Which Lens for Portrait Work

C

chrisb1357

Suspended / Banned
Messages
201
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

Been using my 350D for a while for aircraft photo's and the odd event photo using my Kit lens and wanted some advice on a lens that wont brake the bank for use to get started in Portrait Work.

Can anone advise me on which lens i should go for

Thanks
Chris
 
The legendary Nifty Fifty (50mm f/1.8 prime lens from Canon).

It's considered by many to be the best value lens Canon make.

You can pick one up for £60-70 or £50 if second hand.
 
ive just got the nikon 50mm 1.4 and i intend to use it for portraits
 
just remember that you don't always want tiny DOF in portraits so fast lenses are not always regularly. The only time I use fast apertures when the background is a bit cluttered.
 
The 'Nifty' gets my vote too....for the reasons that have already been stated :thumbs:
 
What type of portraits?

Studio type? - I use my 28-105 a lot, usually at the 80mm end.

Outside? - Often use my 70-200L.

Environment? - Often use my 10-20mm
 
When I talk about a portrait lens; I mean a lens suitable for head and shoulders portraiture which IMO requires a minimum of 50mm on a 1.6x camera to avoid distortion. Environmental portraits can be shot with a wider lens because they usually include the surrounding area and are not shot from as close distance as a head and shoulders portraits. Often, environmental portraits are shot with wide lenses specifically to distort.

The 50mm f/1.8 Mark-II is often recommended as a portrait lens, primarily because of its low cost, but, I consider it a fairly mediocre lens for that purpose. My rationale is that the rough bokeh from the five bladed Mark-II aperture is not particularly pleasant in portraits. A more expensive but better option is the 50mm f/1.4 which has an eight bladed diaphragm producing better bokeh. The Canon 50mm f/2.5 macro lens also produces better bokeh than the 50mm f/2.8 Mark-II lens and the f/2.5 would give you macro capability down to 1:2.

If you have room to shoot, either the Canon 85mm f/1.8 or Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro lenses do an extremely nice job in portraiture. Neither of these lenses will break the bank. The Tamron can be often had used at a very reasonable price, I would assume that the 100mm Canon macro lens would also be nice as a portrait glass. However, this option would be more expensive and I cannot personally recommend it as a portrait lens because I have no specific experience using it.

Portrait lenses can be pretty generic. Just about any lens with a focal length of between 50mm and 100mm will be effective as a portrait lens on your camera, especially if it produces smooth bokeh.

Have you tried your Kit lens at 50 or 55mm? I would try that first and see if you like the results. My philosophy is don't buy equipment when the equipment you already own can do the job. A portrait lens doesn't need to be the sharpest glass.

I worked for a long while with a Canon 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens which can pump out some pretty nice portraits.
 
Take a look at some of Diddy Dave's work on the forums, some superb studio stuff taken with an 18-70mm which won't break the bank.
 
Canon 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 are both great especially wide open using natural light - but as said above the f/1.4 gives better bokeh. But in a lit studio you won't be using any lens wide open and, depending how much room you have, you may want something wider for full body shots. Canon's 24 - 70mm f/2.8 is ideal for studio work. But it will break the bank.

If I were you, I'd stick with the kit lens (which is not that bad) and get a 50mm. Then see how you go. If you need a longer or wider lens, you'll soon work it out for yourself.
 
I shoot portraits - and a lot of the advice on here is linked back to never shoot a portrait under 50mm....well guess what....I do.

I shoot Nikon but I have an 18-70mm lens, and both myself and DiddyDave on this forum, both use it in the studio as its a superb lens for the money. We even use it for some shots at weddings.

A lot has to be said for the 50mm mainly because its a fast lens f1.8 or f1.4 and I have used it for portraits, and didnt really like it, as you have to be spot on with the focussing - and sometimes you might want BOTH eyes sharp due to the shallow DOF when using it wide open.

Plus if you wanted to do close up head/shoulders and also full length, then you'd need to keep running closer/further away from your subject.

I have used the Tamron 90mm f2.8 for candids at weddings, and have to say, depending where you are you really do suffer.

If you are using a cropped sensor body, then you also need to take into consideration that a 28mm isnt really a 28mm, and therefore a 50mm isnt a 50mm....

We shoot under 50mm, we shoot at 18mm, and we shoot at 70mm.

May I also suggest that that OP has said that he wants a cheap portrait lens, he hasnt said what type of portraits that he'll be taking, where he'll be taking them.
If he was taking them in the studio, then I wouldnt recommend the 50mm due to him not needing it at its f1.8 [or 1.4] and hes getting started in portrait photography.

I am sure that the OP wont mind me mentioning that I have spoken to him on MSN this evening regarding this, and have advised that the money for a "new lens for portraits" is probably best spent on learning about taking portraits first, and trying with his "kit" lens - and then deciding whether or not he needs any additonal lens'/flash/lights etc.
 
dellipher said:
I have used the Tamron 90mm f2.8 for candids at weddings, and have to say, depending where you are you really do suffer
Click to expand...

Adele could you please elaborate on this a bit, as i have not long acquired this lens and am curious as to how i would get on with portraits and candids as i have been lead to believe it's very good for these shots, although it is primarily a macro lens, thanks ;)
 
TG. said:
Adele could you please elaborate on this a bit, as i have not long acquired this lens and am curious as to how i would get on with portraits and candids as i have been lead to believe it's very good for these shots, although it is primarily a macro lens, thanks ;)
Click to expand...

TG it is a very good lens, and having shot several weddings as 2nd shooter with it I am over the moon with the quality of the lens.
How I mean is, if something is happening right in front of you, you cannot get the candid because you are too close. Also, if you want to give a different take on the "staged" shots, then you have to be far enough away to get in the shots what you get in them. You may not be able to turn around and take a shot of 3 people laughing, without quickly taking 5 steps back - for candids, especially at a fast-moving event such as a wedding, sometimes you will "miss" a couple of shots - thats what I meant about it.

But at 90mm, shooting portrait, its great for close ups, but you think if you decide that you want to do a full body - you have to sprint half way across the field.

Depending on the size of the studio, if you were using it for studio work - then I wouldnt recommend it.
 
Ok see what you mean and thanks for the feedback, i bought it for macro really but had heard a lot about the portrait advantages of it, i must really have a good play with it, as i have had it a couple of months and only done test shots really :)
 
You might want to look at the Tamron 90m great quality and light weight . Price is reasonable too.

SI
 
Sir Isaac said:
You might want to look at the Tamron 90m great quality and light weight . Price is reasonable too.

SI
Click to expand...

I will stand by what I said regarding the Tamron 90mm - Fab lens, but doesnt give you enough to work with, especially if you're working in a tight space, or you're wanting to do head/shoulders - full body - 3/4 body shots.....with a fixed lens you cannot get that....unless you swap change lens' all time when the model is gonna get bored....or have several bodies on to go!
OR....just have a zoom!
 
Nifty fifty without a doubt. On your 1.6 crop that will equal 80mm, which is considered a very, very good portrait length. Any longer lens and you may struggle in some environments.

If you buy a longer lens, you'll need the fifty as well, so buy it first and enjoy it. From there you'll know if you need to expand your kit or not.

This set was taken with a 350D and 50/1.8:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rossharvey/sets/72157607338856234/
 
85mm lives on my full-frame camera 90% of the time (~equiv. to a 50mm on a crop body) and all I ever photograph really is people. For £55, just get the 50mm f/1.8. If you find you're not using it you will be able to get probably £45 or £50 back again anyway :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top