Camera Advice: Only Portrait Photographers on bussines, Pro or Semi Pro.

Hey All!

First off: I'm not a pro, BUT...

My intention is to get myself in the business of Portraits and Landscape photography on the side. I was going to get a 7D but I believe is not the right choice for my needs.

According to my research, this is the best camera for Portraits (in my budged) I decided to wait one more week to safe more money an to go FF with the Mark ii. I've been seeing great reviews for this camera and I think is the right move to make.

The questions is: Everybody use that body with an L lens. Do you really need an L lens (24-70 or 24-105) to get the best out of a mark ii?

My current lenses at the moment are a 70-200 f4 non is and a 50mm 1.8 II

Your feedback will be appreciated.

For portraits you don't need a 24-70 or a 24-105. The 70-200 f/4 will be an excellent choice. A lot of people here use the 70-200 (f/4 or f2.8) exclusively for portraits. Even the 50mm f/1.8 will take amazing shots.

As for landscapes, none of your lenses are going to be wide enough. I'm not a landscape photog so I couldn't really recommend anything.

Not all landscape has to be wide shots and I also know a bunch of photogs that get paid using 40D/50D's. FYI.

Talley wrote in post #14651035
Not all landscape has to be wide shots and I also know a bunch of photogs that get paid using 40D/50D's. FYI.

Now you throw the 50D on my face, lol. This thing about cameras gets more and more difficult.

Check out forum member blackrainbows work with the 50d and 135L and 135 f/2.8 soft focus lens over in the lens section. That is proof enough that you don't have to chase the full frame illusion that you have to have full frame to do portraits.

Skill is more important than gear. lenses more important than the body, and good light is more imporant than the lenses or body.

Thorrulz wrote in post #14651133
Check out forum member blackrainbows work with the 50d and 135L and 135 f/2.8 soft focus lens over in the lens section. That is proof enough that you don't have to chase the full frame illusion that you have to have full frame to do portraits.

Will do... How you like your 7D?

erikfig wrote in post #14651167
Will do... How you like your 7D?

I love it. My Sigma 50 and Canon 135 keep fighting over it though.

You don't necessarily need L lenses. The 85mm 1.8 is a great lens on the 5D2, especially for portraits.

I'm using 5D2 cameras for exclusive portrait work. I use a 70-200 f/2.8 L IS for 70% of my work and a 50mm f/1.8 Mk 1 for perhaps another 20% when quarters are tight. I have a 17mm lens that I use for ultra wide-angle effects.

The 5D2 cameras enable me to enlarge a loosely posed full-length group to 30x40-inches (my most lucrative print size) or larger and still count eyelashes. That's very nearly as good as my old Mamiya RZ67 cameras.

Gregg.Siam wrote in post #14651022
As for landscapes, none of your lenses are going to be wide enough. I'm not a landscape photog so I couldn't really recommend anything.

As already said, not all landscapists want extreme wide angle lenses. I consider that is my strongest suite and do have a 16-35L, but it never gets used, I'm happier in long lens territory.

erikfig wrote in post #14650997
The questions is: Everybody use that body with an L lens. Do you really need an L lens (24-70 or 24-105) to get the best out of a mark ii?

For business use?
The simple answer is yes, but it needs to be put in context.

To get the most out of the 5D2 great sensor, you need to put really high quality glass in front of it.
That doesn't have to be an L, but most of the best Canon stuff has an L ring on it.
However, Simga and others make some very good lenes that do help bring out the 5D2 best.

If your working for a customer you need something consistent and reliable, and again that generally means an L lens. It also needs to be solid and able to take a few knocks, which again generally means L.

And, the 5D2 is you havn't heard is a little weak in the focusing department.
However, it does work very well when used with fast glass, that is F2.8 or faster.
Again, when you have to get the shot, the difference between F4 and F2.8 can mean the difference between delivering or failing and having an upset customer.

Should I invest in a better camera (mine is an XSI) or get the 70-200 2.8 IS II? I know it will be my own decision at the end, but would like see what people with more experience would do if they were in my shoes.

If your business is portraits, you'll want to invest more in lighting before lenses and finally bodies.

The 770-200 f4 is a respectable piece of glass. I would think very hard before spending all the extra cash for the extra stop (and the extra weight) and the IS. Depends on what you shoot. If you need quality wider glass (EFS 17-55, EFS 10-22) then I'd spent there first.