Toronto Photography Meetup Group • View topic - Which Portrait Lens (Canon) would you pick ?

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » Photography Forums » Gear and Equipment

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]

Which Portrait Lens (Canon) would you pick ?

Moderator: TPMG Moderators

Page 2 of 2

[ 48 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2

Previous topic | Next topic

Author

Message

djja

Post subject:

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 10:16 pm

Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:22 am
Posts: 177
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

taob wrote:

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 have been finding it hard to find secondhand ones, locally that is.

Top

sliua

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:28 am

Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 1:08 am
Posts: 368
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

200 f/2

Top

lz7j

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:34 am

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 11:46 am
Posts: 381
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

Hey Yeshwanth, your best bet is to try all of these (great) lenses you listed and get the one that suits your needs. If you can make it to the Nov 29 social, let me know and I will bring them for you (I don't have the 200 2.8L, but have the f/2.0 IS version instead).

Another awesome lens to consider is the 100mm 2.0 - a very good compromise between the 85L & 135L with the best value.

Top

Metrix

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 9:09 am

Official TPMG Contributor

Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:18 pm
Posts: 4691
Has thanked: 3 times
Have thanks: 19 times
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/metrix_feet/

lz7j wrote:

I have the 100mm f2 excellent portrait lens sharp wide open not quite as good colour rendering as the 135mm but pretty close at half the price when comparing used market prices.

Top

Carlton

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 9:33 am

TPMG SUPERSTAR

Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 11:46 am
Posts: 2119
Location: Toronto
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 1 time

Metrix wrote:

I have the 100mm f2 excellent portrait lens sharp wide open not quite as good colour rendering as the 135mm but pretty close at half the price when comparing used market prices.

How is the CA on the 100mm f2? I thought about getting the 85mm f1.8 but the pics I've seen all seem to have a bit of CA.

Top

Guy

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 9:52 am

Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 10:06 pm
Posts: 63
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

Carlton wrote:

How is the CA on the 100mm f2? I thought about getting the 85mm f1.8 but the pics I've seen all seem to have a bit of CA.

The CA on the 100/2 is as bad wide open as the 85/1.8. The two lenses are extremely similar.

See: http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/image/80881668

Top

yeshwanth

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:02 am

Official TPMG Contributor

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:22 pm
Posts: 983
Has thanked: 12 times
Have thanks: 6 times
Flickr: www.flickr.com/enian82

Thank you all for the Super awesome replies

I am shooting a wedding as a second photographer first week of December
I am thinking of renting the 135mm( for the weekend)
will give me rough idea before i buy one...

I am sure i wont make a mistake picking either 85 or the 135 but the question is going for the 85's price tag is it worth the extra strop of light and the quality difference, This question is answered by many...the only way I can see, is by trying myself.

Thanks again for your inputs
cheers
Yeshwanth

Top

lz7j

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:12 pm

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 11:46 am
Posts: 381
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

There's no doubt about the image quality about these lenses, they're all superb. The main thing to consider is which focal length you'll be using the most. If this is your first wedding, a 70-200 2.8IS will be the optimal choice, imo. Take the time to discover and learn a shooting style.

From my personal experience, I use the 85 much more than the 135. The reasons being: (I'm including some of my pics available on this computer)

1) 135 is too long indoors (outdoor candids is where this lens shines - http://www.nikkophotography.com/85L/135l-1-2.jpg )
2) not fast enough 80% of the time in dark churches/venues (hard to get sharp pics /w less than 1/125th shutter - it might just be me and the redbull)
3) working distance with the subject - I like being able to communicate with the people I'm photographing.
4) I can get a similar fov from both lenses (colors might be off, I'm on my laptop)
85: http://www.nikkophotography.com/85L/85l-1.jpg
135: http://www.nikkophotography.com/85L/135l-1.jpg
-------
The 135 will be better for tight head shots.
But as already mentioned, there's something special about the 85l images:

More (exif is intact):
1) http://www.nikkophotography.com/85L/85l-1-3.jpg
2) http://www.nikkophotography.com/85L/85l-1-2.jpg
3) http://www.nikkophotography.com/85L/ansi14.jpg
4) http://www.nikkophotography.com/85L/85l-10.jpg

Don't let the focus speed of the 85L deter you, it's more than fast enough for weddings/event work. I use mine for sports when the lighting gets bad.

So to answer your question... YES, the 85L price tag is worth it. It's an investment that will eventually pay for itself.

And when you get more work and more $, get the 200 2.0 IS

Top

Alejandro

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:47 pm

Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 3:25 pm
Posts: 137
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

My Fav lense for portraits....135 L besides 85L....

If money wasn't an issue I would get the 200L

Top

dant

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:22 pm

Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 8:27 am
Posts: 487
Location: toronto
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time
Flickr: www.flickr.com/tauro220

MikeES wrote:

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

+1 incredible piece of glass for the +- $500 mark.

Top

inzite

Post subject:

Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 3:33 pm

Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:41 pm
Posts: 103
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

totally agree with lz7j, the 200 f2 lens (nikon or canon) are totally in a league of its own.

Top

BernardChan

Post subject:

Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 3:54 pm

Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 1:42 am
Posts: 485
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

inzite wrote:

totally agree with lz7j, the 200 f2 lens (nikon or canon) are totally in a league of its own.

so is the price!

Top

yeshwanth

Post subject:

Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 4:09 pm

Official TPMG Contributor

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:22 pm
Posts: 983
Has thanked: 12 times
Have thanks: 6 times
Flickr: www.flickr.com/enian82

Thank you lz7j and inzite for those spectacular images ....
Yea the 200 comes with a big price tag...but for sure a great glass..
Pictures speaks more than words....
Yeshwanth

Top

Carlton

Post subject:

Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 6:22 pm

TPMG SUPERSTAR

Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 11:46 am
Posts: 2119
Location: Toronto
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 1 time

Someone has the older 200mm f1.8 for $3700 on Fredmiranda.

Top

inzite

Post subject:

Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:05 pm

Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:41 pm
Posts: 103
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

BernardChan wrote:

inzite wrote:

totally agree with lz7j, the 200 f2 lens (nikon or canon) are totally in a league of its own.

so is the price!

everything's got a price

Top

PotatoEYE

Post subject:

Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:31 pm

TPMG ARISTOCRAT

Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 6:45 pm
Posts: 5371
Location: Etobicoke
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 10 times
Flickr: www.flickr.com/potatoeye/

Yesh, at around $1200-1300 you can get an L with 2.8 aperture, rounded blades, Image stabilization, USM and 100mm. You also get macro if you ever want it. Focusing limit has 3 choices :wink:

Top

Spencer

Post subject:

Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:31 pm

Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:42 pm
Posts: 146
Location: North York
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 0 time

^ Yeah, I'm quite convinced the 100mm 2.8L Macro is on my roadmap of lenses.. my last prime at least. Mid-long telephoto, f/2.8, hybrid IS, macro.. is there anything it doesn't do? :lol:

Top

PotatoEYE

Post subject:

Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:06 pm

TPMG ARISTOCRAT

Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 6:45 pm
Posts: 5371
Location: Etobicoke
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 10 times
Flickr: www.flickr.com/potatoeye/

zone555 wrote:

^ Yeah, I'm quite convinced the 100mm 2.8L Macro is on my roadmap of lenses.. my last prime at least. Mid-long telephoto, f/2.8, hybrid IS, macro.. is there anything it doesn't do? :lol:

take great photos for you :lol:

you still have to use your framing and exposure skills :roll:

Top

Page 2 of 2

[ 48 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2

Board index » Photography Forums » Gear and Equipment

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum