Budget Portrait lens

jbissaker

jbissaker

Suspended / Banned
Messages
66
Name
Julian
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone,

Can anyone recommend a relatively inexpensive portait lens for a Canon 400d ??? will the 50mm 1.8 be any good ? heard lot's of good things about it.

Also i haven't yet got a flash gun but was thinking about a Canon Speedlight 200 or the Jessops 360 AFD as i want to spend under £100.

Any thoughts on the above please.
 
The 50mm f/1.8 is a cracker of a lens for the price, super sharp, love mine.

I'm looking to get the canon 85mm f/1.8 for portraits, haven't heard a wrong thing said about it.

As for flashes I'm not too clued up on them, but you will want to go off camera soon so start looking in the lighting forum.

Good luck.

Steve
 
Yes the 50mm 1.8 is an absolute bargain and on your camera body it should make a great portrait lens..
 
+1 for the 50mm 1.8 and i highly recommend the 360AFD a lot of flash for not a lot of money
 
Another+1 for the 50mm f1.8. Great lens!
 
I have found the 50mm a bit narrow on a cropped sensor for indoor shooting. If you are using it in normal size domestic rooms you will struggle to get the whole person in. If you are using it outdoors or only want partial portraits it is great.
 
50 then 85 as said. Comet had some canon 430 flashes for about £100 a while ago, probably all gone now though.
 
Another big yes for the nifty fifty.
 
I've never liked the nifty fifty for more than one reason, the 85mm f1.8 however is a great lens for portraits IMO.
 
The nifty 50 is great, however I have to say I personally would vote the 85mm or even the 80-200mm ones. Depends on the situation! 50mm 1.8's are cheap though, so if it's on a budget get one of those bad boys!
 
another nod for the nifty fifty. Set it to f5.6 and it is very sharp. I find at f2.4 the sharpness and DOF are just right. Auto Focus can be a be of a pian sometimes on it, but other than that it is a lens everyone should own!

Produces great portrait pics in natural light too. So I would try it without flash first.
 
I'm going to get jumped on here, but avoid the 50mm like the plague. It's an awful lens.

It's 80 quid for a reason, you absolutely get what you pay for. The images it creates are very unpleasant; they have a "digital" look to them that isn't seen on other lenses. The Bokeh will make you nauseous.

It's loud, the autofocus is horrible, it's cheap, tacky, falls apart(but admittedly does click right back together), there's just so many bad points.

People say it's good value, but it's not. It would be good value if it was 80 quid and only had half of the issues it has.

In my opinion, a far better portrait lens is the 85mm 1.8 or the 50mm 1.4.

Both lenses are quite a bit more expensive, but they actually do represent good value for money.

As for the 360AFD, that's a pretty decent flash if you're going to pay a decent price on it. I got one for £70, and it performs flawlessly as long as you aren't using it off camera. Then all sorts of issues pop up. But it's got it's got a built in bounce card and diffuser and is very good considering it's price.
 
Blimey that was harsh. lol.


I love my nifty.

Check out the pics on flickr to see what it can do.
 
jbissaker said:
Hi everyone,

Can anyone recommend a relatively inexpensive portait lens for a Canon 400d ??? will the 50mm 1.8 be any good ? heard lot's of good things about it.

Also i haven't yet got a flash gun but was thinking about a Canon Speedlight 200 or the Jessops 360 AFD as i want to spend under £100.

Any thoughts on the above please.
Click to expand...

stay focused people :p

yes the nifty is cheap and nasty but i think that's the point of it :lol:
unless you have a result at a car boot and go the manual focus old lens / adaptor route, you are pretty well stuck with the nifty and it has it's place in the world of budget lenses. It's worth all of it's foibles just for the manic 1.8 DOF :)

fly my pretties
I find my 2 360AFD's much more reliable off camera as slave units than the pt04 triggers i got from ebay, it just means i have to think more about placement.
 
I would recommend saving up for the 1.4, be it the Canon or the Sigma one.

Inexpensive & Photography don't go well together.
 
OTOH a 50mm f1.8 can be bought second hand for about £60, tried out, and sold on for, well about £60 if it doesn't work out OR if one then upgrades to the 1.4.

I have the 50 and the 85mm f1.8's and much prefer the 85mm, but then again I have FF so on crop 50 would be close in FoV terms.

HTH
 
50mm 1.4 - hunt one out second hand - ok it's a bit more - but you'll be happy with it forever - takes away the need for an upgrade later - and 1.4 is fun
 
sheridant said:
50mm 1.4 - hunt one out second hand - ok it's a bit more - but you'll be happy with it forever - takes away the need for an upgrade later - and 1.4 is fun
Click to expand...

Subjective.

Then again, when I had the 1.2, I couldn't recall how often did I use it at 1.2
 
50mm f/1.8 is a horrible lens wide open but stop it down to at least f/4 and it becomes completely different. If you are careful how you use it (composition wise and physically) - it is a very good value for money and can give great results. As a perfectionist I didn't get on with that lens at all, but if your budget is limited f/1.8 is much better than nothing or 18-55! The key is to focus very carefully and avoid bright spots in the frame if possible.

It may be a long shot but I've seen some 135mm f/2.8 SF cheaply on ebay. They are not perfect, but not completely horrible either. Better lenses start over £200.

If you can find the older 50mm mk1 with the metal mount. It was much better.
 
daugirdas said:
50mm f/1.8 is a horrible lens wide open but stop it down to at least f/4 and it becomes completely different. If you are careful how you use it (composition wise and physically) - it is a very good value for money and can give great results. As a perfectionist I didn't get on with that lens at all,
Click to expand...

What a load of tosh.

It's a cracking lens for what it is, my best shots with it are at f/1.8 or f/2, it's not much use past that.
 
It is a true Marmite lens :D

Edit: In fact it should be called The Marmite :lol:
 
daugirdas said:
It may be a long shot but I've seen some 135mm f/2.8 SF cheaply on ebay. They are not perfect, but not completely horrible either.
Click to expand...

Agree with that. Obviously 135mm is pretty long on crop, but it is a good lens IMO. There is some purple fringing at F2.8 if you look closely, but it's gone by f3.2 IIRC. Another nice give-away lens is the 70-210mm F4 (old push-pull job). Both have the old arc-drive focus motor, but the 135mm isn't particularly slow.

A bit off topic though :lol:
 
Its an absolutely brilliant lens!!

Yes its cheap and plasticy, noisey with slow AF. But work around its faults and use it for portraits and landscapes, and it produces some really beautiful shots. Also, for a lens with apparent cheap build, it can put up with a hell of a lot of knocking around, and its so small it fits snugly in your pocket!!

I've taken hundreds of shots with this lens and can post images up if the OP wants to see them.
 
daugirdas said:
If you can find the older 50mm mk1 with the metal mount. It was much better.
Click to expand...

only in terms of the mount being metal V's plastic for the mk2. they were/are the same optically - soft wide open, sharp from f2.8, and they have horrific bokeh due to the 5 non rounded aperture blades
 
i'd go with the 50mm 1.8
then if you use it loads then you can upgrade to a 1.4 perhaps.
buy one 2nd hand and the depreciation should be minimal

I think the 85mm will be a little long on a cropped body
 
POAH said:
only in terms of the mount being metal V's plastic for the mk2. they were/are the same optically - soft wide open, sharp from f2.8, and they have horrific bokeh due to the 5 non rounded aperture blades
Click to expand...

True, but

* It is likely to survive rougher handling
* front thread doesn't rotate which is good for polarizer and grads
* proper focusing ring, and much finer AF / MF focusing control (more accurate)
* distance scales window
* looks more like a real lens

* soft wide open, but people used to use soft focus filters, so it may be not a big deal
* Originally the primes were not intended for use wide open. They are best stopped down and beat all zooms in terms of sharpness.

If you are that much concerned about sharpness wide open and bokeh of standard lens then there are Canon L primes and Leica R primes that can be adapted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top