which of these for portraits

[Andy77]

Canon 17-55 2.8 is
canon 24-105 is
tamron 17-50 2.8

Or any others you can think of please add to list, will be using for home portraits in small space on a 40d

Andy

 

[LongLensPhotography]

24-105mm without much thinking from that list.

 

[chris321]

I'd say the Tamron 17-50, and with the few hundred that you save, buy a few primes for that shallow depth-of-field stuff!

For the secondhand price of a 24-105 you could get the 17-50, 50mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, and still have some cash left over

 

[phototuition]

40d and small space sounds like a nifty fifty (ef 50mm f1.8 = £80) job as a minimum.

 

[magicaxeman]

Chris knows and has the right idea, its exactly the set up I have, the Tamron 17-50 to cover the wide end of things, the 50mm & 85mm F1.8 for the rest.

 

[Houston1863]

Ditto Chris

I've not used a 24-105 before. In fact it's a lens that doesn't quite appeal to me because of the f4..... For portraits you'll be well served with a f2.8 or faster which will give you a shallower DOF. I can vouch for the 85/1.8, again as suggested earlier.


Good hunting

H

 

[BigJohn]

I also have to say the Tamron . I was in the very same position as you a short while back and deciced on the Tamron . A great lens for the price .

 

[woof woof]

I don't know about the other lenses but another good thing about the Tamron, besides it being fast, sharp, compact and cheap is that it'll focus quite close.