New Lens: 85mm f/1.8

[burkdog]

Hey. I bought this lens based on some recommendations had here for a decent portrait lens. I'm not disappointed with the quality so far. I am surprised that this lens is "zoomed in" more than I thought it might be. It seems like it would be good for portraits of one individual, but that if you needed to have 3 or 4 people in the picture, like a family shot, it would be too "zoomed in," or that you would have to back up a pretty fair piece. What would be a better lens for family portraits?

I'm probably going to buy the 28-135mm next, then probably eventually onto the 70-200, then the 100-400.

Will I be able to make do with the 28-135 for some family portrait shots??

Thanks,
Greg

[Ballen Photo]

Greg, The 28-135 should do just fine for family portraits.
........Bruce

[burkdog]

Wow. You have a LOT of photos on that site. Is it relatively easy to process the pics. so you can throw them up on the site like that? I have to go through the process of making mine very small in Photoshop, then uploading them to pbase. I don't have much control over the way they are displayed, either, and it's not easy to upload them in batches (at least the way i have been doing it.)

[chris.bailey]

Or one of the 50mm primes, the 1.4 is best IMHO because of the US focus. There is some advantage to primes again IMHO for portraits as it forces you to move around which might make for a different angle. With zooms there is a tendency to use the zoom to create the framing rather than to move about. I use the 50mm a lot and set up at 1/250 with the studio lights so as to get some DOF. I then move around as the model re-poses. This would be much ahrder to do with the camera on a tripod.

I do use the 28-135 though and it is good for portrait work, just a bit too flexible.

[theoldmoose]

Burkdog,

That would depend on what body you have the lens on. If you have it on something like a 10D or 300D, then the 1.6 crop factor will give you an angle of view similar to a 135mm lens. I like 135mm for individual shots, but it would be too tight for groups for sure. Instead, get a 50mm to use on 1.6 factor cameras. It will come out to about 85mm, which is usually fine on regular 35mm film bodies.

[Belmondo]

I bought an EF 85mm f/1.8 about a month ago, and I actually used it for the first time yesterday, and I am very favorably impressed with it. Of course it's a train picture.....what else? When I get it post-processed, I'll stick it up in the Share board and post a link here.

Thos.

[G3]

I have the 85 f/1.8. It is, without a doubt, one of the best lens investments I've ever made. It may well be my favorite lens. Focus is unbelieveably fast and accurate and the thing is just tack sharp..can't say enough about it. I just don't understand why it doesn't have a red stripe....

[burkdog]

:(

Hey, maybe you guys can talk me into liking this lens a little more. I totally agree that it is very sharp, very fast, and takes awesome pictures. The only problem is that I have to back up too far from just about everything I want to take pictures of. That, and the DOF (and trust me, I'm not sure of myself throwing around that term) seems very short? i.e. when I've tried to take a picture of a couple of people standing beside each other, one persons face will be in focus, and the other persons face will be out of focus. I have managed to take a couple of beautiful pictures of my dog, but I'm having to back up all the way across the room to get her completely in the frame.

I'm seriously considering seeing if I can send this lens back to B&H and trade it for the 28-135. I'm just afraid once I get the 28-135 I will never use this lens again.

Help me out guys. What should I do?

[G3]

:(

Hey, maybe you guys can talk me into liking this lens a little more. I totally agree that it is very sharp, very fast, and takes awesome pictures. The only problem is that I have to back up too far from just about everything I want to take pictures of. That, and the DOF (and trust me, I'm not sure of myself throwing around that term) seems very short? i.e. when I've tried to take a picture of a couple of people standing beside each other, one persons face will be in focus, and the other persons face will be out of focus. I have managed to take a couple of beautiful pictures of my dog, but I'm having to back up all the way across the room to get her completely in the frame.

I'm seriously considering seeing if I can send this lens back to B&H and trade it for the 28-135. I'm just afraid once I get the 28-135 I will never use this lens again.

Help me out guys. What should I do?

Depth of field is largely a function of the chosen aperture. If you want to get more DOF, choose a smaller aperture (larger number). Use the Av mode and choose f11 or smaller (like f16). Use a larger aperture (smaller number) to blur the background out for portraits.

Using a prime lens takes some practice and getting used to, if you are accustomed to using zooms. But, in my opinion, the payoff is worth the extra work. When I'm shooting portraits, I use mostly primes, either a 50mm or the 85mm. I also think that using a prime forces you to think more about composition and perspective...a zoom can make you lazy.

[burkdog]

I don't mind working a little harder, but I'm just afraid that I would only be able to take portraits of people's heads, unless I back up 30 feet away. What kind of portraits do you take with your 85mm??

[burkdog]

I don't mind working a little harder, but I'm just afraid that I would only be able to take portraits of people's heads, unless I back up 30 feet away. What kind of portraits do you take with your 85mm??

[G3]

I use it for all kinds of individual portraits, outdoor portraits, formal wedding portraits, you name it. If you want to do a full body shot, you do have to back up a bit..for a head/shoulders shot or a half-length portrait not so much..maybe 15 feet. On a digital body, a 50mm lens is a good choice for portraits also, it is the equivalent of an 80mm lens on a 35mm camera....good for full-length portraits and couples portraits.

I think once you get used to using a prime lens, you won't regret keeping the 85.

There's nothing wrong with having the zoom also, though. I have several zooms and use them all the time. It's just that (IMHO) zooms are suited to certain applications and primes are more suited to others. That's not to say you can't shoot portraits with a zoom...you certainly can, and with excellent results. I just prefer the sharpness and the perspective the 85 gives me. It's the same as using a 135mm on a 35mm camera. It's just about the perfect portrait lens.

[Belmondo]

When there's nothing to take pictures of, take pictures of your equipment.

Shot with a 10D
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
ISO 100
1/800
f/5.6

My focusing point was on the IS switches on the lens barrel.

or if you want the big version, go to

http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=17929&size=big&password=&sort= 1&cat=500


http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/353Waitin_for_a_train-med.jpg

[WestFalcon]

Burkdog,

I have the 85 1.8 and the 28-135 and the 85 doesn't get much use. The zoom cropping is too convenient for me. I'm sure the 85 is sharper at that specific focal length but the versatility of the zoom wins in my book. Send it back and get the zoom. Good luck.

[roanjohn]

I want this lens!!!! I want it, I want it, I want it!!!

he he

Ro1

[Belmondo]

I'm sure we can work something out. :wink:

[burkdog]

Damn, guys. You guys are making it tough. I'm leaning toward sending it back, but I don't even know if I can. I bought it from B&H, and as everyone knows, they are closed until the 14th, I think. I can't even get in touch with the customer service people on the phone. I know I will like the 28-135. I just know it. Beyond that I'm planning on getting that 70-200mm 2.8, the 100-400, and the 17-40, and definitely the 50 1.8. I just don't think this 85mm 1.8 is going to see a lot of use, at least in the short run.

:roll:

[nosquare2003]

Yeah, return the 85/1.8 if you really prefer a zoom.

Well, do you really need the following lenses?

17-40
28-135
50/1.8
70-200/2.8
100-400

[maderito]

These are informal candids using the lenses you mentoned:

50 f/1.4: http://www.pbase.com/image/26753201.jpg
28-135 IS: http://www.pbase.com/image/26753199.jpg
85 f1/.8: http://www.pbase.com/image/26753207.jpg

I wouldn't trade in the 50 f/1.4 or 85 f/1.8 for anything. They are reasonably priced and can be used in available light shooting settings when you want to avoid or can't use flash. I don't have a studio lighting set up (yet) so I find myself always wanting natural lighting and fast lenses.

That said, for portraitue, you typically need f/4.0 to f/5.6. So the 28-135 IS may work for you.

[drisley]

When there's nothing to take pictures of, take pictures of your equipment.

Shot with a 10D
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
ISO 100
1/800
f/5.6

My focusing point was on the IS switches on the lens barrel.

or if you want the big version, go to

http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=17929&size=big&password=&sort= 1&cat=500


http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/353Waitin_for_a_train-med.jpg

Seconds after that picture was taken, a silent locomotive came zooming by and crushed the whole lot! :lol:
Well, that is what would happen if you lived in a Farelly Brothers movie.
:lol:

[nosquare2003]

A second thought, you may consider Tamron 28-75/2.8. I don't have this lens but it seems good. There're a lot of discussions of this lens in this forum. The advantage of Tamron 28-75/2.8 over Canon EF28-135/3.5-5.6 is that it has larger aperture. You can use larger aperture for shallow DOF if needed. If 85mm is too long, then you may not need the extra 76-135mm.

I won't trade any of my prime lenses either. But I read burkdog's post that he prefers zoom more. Although 85/1.8 is a very good lens, it's no good to keep it unused. (Though it is a sad story of the 85/1.8 :( )

[Cadwell]

The Tamron 28-75mm is a MUCH better lens than the EF 28-135mm. Of course it doesn't cover the same focal length but if, as you say, you are going to buy the EF 70-200L later, then the Tamron makes a lot of sense. It's also $80 cheaper than the Canon.

[CoolToolGuy]

I wouldn't trade in the 50 f/1.4 or 85 f/1.8 for anything. They are reasonably priced and can be used in available light shooting settings when you want to avoid or can't use flash.

I couldn't agree more. Go into a theater environment or a concert, and these lenses shine. Add to that any case where you know what your shots will be, and you don't want all the weight or bulk of the zoom. Extra cost, sure, but there is a value. :wink: