Which one is better for portraits?!

[And0]

So guys can you give me your opinion for two lenses. I'm more into portrait photography. I like visiting places where people work like on building sites, garages, factorys etc. Which one can you suggest me for that situations?
Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.0 USM
or
Canon Telephoto EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

They are the same price...
Thanks:rolleyes:

[grego]

Camera you are using?
Indoors/outdoors?

You couldn't go wrong with either len. Both have agood AF speed, backgroun blur. It comes down to your working space, most of all.

[And0]

350D and i'm not sure if i get the 100mm will i be able to shoot indoor :(

[René Damkot]

IMHO they are both too long on a 1.6 crop, unless you are planning very tight headshots...

[And0]

Can you explain something about the 1.6 crop i didn't get that :(
If someone has one or both of those lenses i will appreciate if he could make a photo of something and give some info on the distance between the camera and the subject because i'm not familiar with those kind of focal lenghts :(

[René Damkot]

In the 'film days', the advised Focal Lenght for portraits would be somewhere between 70 and 135mm, depending on kind of portrait (half body to very close headshot).
Those FLs would give you a working distance that gave a nice perspective.
On a crop body, you 'don't record' the whole frame as you would with film, because the sensor is smaller (the outsides are cropped off). Therefore the Field of View of a lens is different.
A 50mm has the FoV a (1.6 x 50) 80mm would have had on a FF body.
So, on a 1.6 crop body, a 50mm will give you the same working distance (and thus, perspective) as a 80mm would when using a film body.
A 85 or 100mm will require you to stand too far back, so you'll get a 'flat' perspective.
While nice for 'fashion' kind of shots, not too nice for a natural looking portrait. It is also a matter of taste of course...

[And0]

so lets see. If i buy a 100mm it would be on a FF body 160mm? WOW thats very far for a portrait... so the 85mm is 136mm which is in the upper limit :) Maybe i will go for the 85mm

[Tareq]

so lets see. If i buy a 100mm it would be on a FF body 160mm? WOW thats very far for a portrait... so the 85mm is 136mm which is in the upper limit :) Maybe i will go for the 85mm
Wrong. 100mm on FF will keep 100mm, but on crop 1.6 body like XT or 20D will be equiv. to 160mm

[Tareq]

85 is great, but if you need little wider then think of 50

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Personally, I'd get the 50 1.4. You can get up closer for headshots and upper body, but you can stand a normal distance and get full body. With the 85 or 100, you'll be walking back into the next room to get a full body shot.

[Jamie Holladay]

I was thinking the same as Ronald. 50mm f/1.4. I have the 1.8 on my XT 85% of the time. It is a great lens. It will do the Job.

[Fureinku]

Id go with the 50 1.4 as well

[Dellboy]

There very similar lenses but if it's a choice between the two I'd go with the 85 on an XT its just a bit more usable indoors + a third of a stop faster too.
You'll be chuffed either way, Dellboy.
ps. the 50mm 1.4 (or 1.8 ) is cool too but not sure what you have already or what your shotting preferences are

[basroil]

don't always go by the books though, i use 70-200 for a lot of portraits indoors, and 70 is wide enough on a 1.6 crop. unless you are in a small room, you should have enough distance with either of those two lenses. if you like most of the body, i'de suggest something along the lines of the 30mm 1.4 ex from sigma. small focal length, but damn fast.

[steved110]

I generally am a big fan of zoom lenses, particulary if you have space limitations. for indoor work place portraits, in potentially low-light situations, I think you need a fast lens, witha constant aperture of f/2.8
there are a number of these coming available as well as the established canon ones, and you don't have to blow major cash to get one.
think about sigma - 18-50 EX f/2.8 ; sigma 24-70 EX f/2.8 ; tokina and tamron also make 'standard zooms' with a constant f/2.8 aperture.
and if you are loaded, Canon make the renowned 24-70 f/2.8 USM and the brand new 17-55 EF-S f/2.8 IS USM

You don't want to be changing lenses all the time especially in a factory, but if you want primes, then go for a 28-35mm - various makes, a 50mm f/1.4 and the 85mm f/1.8

A fast medium tele zoom like a 70-200 would also have its place.

[And0]

I have the kit lens for the 350D 18-55/3.5-5.6 IT IS DAMN SLOW !!!!!! I cant shoot at 55mm indoor at all. I'm very unhappy with that lens :'( So i see you offer me a 50mm for portrait work :) Some interesting points. I'm a great fan of the ULTRA sharp lenses i preffer a sharp lens more than a soft one. What can you tell me about that. I heard that the 85mm is a sharp one, fast too. So i thing that the 100mm want be good enough for my case.
I like the fact that you comment not only the ones i have mensioned. I will be happy if portrait photographers share their lens knowledge :)

[curiousgeorge]

Even at 70mm, my 70-200 is too long on my 350D for portraits. You really do have to stand well back.

I would go for the 50mm.

[Mark_Cohran]

I have both the 50 f1.4 and the 85 f1.8 and I'd choose the 85mm over the 50mm. That's my preference though. As others have said, the 50mm f1.4 gives you some room to move, but I like the IQ of the 85mm better.

Mark

[steveathome]

I would say the 85mm for portraits.
In 35mm days this was the standard portrait lens. Its true that 1.6 crop gives the impression that it would be a 135mm lens, but it will remain an 85mm lens whatever the crop may be. The reason the 85mm was popular for portraits is that a 50mm standard lens would distort the face and make noses and chins etc look longer, whilst the higher focal lengths would flatten the image, the 85mm gave the most natural perspective. Regardless of the crop these rules remain the same, you will just have to stand a little further back with a 1.6 crop.

[grego]

50mm is the most versatile on the 350D(1.6 crop). It gives you the most room to work with. The 85 or longer would be far too restrictive unless you are using the 5D or 1Ds series.

[Jarrad]

I would say the 85mm for portraits.
In 35mm days this was the standard portrait lens. Its true that 1.6 crop gives the impression that it would be a 135mm lens, but it will remain an 85mm lens whatever the crop may be. The reason the 85mm was popular for portraits is that a 50mm standard lens would distort the face and make noses and chins etc look longer, whilst the higher focal lengths would flatten the image, the 85mm gave the most natural perspective. Regardless of the crop these rules remain the same, you will just have to stand a little further back with a 1.6 crop.


Almost.
It's the distance from the subject which dictates the perspective distortion. For example, if you shot 20 feet (6.1 metres) away from a subject with each lens and cropped for the same framing the perspective distortion would be exactly the same in each shot. :)

[steveathome]

Almost.
It's the distance from the subject which dictates the perspective distortion. For example, if you shot 20 feet (6.1 metres) away from a subject with each lens and cropped for the same framing the perspective distortion would be exactly the same in each shot. :)

I stand corrected, just out of interest what would you say would be the ideal focal length for a head and shoulders shot with a 1.6 crop.

[And0]

I'm an interior designer (maybe i should of started with that :) ) So i think that a 50mm will be better for small areas and i can use it in my work. Second I'm planing a 2 week vacation which is cash consuming. I think that a 50/1.8 will be exellent for the moment. If i like the idea of "prime lenses" i could get a 85 in the near future. So i will test the 50/1.8 because its cheap and maybe after some time i could get a better one like the 85mm or even the 70-200/2.8 ;) What do you guys think from the above written? Am i right or am i wrong and what will you do if you were me?

PS I know about the bokeh that the 1.8 makes but i'm addicted to PS so i think it wont be a big deal for a non pro like me ;)

[SuzyView]

The Nifty is capable, but put side by side with the 50 1.4, I would spend the extra money. I was spoiled to get the 50 1.4 first. I love that lens. The 85 1.8 is my favorite, but for indoor portraits, way too long in a small room.

[OceanView]

On a 1.6 crop I would go for the 50mm 1.4 but if you have to have one of these, then go for the 85mm.

[Jarrad]

I stand corrected, just out of interest what would you say would be the ideal focal length for a head and shoulders shot with a 1.6 crop.


Ideally I'd want something in the 60mm range. I find that my 50 leaves me with some perspective distortion. Not a lot, but enough to notice. :)

[Dellboy]

I'm an interior designer (maybe i should of started with that :) ) So i think that a 50mm will be better for small areas and i can use it in my work. Second I'm planing a 2 week vacation which is cash consuming. I think that a 50/1.8 will be exellent for the moment. If i like the idea of "prime lenses" i could get a 85 in the near future. So i will test the 50/1.8 because its cheap and maybe after some time i could get a better one like the 85mm or even the 70-200/2.8 ;) What do you guys think from the above written? Am i right or am i wrong and what will you do if you were me?

PS I know about the bokeh that the 1.8 makes but i'm addicted to PS so i think it wont be a big deal for a non pro like me ;)

I think this is a perfect plan, the 50 1.8 is proper sharp and very underated. I to found the kit lens a bit soft as did my brother but we never had a problem with the 50. Buying the 50mm 1.8 is a very cheap way of checking out primes and when your a bit short on glass you shouldn't miss out on this bargin. Getting the 50 also will enable you to buy you next lens with a bit more insight and you'll make a better (for you) decision with the prior knowledge of working with a prime.
Good luck, Dellboy.

[tlc]

i vote for the 50 1.4

[Salleke]

50 mm 1.4. That's a hell of a lens on every body.

Good luck.

[SkipD]

There are huge differences between the Canon 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 lenses, and it isn't just the (roughly) one-stop difference in the max aperture.

The 1.8 does not have a "conventional" focussing ring - it's the front end of the lens. If you wish to use a polarizing filter, you will run into big problems because when you adjust the filter you will be affecting the focus and when you adjust the focus you will be upsetting the position of the polarizing filter and thus it's effect. Also, I find the front ring very inconvenient to use for manual focussing. I have not handled the 50mm f/1.8 lens, but the "kit" lens that my son has for his 300D has the same design and it's horrible in my opinion.

The basic build quality of the two lenses is extremely different too, based on what I have read on these forums.

The 50mm f/1.4 would be my choice between the two for any semi-serious photography work.

[Stan43]

I have all three. I agree that the 50 1.4 on a crop body is your best all round bet. If you have the working distance the 100 2.8 Macro can do dounle duty but be prepared for the sharpness on the face.

[michael_]

i purchased the 85mm last week and love it HOWEVER i now want the 50mm 1.4 to get me a fraction wider, i think they will compliment my 17-40 and 70-200

[And0]

I will take the 50/1.4 USM after all your comments. Will buy it after my vacation.
It wont be a good deal to spend less money for a crapy glass :(