vietnameseamateur wrote in post #18181608
What is best prime for portrait with price <$1000? Sigma 50mm art f/1.4 or 135 F/2?
The 85mm f/1.2 L II USM is very expensive and slow. It is $1000 more expensive than Sigma 50mm art f/1.4 and 135 F/2. With $1100-1200 I even can buy a used Canon EOS 6D
Best is relative here, so you're going to get a lot of "bests" but maybe not for the reasons or uses that you would consider best for what you do. A portrait lens is not ideal based on it being a long fast prime to generate that "look." For example, shooting in a studio with controlled lighting and limited space, a 135L is not an ideal lens at all for portrait. You really need to figure out what you feel is a good working distance for you, in your space, where you shoot, how you shoot, with your subject(s) and if it's full body or not and what your goal is for the overall composition. A wider angle lens is going to be more versatile in general for portrait and many other things, while a longer lens is going to limit a lot more while achieving a very specific look (when used in conditions that promote that look).
So really you should describe:
* Where you plan to shoot mostly.
* Full Frame or APS-C.
* Subject composition goal (full body, busts, head shots, etc).
* Indoor, outdoor.
* Studio or not.
* Goal for the look (shallow depth of field outdoor with tons of distance behind the subject, versus full depth of field or less limited depth of field and less space).
* Goal of environmental or subject isolation, etc.
* How much working distance do you have/want for your distance to subject and full body or not goals.
The more you can narrow down what you actually do and will do will help you figure out a best lens for you.
Otherwise, you might as well just throw in other popular lenses... like the various 24-70's, 70-200's, other 50mm's, other 35mm's, some 100mm flavors, lots of 85mm flavors, etc. Really every lens out there, you'll find someone who does incredible portrait work with nearly anything.