1.8 or the 85L which both render beautifully. I like the Leica 90mm f/2 Summicron APO ASPH (R or M) and the Leica 180mm f/2 APO Summicron R has something special about it. Some of the highly corrected modern glass really is unforgiving though in portraits, I quite like the dreamy look that older glass can give you.
 
postcardcv said:
For some time my fav option has been the 135 f2 it is a superb portrait lens. I recently tried using a 300 f2.8 for portraits and that is quite impressive too... Not tried a 200 f2 yet, might have to see if I can lay hands on one.
Click to expand...

I had the Nikon 135 F2 for a few days - it was nice but not the sharpest wide open. I might see if I can get another one sometime to see if it's any better. Although there's rumours of a new one in the pipeline
 
postcardcv said:
For some time my fav option has been the 135 f2 it is a superb portrait lens. I recently tried using a 300 f2.8 for portraits and that is quite impressive too... Not tried a 200 f2 yet, might have to see if I can lay hands on one.
Click to expand...

I've just bought a 135 f2 (Canon) from the classifieds, reading the reviews it is meant to be rather nice, looking forward to it arriving tomorrow.
 
Regularly give myself a mental kick for not buying the 200mm f/2 lens when I found it at sub £2k at the end of last year. ******!

Thinking of renting it for a week this summer just to scratch the itch...
 
I remember trying to take a full body shot with a 20D and a 150mm and going outside... and then reaching the end of the garden... :D

200mm is fine especially on full frame, if you have enough room :D
 
woof woof said:
I remember trying to take a full body shot with a 20D and a 150mm and going outside... and then reaching the end of the garden... :D

200mm is fine especially on full frame, if you have enough room :D
Click to expand...

You need a longer garden! :lol:
 
And a megaphone to talk to the subject.

I'm showing my age now, these days we have mobile telephones, I think :thinking:
 
no-one has mentioned the canon 200 f/2.8
Built very similarly to the 135 f/2 but the extra focal length should increase the amount (if not quality) of the blur.
 
woof woof said:
And a megaphone to talk to the subject.

I'm showing my age now, these days we have mobile telephones, I think :thinking:
Click to expand...

Yep, only politicians have megaphones these days. :D

aeronic said:
no-one has mentioned the canon 200 f/2.8
Built very similarly to the 135 f/2 but the extra focal length should increase the amount (if not quality) of the blur.
Click to expand...

According to Stewart at Lens For Hire, Canon's recent 200mm f/2 is Canon's best ever lens...
 
Not the best portraits, but does give reasonable examples of the Sony (or Minolta) STF with busy (small park) backgrounds.

Defocus is definitely smoother than the Sony (CZ) 85/1.4, especially if you have highlights on the defocus areas.

6236723305_22279e5846.jpg


6224106900_6f7df84041.jpg
 
Last edited:
=ReBeL= said:
Hmm is this thread really about £5,000 200 f2?
Click to expand...

Well, thread is about the ULTIMATE bokeh monster portrait lens. No mention of a budget there, not even a hint of one. And the Canon 200mm f/2 is the ultimate portrait lens. So what's your problem?
 
StewartR said:
Well, thread is about the ULTIMATE bokeh monster portrait lens. No mention of a budget there, not even a hint of one. And the Canon 200mm f/2 is the ultimate portrait lens. So what's your problem?
Click to expand...

Just re-read the thread, you're right. No budgets here. It was just strange to me that £5000 lens was compared to much much cheaper ones.

My only problem is that I cannot afford it :wave:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top