Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Hello

Among these lenses to shoot portraits,Which lens would be prefer over the other,

85mm 1.2
135mm F2
200mm 2.8
70-200 2.8 IS


Thank you
Yeshwanth

85L. Definitely.

u need that to complete ur holy trinity

i would too, but i guess depends on how much you shoot portrait..
for me i use zoom a lot, and same price with 70-200/2.8IS.. 70-200 also good for portraits..

70-200 is my pick (of course, that's me only), if i have extra cash i'll pick the ultimate 85L for sure..

85L

70-200 f2.8 imo is too heavy for portraits - I barely use mine as just too lazy to lug around.

135mm F2
200mm 2.8

imo are too long and are not as nice as the 85.... wish I had the extra cash.

85L in a blink but can't justify spending that much on that piece of glass just yet.

70-200mm f2.8 would be my next option. That's my workhorse. Sharp and flexible gives it great versatility.

For full frame the 135mm f2 L has got to be one of the best prime lens for a portrait my choice.

85L is very nice, I regret selling mine to Gummybear. Now I use the Contax 100mm f2 for portrait. On a full frame, it is the right FL for me.

+1

But if I were to choose a zoom it would be the 70-200 F4 non IS to save on weight.

85 1.8
...wait, that wasn't one of the options

Hummmm, I'll have to give this 135L another look.

Yeah check out the 135L. I had the opportunity to play around with a 5D + 135L and it was pretty sweet. Granted that I'm comparing this to an 85 1.8 (so I have no experience with the 85L) but the compression with the 135 wins hands down compared to the 85.

And it's fairly "cheap" for an L glass, all things considered. I've played with Nikko's 85L II and that's one sweet lens.

That's what I was going to say

I'm making the assumption that we are talking a portrait lens for a full frame camera right?

Yesh I believe has a 5D mk ii, so I think that's a correct assumption James.

I heard the 100L (the new macro) is pretty good for portraits too! and its not too expensive either... Probably still too long for a crop sensor though

Speaking from personal experience, I would pick 135 f/2.

Keep in mind 85L AF is a little slower than other USM's, it has electric manual focus (which some ppl don't like), and weight distribution might be a little awkward (heavy but stubby). And MSRP is expensive.

70-200 2.8 IS is a versatile lens but you can't compare sharpness with the primes, imo.

Yesh has a 5D, but mark I so far.

Yesh, get a macro lens, check it out, if it's not working, sell it. 2 in 1 (macro + portraits), I have even taken a great landscape shot with it once The old macro at 600 is a killer

Good points on the 85L. I'm not a big fan of the electric MF but I can probably get used to it.

I find 135mm on a crop may be too long. Maybe the 100L macro will be a good substitute but I don't know if the AF is typical of macro lenses ie slow and sluggish.

Hello
Thank you for all the suggestions so far...

I have a 5D mark 1, Debating on picking one lens for portraits before i head to my sisters wedding to India...

The above discussion kind of leads me either to 135 or 85 1.2,
I guess no body voted for the 200 2.8 and not much for the 70-200 2.8 IS.




MikeES...I have used the 85 1.8 Not that impressed with it and thats the reason its not on the above list.



Yes James



Kind of struggling to make a decisions Potatoeeye


Cheers
Yeshwanth

Even though I've never used one, I'd go with the 85L.

Particularly for a wedding, I find it's easier to "add" zoom by walking towards the subject rather than backing up, check, backing up, check.. to accommodate a more powerful zoom in tight quarters.

If you could get both, maybe that would be the best choice if the budget allows.

If space is limited then the 85 would be the best choice. If you have space to work with, such as portraits taken outdoors, then 135L.

Looking at the price difference between the 85mm and 135mm
I would prefer the 135mm i guess .....

Vistek's
1 Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM Telephot.. $1,189.00
1 Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L II USM Mediu.. $2,299.00
85mm price drive me crazy .....
cheers

FYI, Aden lists 135 f2 for $1099.99 (whether they have it in stock is another story). If you want to get it from Vistek they should be able to price match.

Budget?

If you can handle Manual Focus, why not consider the Korean 85/1.4 at under 300 bucks?

135 if u have room to work with.

The only one of these lenses listed that I have not owned (at some point) was the 200 f2.8.

Having said that, here's what I've noted about the lenses.

135L - awesome performer and very reasonably priced considering it's an L lens. I wish there was a Nikon equivalent (now that I'm Nikon). The out of focus areas are wonderfully rendered. It also allows you just enough distance b/w you and your subject(s) - it was great to use during weddings. And it was very good wide open.

70-200 f2.8 (IS) - same awesome performer but heavier and slower but has IS to accommodate for those items. In my opinion, really good if you want distance (at full 200mm) between you and your subject(s) and really does give that whole flat field thing to the image.

85L - slow if you're going to use it in situations where your subjects may be moving "too fast" for the lens to keep up. Unparalleled out of focus areas and, really, there are no other 85 f1.2 modern af lenses around are there? If you go this route be VERY wary of being within the minimal focus distance to the subject - the DOF chart would show you that there is ZERO room for error on that lens; not even 1mm, when shot wide open (at f1.2) and you're at the minimal focus distance. So you breathe too hard or your subject just moves their head slightly (unnoticeable to you or me) and you've blown the image.

Cheers,
Dave

I really like the working distance of 85mm over 135mm. Both lenses are spectacular though.

If I had to choose one lens for portraits, it would be the 135mm f/2L as well. For me, it has the right combination of image quality, bokeh, size, weight, AF speed and build quality. I shot with it for years on 1.6x crop bodies, and it was my favourite lens. If I could somehow shoehorn it onto my D700's now, I would. The f/2 max aperture gives lovely OOF highlights, yet the regions inside the field of focus are pin sharp, even wide open. It gives a pleasing amount of focal length compression, without needing a lot of room to shoot.

You can pick up secondhand ones in excellent condition for under $1000.

I own all of those lenses other than the 200 2.8 as well.

If I had to choose, for a wedding my choice would be the 85L- it does focus slowly, but it is a wonderful lens- and I think it is the best compromise focal length- you can back up a bit to get group shots with it- and 3/4 portraits. I find the 135 much less versatile - unless you like only tight portraits (ie. headshots) group shots become a bit harder. I do find the 135 focuses very quickly and is a great performer- it is probably the better choice if you want to use a lot of candids. Will you be using flash? You may wish to take the limits of your lighting into account.

The 70-200 2.8 IS is a great lens, but very bulky. I rarely use it for that reason (though it is my lens of choice when I'm shooting children). At a wedding you are probably going to be dealing with low light, so you might want that extra stop.

Good luck!