Which prime for portraits on 5d mk2

Andy77

Andy77

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,543
Name
andy
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys looking for a nice prime for my 5d mk2 to use for portraits in studio and on location, what would you guys recommend budget is approx £300-£400.

Andy
 
At a guess the canon 85mm 1.8 is about the only thing? Maybe a Samyang 85mm 1.4 if you don't mind manual focus.
 
does 85 1.8 fit full frame? i was also thinking along the lines of the siggy/canon 50 1.4
 
Depends on subject to camera distance and how you want to frame the subject, but as stated you wont go far wrong with a Canon 85/1.8 and I'd add a 50/1.8 into teh bag as well, about £80 for the 50mm (treat carefully, they are a little fragile) but superb IQ especially at that price.
 
Or if you like macro, the 100mm 2.8 offerings from a canon are both superb lenses.
 
Andy77 said:
does 85 1.8 fit full frame? i was also thinking along the lines of the siggy/canon 50 1.4
Click to expand...

Yes and produces wonderful results in terms of colour, IQ etc, they seem to have been made for each other (85 + 5D) if you have room to frame etc.
Canon 50 1.4 also seems to have some "issues" in regards build quality, I considered buying one for my son when his 1.8 broke. Siggy I believe can have variable IQ so make sure you get a good one. 1.4 wont give you much dof as I am sure you know but images are very nice from either from what I've seen/read.
 
MatBin said:
Yes and produces wonderful results in terms of colour, IQ etc, they seem to have been made for each other (85 + 5D) if you have room to frame etc.
Canon 50 1.4 also seems to have some "issues" in regards build quality, I considered buying one for my son when his 1.8 broke. Siggy I believe can have variable IQ so make sure you get a good one. 1.4 wont give you much dof as I am sure you know but images are very nice from either from what I've seen/read.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

85mm (in my view) is better suited to portraits on a full frame body.

sorry to hijack, what about if the camera in question is a 1D mkIII - i.e a 1.3 crop, I guess the 85mm still beats the 50mm 1.8?
 
I have the Siggy 50 and 85mm f1.4's and they're good lenses IMVHO but I suppose it depends what aperture you'll be using. If you are going to be shooting at wider apertures then they make sense but if you are going to be shooting portraits at smaller apertures I suppose it becomes a much more difficult call and you'd have to ask yourself what advantage a prime would give you over your existing lens(es.)

A friend of mine is a part time model and her latest shots look amazing, shot with a Nikon D200+zoom at apertures ranging between f4 and f5.6 , 26-50mm.
 
Last edited:
i will have alook into to 85 1.8 i think, i thought it was a ef-s fitment only :s lol, i like the look of the siggy 85mm 1.4 but over my budget
 
shabba said:
Bingo.

85mm (in my view) is better suited to portraits on a full frame body.

sorry to hijack, what about if the camera in question is a 1D mkIII - i.e a 1.3 crop, I guess the 85mm still beats the 50mm 1.8?
Click to expand...

From the limited testing I have done on my 85 + 50 1.8s I'd say they are pretty much equal in terms of image produced, both are high quality, build quality wise the 85 is better than the 50 so it would just be down to framing issues, although some do mention a bit of purple fringing at times with the 85 (I cant say I look "that" closely) which can be removed in PP I believe.
 
Thanks MatBin, appreciated. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Might wait for the 50mm 1.8 mkII and see, been wanting to upgrade the nifty50 for a while but too many stories of focus issues with the Canon 1.4, and the Sigma 1.4 also has it's fair share of problem stories.
 
shabba said:
Thanks MatBin, appreciated. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Might wait for the 50mm 1.8 mkII and see, been wanting to upgrade the nifty50 for a while but too many stories of focus issues with the Canon 1.4, and the Sigma 1.4 also has it's fair share of problem stories.
Click to expand...

The current 50/1.8 is the mk2 version, the mk1 version was better built, they still go for a premium, the mk2 could certainly do with an upgrade to better build quality.
 
Sorry I meant the mkII 50mm of the 1.4 lens, due this year I believe, to resolve the focus issues wth the first one.
 
I have the EF 100mm f2.8 macro, the EF 85mm f1.8 and the EF 50mm f1.4 and they're all great for portraits.

Of the three, the 50mm requires the most concentration on the part of the photographer. :)
 
Perfect portrait lens is probably 135L 2 on full frame. That's over budget, but the 100mm f/2 isn't.

Very similar to 85 1.8, but a handy bit longer. Thinking of getting one of those myself :)
 
Depends in why you mean by portrait?

135 no good if you don't have the room etc
 
shabba said:
Sorry I meant the mkII 50mm of the 1.4 lens, due this year I believe, to resolve the focus issues wth the first one.
Click to expand...

I've not seen such rumours for a while now. There was a mention of 1.8 IS on canonrumors which would cost around £500-600 following the trends.
 
POAH said:
Depends in why you mean by portrait?

135 no good if you don't have the room etc
Click to expand...

You have to be seriously out of space or shoot group portraits to have any major issues.
 
shabba said:
Maybe a Samyang 85mm 1.4 if you don't mind manual focus.
Click to expand...
Doesn't the aperture close immediately when you stop down? Focusing at f8 is probably not that much fun.

85mm might be too long for a small studio and full length shots.
 
POAH said:
Depends in what you mean by portrait?

135 no good if you don't have the room etc
Click to expand...

por·trait
Noun:
A painting, drawing, photograph, or engraving of a person.
A representation or impression of someone or something in language or on film.

I'd have thought that was pretty self-explanatory! :cuckoo:

It doesn't matter what lens is used really does it?
 
Spiritflier said:
por·trait
Noun:
A painting, drawing, photograph, or engraving of a person.
A representation or impression of someone or something in language or on film.

I'd have thought that was pretty self-explanatory! :cuckoo:

It doesn't matter what lens is used really does it?
Click to expand...

Well if you do a head shot you need less room than if you do a full length shot. Would have thought that was obvious but clearly not to a google fiend like yourself
 
POAH said:
Well if you do a head shot you need less room than if you do a full length shot. Would have thought that was obvious but clearly not to a google fiend like yourself
Click to expand...

SLAAAPPP!:lol:
 
POAH said:
Depends in why you mean by portrait?

135 no good if you don't have the room etc
Click to expand...

It's a fair point. When I think portrait, I think something between upper body and tight head shot. Not full length or groups.

But the critical thing about focal length is whatever you need to get a comfortable working distance. I like to be about four to six feet away, but rather more than less. 135mm on full frame suits that, 85mm is too short (but perfect on a cropper). 50mm for full length and groups.
 
85mm 1.8 is a very nice lens on full frame. I have the Sigma 85 1.4 now though which has incredible bokeh. :D

I know you said primes but a 70-200 f4 would be within budget second hand and gives you a bit more flexibility. A lot of portraits are shot around f4-5.6 anyway.
 
Last edited:
POAH said:
Well if you do a head shot you need less room than if you do a full length shot. Would have thought that was obvious but clearly not to a google fiend like yourself
Click to expand...

Well of course it's obvious but you said; "it depends what you mean by portrait". Duh!

Regardless of what lens is used, it's still a flippin' portrait! :cuckoo:
 
Spiritflier said:
Well of course it's obvious but you said; "it depends what you mean by portrait". Duh!

Regardless of what lens is used, it's still a flippin' portrait! :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

You are not getting the point of how much room the person has are you.
 
POAH said:
You are not getting the point of how much room the person has are you.
Click to expand...

I think you're being a bit dense and not understanding my point... It's ok though. I'm sure it'll sink in eventually! ;o :cuckoo:

I'm a sucker for Special Cases so I'll explain my point again... It DOESN'T MATTER how much room you have, it's still going to be a portrait regardless of whether it's taken 6 inches or 6 feet away from the subject or with what lens you use! Is that clear enough for you now?
 
Yup. A portrait done on an 8mm lens would still be a portrait.

Sort of...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top