so what lens would be best????

[fitz]

i have some portrait sessions coming up and was wanting some lens advice...

should i go with my 75-300 @ about 175mm-ish say wide open Av...

or

should I just use my 50mm?

i have tried both but just want some opinions....thanks!

[chris.bailey]

Which camera? Indoor outdoor? Studio size?

I love the 50mm for portraits but also use a 17-40, 24-70 and 85 1.8! All depends on the situation. 175mm is considered a bit 'long' for portraits.

[fitz]

sorry for lack of info - posted in a rush...

all sessions are on-location at either evening or morning...

GEAR -

Digital Rebel and all i have to work with right now is the 18-55mm, 50mm, 75-300, as also displayed above in my signature...

i thought 175mm sounded a bit long too, when another guy told me that, so i thought I might ask here...also.

any advice...i guess i could rent a lens...but i really don't want to.

[robertwgross]

Traditionally, most portrait work is done with effective focal lengths of about 60mm up to about 90mm. So, with a 1.6 factor body, that would be a lens of 37mm to about 55mm.

---Bob Gross---

[Andy_T]

I'd say
- take both with you,
- start with the 50/1.8@f/2.8 and
- use the 75-300 if you really need it.

Best regards,
Andy

[mdr]

I fully agree with Andy. Although I bet that you won't use the 75-300 at all.

The 85mm f1.8 is the ideal portrait lens for full frame, so the 50mm f1.8 is the equivalent with the 1.6x crop factor.

[tim]

When you guys refer to the ideal lens, are you talking about what will fill the frame from a given distance, or the amount of feature compression the lens provides? And does the difference between, say, 50mm and 90mm really matter?

[roanjohn]

50!!!! Not even a question.........the wider aperture and the sharpness of the 50 will outdo your 70-300 on any focal length/aperture.

Ro1

[chris.bailey]

Outside evening or morning then the 50 has got to be a first choice.

[griff2]

Tim wrote: When you guys refer to the ideal lens, are you talking about what will fill the frame from a given distance, or the amount of feature compression the lens provides? And does the difference between, say, 50mm and 90mm really matter?
Both feature compression and what will fill the frame are important. A traditional portrait lens would be ~90mm, but the fifty on a smaller sensor (1.6x) is equivalent to an 80mm, which is just about there. Ironically, for studio work, the 90mm might be a little too long (144mm) on a smaller sensor camera.

[fitz]

i glad i brought this up..some else recommend the 75-300 and it through me off a bit. and being somewhat new photography i wanted clarification

thanks to all i agree with you about the 50mm

[tim]

People seem to have trouble with the crop factor vs magnification factor thing. IMHO we should just stop comparing things with 35mm cameras and accept them how they are. That doesn't help 1D owner though, but I feel really sorry for those people ;)

[johnboy00]

A lot of people also seem to think that the crop factor turns a 50mm lens into an 80mm lens. It does not! The crop factor only changes the size of the subject in the frame from a given distance. It's like doing a post-processing crop, only it's done on the camera and you can't turn it off. The angle of view is the same as on a 35mm film camera or a full-frame digital. If you like 85mm for portraits with 35mm/full-frame, use an 85 on your 1.6x and step back a bit from your subject.