Would anyone use a canon 70-200 f4 IS for portraits?

scottduffy

scottduffy

Messages
3,348
Name
Scott
Edit My Images
Yes
I am seriously thinking about buying this lens as it gets brilliant reviews but i am not sure if it's exactly what i am looking for. I recently bought the Canon 85mm f1.8 lens as i was convinced i was wanting to get into portrait photography but found willing subjects hard to come by and ended up using this as an all round lens which it was great at too. I was thinking therefor to buy a good lens i could use in most everyday situations and thought about the two canon 70-200 f4 lenses. I really don't think i can stretch to f2.8 non is so my question is will the f4 IS satisfy my everyday needs even if i end up taking a few people pictures? Or should i just buy the f4 non IS and save a bloody fortune?
 
yes, definitely the shorter end particularly is great for portraits, and the f4 is tack sharp :)

maybe consider a f2.8 non is, second hand iirc they're about the same as a second hand f4 is? (pretty sure I've seen straight swops anyway...)
 
I personally use the 70-200 f2.8 IS for 90% of all my portrait work providing I have the space. I hear the 70-200 f4 has fantastic image quality and sharpness for the price, even better than the f2.8 versions which cost a boat load more... I would say unless you need the 2.8 for low light stuff, it would be a cracking choice. IS is always a bonus... but at extra cost. The f4 is also a lot smaller, and a LOT lighter for when you go walkabout :)

heres a shot with the 70-200 f2.8 so you can get a idea of sharpness (bare in mind the f4 is rumored to be better)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rob_ashton/3897081725/sizes/l/ (ignore the terrible lighting)
 
Two examples with a 70-200 f4L IS

IMG_3667.jpg

IMG_3620.jpg
 
Since I've just bought your 85mm this might seem a little odd, but I use my 70-200 F/4 IS for a lot of portrait work (obviously largely wedding based). It's excellent outdoors, and to be honest I probably wouldn't go wider than f/4 at 135 and longer.

(In case you're wondering, I bought your 85mm for the one thing the 70-200 f/4 is not so good for - low light)
 
Hi Mark,

Don't think it's odd at all. I am still swithering whether to save the money and buy the non IS. I think i could earn big brownie points from the wife for that but then i think what's the point in brownie points when i just gather them to allow me to buy something nice !!!!!
 
Talking Nikon, but it's relevant..... I use my 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S on my crop body generally between f/3.2 and f/4.5 for 99% of my portrait work, which is 99% of what I shoot. So wide open it should be a cracking choice. I don't have IS/VR and rarely wish I did for what I do.

It's a great range for indoors and out, although more head shots indoors at the long end unless you've got lots of room.
 
Absolutely!

I've been very fortunate to have had the Sigma, Canon f4 and Canon f2.8IS and for one week I had all three. :)

For shooting quite tight portraits it's absolutely brilliant and if you really need some inspiration, have a look at a chap called Doug Gordon. His bridal headshots are among the best I've ever seen and every one is shot on a 70-200 (albeit the 2.8IS)

The great thing about shooting portraits at the longer focal lengths is that the perspective is flatter than if you moved closer and shot on a shorter lens. Same frame but the perspective changes.
 
I use both the 7-200F4 and an 85mm F1.8 and find that both are useful.
The 70-200 is clearly more versatile, but I do find that being able to happily open to F2 (IMO the 85mm is slightly soft at F1.8) does result in some shots that simply jump out at your more.
So I take fewer shots with the 85mm, but am happier the outright results.
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
I use both the 7-200F4 and an 85mm F1.8 and find that both are useful.
The 70-200 is clearly more versatile, but I do find that being able to happily open to F2 (IMO the 85mm is slightly soft at F1.8) does result in some shots that simply jump out at your more.
So I take fewer shots with the 85mm, but am happier the outright results.
Click to expand...

That makes good reading for me...just hope Scott doesn't change his mind about the sale!
 
IMG_3355.jpg


I find it very useful for getting in close when it might not be appropriate to dive in with a smaller lens.
 
F2.8 non-IS is only about £30 more from Kerso than the F4-IS. And as said above, 2nd hand they go straight-swap.

I had the F4 IS but found insufficient subject isolation for full-body stuff, hence swapped to the F2.8. OTOH the TP member I swapped with was finding the F2.8 much too heavy for his purposes.
 
I have this lens (F4 IS), and I think it's lovely. I didn't really need the F2.8 for low light, as I generally use this lens outdoors (the focal length on my crop sensor 40D is quite long). It's lovely for portraits, provided you have a bit of room to work with. Sharp images, nice colours. I am really pleased with it. Got mine from Kerso. Ordered on a Thursday afternoon, was playing with it on Saturday morning - magic!
 
I have the F4 IS version and it is a cracking lens. I use it almost exclusively for weddings only changing to a 17-40 or 24-105 if I need a wider view or am working at close quarters). I did consider the F2.8, but the F4 version got far better reviews WRT image quality and is a whole heap cheaper.
 
Used mine many a time for portrait work and use it over my 85L (which was what I bought the 85 for and not the 70-200).

In essence the 70-200 lens range is a very very versatile focal length for most people, so it's generally a good move to invest in good glass for that region.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top