People Photography Lens Question

[alsmith]

Hey there. I have been getting into photography and am starting to realize that my favorite subjects are people. I am wondering what you would suggest for a people photography lens in the Canon L series? I would like some zoom capabilities and of coures I will be using it with my 300D so there will be a conversion factor.

What are your recomendations?

[alsmith]

Oh yeah and I should mention that I love to do natural light photos outdoors.

[Lamplight]

I would imagine the 70-200mm F4 would be pretty good as long as you are not terribly close to the person, but maybe someone else will have another suggestion.

[alsmith]

I was thinking of one of these lens but with the conversion its an EF 112-320mm and I am wondering if the 112 is ok as the bottom end?

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

[sGu]

do u prefer shoot handheld or with support(mono/tri-pod)?

If u handheld then 70-200 IS the one for a better result; or u can save some money off IS by using mono/tri-pod.

[alsmith]

Does the IS make that much of a difference? I like to shoot handheld mostly?

[cmM]

as far as holding..... it does supposably. I don't own one, but from what I read your could easily handhold up to 1/60 or so... At 200mm, you won't be able to get a clear shot without IS(handheld) . BUT, you gotta keep in mind the ~ $1000 difference between 70-200 f/4 L and the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS

[scottbergerphoto]

For unobtrusive people shots, the 100-400 IS L can't be beat.

http://www.pbase.com/image/20905204.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/20056669.jpg

It is very versatile. The IS works well. You really need the IS with this lens. A tripod is really out of the question if your moving around and want to be quick and unobtrusive.
Regards,
scott

[dn7elson]

For unobtrusive people shots, the 100-400 IS L can't be beat.

Unless they notice that big, white cannon that you may be pointing in their direction :D Ok, the Canon cannon.... :wink:

[Mike H]

Scott, I have to disagree with what you've said about that lens being unobtrusive. It's just too large to not be noticed, as someone has already pointed out, even from a distance. The two photos that you've posted are good evidence of this since both people clearly had you on their radar when you snapped the pictures.

Getting back to the original question, there are several good choices for people photography with the 300D. My first recommendation would be the 85/1.8, a relatively inexpensive lens that is sharp, lightweight, and focuses quietly and quickly.

The 85/1.8 allows one to blur the background because of its large maximum aperture, and the photographer can stay far enough from subjects for them to feel comfortable with anything from full-body to a tight head shot. It's not an "L" lens, but it's still a very good one. In my mind it's an honorary L. :D

Mike H

[alsmith]

I would like a zoom for composition if I can so I am not having ot change my distance from the model all the time is there a lens that can do that well.

Mike H - That is a good recomendation so far especially for budget reasons do you use a zoom at all?

[drisley]

I second the motion on the 85mm F1.8. It is an awesome "people" lens, maybe second only to the 135mm F2.0. This is a very intersting article: http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/85_100_135/

I was at a street festival this weekend and took this shot with my Rebel and 85mm F1.8. It was taken at F4, but would have been much nicer with a shallower dof like maybe F2.8 (and if someone hadn't walked in front) :wink:

http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/rebel/dance/hi_nbour_june05_037_std.jpg


I shot this with my 70-200F4L, but as others have mentioned, it does draw alot of attention. That is why I eventually put on the 85mm f1.8.

http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/rebel/dance/hi_nbour_june05_035_std.jpg

[alsmith]

Interesting article thanks drisley I didn't realize that the 85mm was such a good lens for it's price point (wow people encouraging me NOT to spend more money on this site haha)

Any other sugestions?

[drisley]

The 85mm F1.8 lens is simply fantastic.
It easily rivals (and usually surpasses) L zooms for image quality (as you can see above) because it is a high quality prime lens. In addition, the build quality is tremendous, the USM focus is very fast and totally silent.
It just feels like a quality lens should.

Another amazing "people" lens that doesnt have the reach of the others mentioned is the 24-70 F2.8L. It's also in a class of it's own. However, it's not cheap, and it is supposed to be quite heavy and large.

That is why I like the 85mm, it gives good reach, tremendous quality, great low light ability, and is very unobtrusive which is great for carrying around in crowds.

[alsmith]

wow another shot for the 85mm f/1.8? This lens is a bit of a sleeper I guess.... it just snuk up on me

[drisley]

If you do a search in this forum for 85mm f1.8, you will find that this lens is very much beloved by concert photographers, portrait photographers, and those who prefer prime lenses.
Again, the quality of a good prime lens (and this is a GREAT prime lens) will usually surpass that of even L zoom lenses. The only drawback is the fixed focal length.

[roanjohn]

Ditto for the 85 f1.8.........Again, I think this is a nice, unobtrusive lens for candid photography. This and probably the 135 f2 as they give you a good distance from your subjects without appearing "stalkerish".

Of course, the "3" 70-200 L lenses are my choices in terms of zooms in candid photography.

Examples of 85 f1.8

http://www.pbase.com/image/28800140.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/29896881.jpg

Examples of 70-200 f4

http://www.pbase.com/image/28134038.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/28134041.jpg

Ro1

[scottbergerphoto]

Scott, I have to disagree with what you've said about that lens being unobtrusive. It's just too large to not be noticed, as someone has already pointed out, even from a distance. The two photos that you've posted are good evidence of this since both people clearly had you on their radar when you snapped the pictures.

Getting back to the original question, there are several good choices for people photography with the 300D. My first recommendation would be the 85/1.8, a relatively inexpensive lens that is sharp, lightweight, and focuses quietly and quickly.

The 85/1.8 allows one to blur the background because of its large maximum aperture, and the photographer can stay far enough from subjects for them to feel comfortable with anything from full-body to a tight head shot. It's not an "L" lens, but it's still a very good one. In my mind it's an honorary L. :D

Mike H
Unobtrusiveness is a relative term.
The pictures I took with the 100-400 were taken about 100ft away. How far were you with the 85/ 1.8? The 85 1.8 is a wonderful portrait lens, but not from a distance. You need to get pretty close to a stranger to get a portrait with an 85mm lens.
Scott

[Olegis]

Wow roanjohn , these are great images ! I love the bokeh produced by this lens, makes me want to trade in my 50mm f/1.8 MkII for the 85mm f/1.8 ...

[roanjohn]

Wow roanjohn , these are great images ! I love the bokeh produced by this lens, makes me want to trade in my 50mm f/1.8 MkII for the 85mm f/1.8 ...

Thanks Oleg!!! Yes, there is only one way to describe the bokeh of the 85 f1.8 - "CREAMY".............For portraiture, this lens is absolutely superb.

Ro1

[alsmith]

well I guess I'm heddin to the store today to go look at this lens? I'll let you know if impulse gets the better of me..

[Mike H]

alsmith,

I do use zooms. In fact, the 16-35 lives on my camera, and I only switch to something longer when I need it. I also have the 70-200/4L, which is a relatively new lens for me. In fact, I've only gotten to shoot the latter once so far (and I am excited with the results).

Scott,

I generally use something even shorter than the 85/1.8 for most candid shots. When I do event photography, I tend to mainly use my standard zoom (16-35), which I discussed above.

So how can you get candids that close? I find that shooting candids is more a matter of technic than equipment. When I want a candid shot, I tend to do it one of two ways: I shoot before the person notices me, or if they've seen me, I wait until they stop watching me!

Method One: Thievery

When you see someone that looks interesting or is doing something interesting, you can approach the area from the sides or behind them, generally looking away and either keeping your camera in the bag (use a small one!) or holding it nonchalantly at your side, just in case they look your way. When you're in range, move yourself to an advantageous angle. Watch their movements, see what direction they generally look when they are doing what you want to shoot. Once positioned, focus on something away from them that is approximately the same distance from you so that when you turn to point the camera their way to fire, it will be close to the right focus distance already. That way you can release the shutter just a tiny bit more quickly.

Method Two: Lull Them to Sleep

Sometimes you're spotted right off, and have to use gamesmenship rather than stealth. Just smile at the person who has spotted you, lower your camera, and look away. Go back to using the thief technic, and get into a good position. After a minute or two, they will often conclude that you have either fired already or that since they caught you the game is over and you've given up. When they feel secure enough that you're not going to get them, or if they get involved in what they were doing, you will get your chance. Go back to method one at that point!

James Nachtwey, the eight time magazine photographer of the year (a Canon user), was asked to list the lenses in his camera bag. The longest lens that he listed was the 50/1.4. (This is on the disk supplied with the 10D, highly recommended viewing.) While not all of his subjects are unaware, he makes some really unforgettable candids. You may want to do a web search to see some of his work.

I've read that Henri Cartier-Bresson, the famed French ("decisive moment") photographer, made most of his memorable candid images on a lens equivalent to a 50mm on a 35mm camera.

I hope this helps. Happy hunting. :D

Mike H

[msvadi]

excellent post Mike!

I think it really depends on what type of people shots you want to take. If you want to capture faces, then I think that longer telephotos are better. I shot with 135mm f/2.8, but I have to get quite close to fill the frame with a face.

In terms of staying unnoticed, I agree with Scott. Yes, the lens size is a factor, but the distance is much more important. If you get close, they will notice you. They will notice you even faster if you feel uncomfortable. I think that big lenses can help you in terms of confidence too. You can hide behind big glass ;)

On the other hand, if you are after street activity, then probably you'll need something else, like a wide to normal zoom lens. With wide angle, you can shoot without looking through the viewfinder. Just point the camera into the right direction and press the button. It's a sort of "hidden camera" technique. Obviously, one can get very close using this technique. Here's an example. Excellent russian photographer Michael Levit at work (I did not take he pictures below. Just in case, I link the pictures WITHOUT permissions from authors Vit Vanshtein and Smoke S ;) But I'm sure they don't mind):
http://img.photosight.ru/2004/05/10/484658.jpg

http://img.photosight.ru/2004/05/25/501070.jpg

I tried that technique a few times. It takes practice, but one can get simply amazing pictures.

[Mike H]

msvadi, thanks for the kind words regarding my post.

I think the discussion has become one of semantics, really. I just can't picture a large white lens being unobtrusive, with me using the word in this context to mean that no one notices you and that they are not directly engaged with you as a photographer. Clearly, the people in Scott's photos are very aware of him taking their pictures. I'm usually going for something different. Incidentally, I very much like the photos that Scott has posted. :)

One of my few complaints about the 10D/BG-ED3/16-35 combination is that people so often notice it. Shooting with either setup I sometimes have people ask if I shoot for the newspaper and in what section of the paper should they look for their picture! (Hmm. Are there possibilities for mischief on my part here?) :D

What several people have told me is that looking at the size of the rig is that they "can tell it's serious." That's why it jumped out at me when Scott mentioned the 100-400 for unobtrusive portraits. I would think that being far away would help, but most of his subjects were very aware of him. Again, let me emphasize that I like Scott's photos, and that I am certain that the 100-400 is a good portrait lens. And it certainly works better than my setup if you want to use a long-range sniper style of shooting. (I guess that could be #3 on the list of candid shooting methods that I posted.)

I would like to have something as small as the Leica Digilux 2. Photojournalists used Leica rangefinders over the years for candid crowd shots. With a camera so small, people that are not knowlegable about cameras often think that it's just someone on vacation taking snapshots (which it could be) and don't pay much attention to the shooter. Unfortunately, I've read in some of the reviews that the new Leica camera has some problems (poor viewfinder among them).

Mike H

[msvadi]

the original poster was about to purchase 70-200 2.8 lens. I don't think we should stop him from doing that ;) seriously, it sounds like on of the best lens on the market. No matter what he does, it's nice to have such lens. It would be my first choice if I could afford it.

[drisley]

Can anyone tell what lens Michael Levit is using in that first picture in the crowd?

[sGu]

Can anyone tell what lens Michael Levit is using in that first picture in the crowd?

it looks like a EF 14mm f2.8L USM to me from the hood, but it could easily be something else, one thing for sure, it's a "L", and it's wide angle.

[msvadi]

Can anyone tell what lens Michael Levit is using in that first picture in the crowd?

According to the list of equipment on his web page, it has to be 17-35mm f/2.8L USM

[jonnyhorizon]

i saw my first 70-300 DO today
1299.00
wow, what a sweet looking package
so much focal length is such a small package
i would love to find out if it has the sharpness problems the other canon 70-300 IS lens have at the 300 end
let me know if you all see any definitive tests...

[alsmith]

Thanks for all the help everyone I just bought the 85mm f/1.8 and am eagerly awaiting it's arrival. I will let you know how it goes..

Thanks again

[roanjohn]

Can anyone tell what lens Michael Levit is using in that first picture in the crowd?

it looks like a EF 14mm f2.8L USM to me from the hood, but it could easily be something else, one thing for sure, it's a "L", and it's wide angle.

I agree with the 14 f2.8L..............There doesn't seem to be space for a zoom ring so it must be a prime.

Ro1

[roanjohn]

Thanks for all the help everyone I just bought the 85mm f/1.8 and am eagerly awaiting it's arrival. I will let you know how it goes..

Thanks again

You will love it!!!

Ro1

[rick barclay]

Taken with my 100-400mm IS. I've taken about two dozen candids with
this lens. Others will certainly notice you, but not your subject. My own
opinion is ANY size lens will suffice for a candid shot. It simply is a matter
of technique and circumstances. This shot was done using a tripod from
a distance of about 50 meters.

http://flashdaddee.com/CRW_1094.jpg

[drisley]

STALKER! :shock: :twisted:

[drisley]

Thanks for all the help everyone I just bought the 85mm f/1.8 and am eagerly awaiting it's arrival. I will let you know how it goes..

Thanks again

Sweet! You will love that lens!
Definately let us know when you get it, and snap off a couple shots for us (ducks make great subjects).
When are you expecting to receive it?
BTW, I hope you ordered the lens hood! That is a must for any lens.

[Mike H]

Good luck with the new lens. You will find that it's terrific for portraits, sports, scenic photos, and stage productions, to name just a few things.

Mike H

[alsmith]

I am supposed to get in in three business days. So it may be next week at this point and I did get the lens hood with it all for $300 US..

Ducks Huh...

[rick barclay]

STALKER! :shock: :twisted:


:lol: Expect me when you least expect me.

[roanjohn]

STALKER! :shock: :twisted:


:lol: Expect me when you least expect me.

yikes...........

Ro1

[Pekka]

There are few 85mm shallow DOF shots in http://photography-on-the.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=228231#228231