Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 23 Sep 2010 (Thursday) 18:44
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24-70L or 85 f/1.8 for Portraits?

 
zshaft
Senior Member
357 posts
Joined May 2009
     
Sep 25, 2010 10:34 |  #16

JPepus wrote in post #10966289 (external link)
Considering Buying the 85mm (non L) but I already have the 24-70 2.8L.

Just wondering what most Portrait photographers might reach for first between the two. I mean with the 24-70 you have range to play with and "L" glass, but I also heard the 85mm is a GREAT lens L or not!


you'll be very pleased with 85 1.8 IQ result ! top notch ! :D
cant be compared with 2470,though.


Canon 1Dx | 24 L II | 85 L II | 200 L II | Extender 1.4x & 2x III
Sigma 120-300 mm 2.8 OS HSM.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
JPepus
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
728 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 27
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
     
Sep 25, 2010 13:38 |  #17

Sounds like maybe I should play around the 70-100 focal length with what I have first, then save up for another "L" (oh darn).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Apollo.11
Goldmember
Avatar
1,845 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
     
Sep 25, 2010 14:04 |  #18

JPepus wrote in post #10976429 (external link)
Sounds like maybe I should play around the 70-100 focal length with what I have first...

Play around with what you have first, interesting concept, but here on this forum, you always need to buy something new. ;)


Some Stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xn2b8r
Senior Member
373 posts
Joined Jan 2008
Location: San Diego County, Calif.
     
Sep 25, 2010 14:23 |  #19

FWIW, my 24-70 is very, very nice for portraiture. I like the fact that it forces me to get a little closer to the subject, which I think makes for more personal portraits. (Talking about the interaction between me and the subject, not merely the perspective.)

Then again, the 24-70 is one big honking lens to have in your face when you're getting photographed. For some people, that's uncomfortable. For subjects like that, the 85, with its smaller size and longer focal length, can be a lot less intimidating.


_______________
--Jeff
1D Mark III :: 5D Classic w/BG-E4 :: EF 24-70 f/2.8L :: EF 135 f/2L :: EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS :: EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II :: 580EX II (x4) :: ST-E2 :: Gitzo GT2330, GT1541T :: Markins M10 :: Feisol CF mono

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,113 posts
Likes: 1377
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Sep 25, 2010 14:35 as a reply to  @ post 10970058 |  #20

Although I like a 24-70L for general photography on a full frame camera and for portrait work on a 1.6x crop camera, I find it a bit too short for a portrait lens on a full-frame camera.

I like "at least" 85mm on a full frame camera and really prefer a longer focal length. Of course, you need the room to shoot when you are using longer focal lengths but, my shooting area is quite large and when shooting outside, there is no problem with lens to subject distance.

I really like at least 90-100mm on a 1.6x crop camera and 135-150mm on a full frame camera for head and shoulders portraits. This focal length not only advoids perspective problems but, allows me to throw the background out of focus even when using a smaller aperture.

One thing I insist upon when shooting portraits is a pleasing bokeh. Bokeh is a subjective term for the quality in which the out of focus areas are captured. It is not the objective depth of field. Bokeh is determined by the number and shape of the sperture blades. My 90mm f/2.8 Tamron has eight blades which are rounded forming a nice circle which in turn renders a smooth bokeh. My 70-200mm f/4L IS lens also produces a nice bokeh because of the number and shape of the blades. Conversely, the bokeh produced by the five bladed 50mm f/1.8 Mark-II lens is rather choppy because the aperture is not a totally rounded circle.


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nonick
Goldmember
1,588 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: NYC
     
Sep 25, 2010 14:35 |  #21

The best Portrait lens to me is 70-200 L IS II on a FF such as 5D or 5DII. You can't beat the balanced combination of picture quality, color, sharpness and versatility all in one package. Try it and you will just love it. When you have that, you will find yourself not missing the 85mm Prime anymore (unless you shoot very lowlight).


Gear|Searching for 7DII, Buying 5DIII 35L II, 24-70 2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,513 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Aug 2008
     
Sep 25, 2010 14:50 |  #22

Of the two you mention, I like the 85mm 1.8. However, with a FF camera body, the 135mm 2.0 is about as good as it gets for outdoor portraits.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,807 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2568
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Sep 25, 2010 15:03 |  #23

For FF portraiture at normal 8-10' distances, you need 50mm (full length standing), 85mm (waist up), 100mm (head and shoulders), and 150mm (if you do headshots). Your FL needs are already met, and the only issue is tissue thin DOF that photo enthusiast perceive as 'artsy' but which most non-photographer subjects will simply perceive as "it isn't sharp!")...100mm at 10' has 3" DOF at f/2.8, which is probably not sufficient for both eyes to be sharp in the shot at some angles


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SMP_Homer
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,617 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Likes: 428
Joined Mar 2008
Location: London, Ontario
     
Sep 25, 2010 15:08 |  #24

70-200 f4 IS is my favorite for portrait
also do like the 85/100/135 lenses as well, but my favorites always come out of the 70-200


EOS R / 7D2 / 1D IV (and the wife has a T4i)
Sig35A, Sig50A, Sig85A, Sig14-24A, Sig24-105A, Sig70-200S, Sig150-600C
100-400L, 100L, 300 2.8L, 1.4x II / 2x II
600EX-II X3, 430EX-III X3

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Replaces
Goldmember
Avatar
1,079 posts
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Illinois, USA
     
Sep 25, 2010 15:09 |  #25

i think 85L.
unless you need that versatility.


"If you don't walk today, you have to run tomorrow."
Nikon, then Canon, then Nikon again. But I still love POTN over NikonCafe. :p

Nikon D90, MB-D80, Nikon D600, MB-D14, Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G, Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G VR.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JPepus
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
728 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 27
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
     
Sep 25, 2010 15:50 |  #26

Well I have the 70-200 L IS, only problem is it's only f/4 not the 2.8. However, It will probably be plenty sufficient till (IF) I ever start shooting weddings. Then I would probably sell the f/4 for the 2.8.

I haven't really used the 70-200 for portraits (maybe a few shots at most). I agree about the 24-70 on a FF body seeming a little to short though. I usually end up just leaving it on 70mm. I'm gonna go shoot a few of my fiance in an hour or so withOUT using the 24-70 to give me a better idea of what focal length I like most and save up for an L series prime. I'll just switch lenses alot for the same shots to compare the color, bokeh, focus etc.

Man am I glad I posted up! You guys have given me alot of confidence in lenses I didn't even think would be good for portraits! To be honest I feel kinda stupid and lazy for not just comparing them all in the first place!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nikmar08
Goldmember
Avatar
1,852 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 17
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Bangalore, India
     
Sep 26, 2010 01:54 |  #27

JPepus wrote in post #10976972 (external link)
...
Man am I glad I posted up! You guys have given me alot of confidence in lenses I didn't even think would be good for portraits! To be honest I feel kinda stupid and lazy for not just comparing them all in the first place!

Exactly my experience earlier today. Most folks out here just rock and are very helpful...

But then there also are some who find it annoying to answer a topic that has been already beaten to death earlier on the forum!! Like I am torn between a 70-200 4L IS and 70-200 2.8L (non-IS) and do not have good enough keyword-based search skills. Should I feel intimidated by that kind and make a wrong decision & waste my hard earned money buying lenses which will not be useful enough later? No... so I just fire away. The helpful lot will most likely respond with a link to thread(s) which already answer your question(s) instead of saying "Go Search". My 2 cents...


____O
__( \ \_
((_)/ ((_)
Nikhil | Gear List & Market Feedback | Flickr (external link)
Support POTN by donating here: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,807 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2568
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Sep 26, 2010 02:18 |  #28

70-200 f/2.8 vs. f/4...what's different? IQ, and DOF at wide open aperture, maybe the bokeh quality too. I can't address the bokeh question, not having seen side by side comparisons. The IQ is answered by going to photozone.de and looking at test report of vignetting, distortion, and MTF scores. The DOF can be addressed by looking at DOF calculators and comparing f/2.8 and f/4 values at the same shooting distance. The final issue is one of handling...the weight and size of one vs. the other. Not much else to consider objectively. Anything else is simply subjective opinion on anyone's part, which imposes their values upon you, so it could be of not much merit in your own decision.

Perhaps I forgot a key characteristic difference, but someone else will need to identify one not mentioned.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nikmar08
Goldmember
Avatar
1,852 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 17
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Bangalore, India
     
Sep 26, 2010 02:39 |  #29

Wilt wrote in post #10979221 (external link)
70-200 f/2.8 vs. f/4...what's different? IQ, and DOF at wide open aperture, maybe the bokeh quality too. I can't address the bokeh question, not having seen side by side comparisons. The IQ is answered by going to photozone.de and looking at test report of vignetting, distortion, and MTF scores. The DOF can be addressed by looking at DOF calculators and comparing f/2.8 and f/4 values at the same shooting distance. The final issue is one of handling...the weight and size of one vs. the other. Not much else to consider objectively. Anything else is simply subjective opinion on anyone's part, which imposes their values upon you, so it could be of not much merit in your own decision.

Perhaps I forgot a key characteristic difference, but someone else will need to identify one not mentioned.

Wow Wilt, I just happened to mention to JPepus how helpful some folks out here are and here you are... kind of come to my rescue again!!

Based on your suggestions earlier in the day, I did look at photozone.de and am not too worried about the IQ. Bokeh is slightly better with 2.8 but for most people (me included before I knew about shallow DOF), both eyes in focus is actually a better pic than just one eye and half-the-face. So I am not too worried about that either. I am sticking to my catch-phrase "reasonably good looking" pics.

What's bothering me is that are there really some such stiff moments in a non-pro's photographic life that can be captured with a F/2.8 but not with a F/4? While I don't ever do a Miss Universe/Opera/Rocksho​w pics I would certainly not like to miss my kids cutting-caking pics on their b'days!! While I don't do cars on race-tracks but certainly wouldn't like to miss focus on a bird in flight!! And so on...

I for one, have shaky hands partly & certainly on the strongest due to my very healthy smoking and drinking lifestyle - pun intended!! Wouldn't the 4L IS be a better option than the 2.8L Non-IS? Plus it has a better physical handling and both almost at the same price, that is!!

That's my predicament!!

JUST REALISED MY POST HAS THE POTENTIAL OF TAKING THIS THREAD OFF-TOPIC IF MORE THAN ONE OR TWO REPLIES ARE POSTED TO MY QUESTION. I WILL MOVE THIS OUT IF PEOPLE ON THIS THREAD WISH ME TO. PLEASE LET ME KNOW. MY APOLOGIES!!


____O
__( \ \_
((_)/ ((_)
Nikhil | Gear List & Market Feedback | Flickr (external link)
Support POTN by donating here: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Sep 26, 2010 02:58 as a reply to  @ post 10970058 |  #30

i have both and to be honest the 24-70 gets the most use.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,432 views & 0 likes for this thread
24-70L or 85 f/1.8 for Portraits?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is LaurensW
665 guests, 307 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.