Do I need the 85mm 1.8?

I bought the 100f2, mainly for indoor low light sports.

But I used it indoor during our Christmas party at my house and although the range is not that flexible its definitely doable for head and shoulder pictures.

take focal lenght out of it, what's your opinion? Does adding a prime make sense even if you have a zoom with 2.8?

as a former owner of the tamron, i would add a flash, you can focus really close with that lens which will help you get shallower DOF, and its very sharp.

before i went full frame i had a 10-22, 28-75, 50/1.4 and an 85/1.8

i never used the 85 unless i was outdoors. tnats me. now that i went FF i still dont use teh 85 that much, even indoors unless i want a headshot.

lots of people will say 85 is doable indoors. it is, but remember for studio work you need to have your background away from your subject too in order to blur it effectively or control its lighting. not many people have that much total room.

i highly recommend a 50/1.4 or wider, the 85 is too close to the 28-75. get a 100 macro or a 70-200 instead.

i'm probably going to sell my 85 in a few months even thou i love it and get a 70-200 or 300. its just more versatile, especially outdoors.

I agree that for indoor general use I would not buy a 85mm prime. Honestly the most useful prime for indoors on a crop body is the 30/35mm.

Although I do like taking shots with my 15-85 at the 85 end. But then I do that 10% of the time and have the flexibility of the zoom for the rest.
I would not want to keep switching lenses to 85 prime.

brian4646 wrote in post #15412876
take focal lenght out of it, what's your opinion? Does adding a prime make sense even if you have a zoom with 2.8?

For indoor low light a prime makes a lot of sense since it is 1 1/3 stop faster and you will get better bokeh and subject isolation.

There are times when primes are the best choice for portraits, and times when a zoom is preferable.

When your subject is very mobile (kids and pets), a zoom is almost mandatory. When you can't be mobile (due to studio lighting or any other sort of restriction), a zoom might be a better choice.

My favorite zooms for portraits on a crop camera: 24-70/2.8 or 28-135 IS (I use the latter outdoors, such as when hiking or biking and not wanting to haul the size and weight of 24-70 and 70-200/2.8... it replaces both).

Full frame I usually shoot more stantionary subjects, so tend to use zoom a lot less. If/when I do, it's more likely 70-200/2.8. I find the 24-70 to be a bit short on a FF camera.

I prefer to use primes for portraiture, whenever I can... Especially for candid shots, where larger apertures (the largest possible with a zoom is f2.8) can be useful to blur down a busy background, and I may be shooting by available light.

85mm at f2 on 30D at ISO 1600, 1/400, handheld (studio lighting)...

I only have the 28-75 Tamron. I have owned other lenses 70-200 f/4, 50 1.8mm, and Canon 17-85mm. I'm interested in the 85mm to get that creamy bokeh that I see on many portraits. I get it with the Tamron but not like the 85mm.

Do you have full frame? Many of the "creamy" bokeh shots you see are with full frame cameras.

Also, what kind of background are you really going to blur in a studio?

pulsar123 wrote in post #15412693
For your studio work, you have to find out what FL is good. For my basement studio I determined that my perfect FL is 65mm (I stand as far as possible, to maximize the usage of the paper background, and still can cover the whole width of the background in portrait mode). I used 55-250 for a while, wasn't happy with the quality, just upgraded to 70-200 f4L, it should be much better match.

Regarding 85mm too tight indoors - I don't think so. I even manage to get some nice shots with 135L on crop indoors; 85mm would be easier. It is not perfect for indoors, but given that you'll be using it outdoors as well, 85 f1.8 sounds like a nice compromise. I heard this lens has fast and accurate AF, great IQ.

It sounds like you want it, so get it. If you don't like it, you can always sell it. If you look for one used, chances are if you sold it you would could break even.

And your last statement - yes, it does for all three.

Sorry, but it wasn't me - I don't want it I am pretty well set up between my 70-200 f4L and 135L, no room for 85 f1.8. But if I didn't have the 135L I might have considered the 85mm f1.8.

brian4646 wrote in post #15412331
The focal lenght will not be an issue indoors because it will be for my basement studio. I have room. Would you still look into the 50mm or the 85mm?

do you have studio lighting already?

get a prime of some sort, everyone needs a prime lens...use your 28-75mm to figure out what focal lengths work for you, 30/35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm...

pulsar123 wrote in post #15413743
Sorry, but it wasn't me - I don't want it I am pretty well set up between my 70-200 f4L and 135L, no room for 85 f1.8. But if I didn't have the 135L I might have considered the 85mm f1.8.

Oops, sorry!

In my first line I think I wanted to address brian4646 and my brain froze!

The second line was to address you last line about the characteristics of the 85mm f/1.8.

Though the 85mm complements the 135L pretty well IMO.