Portrait Lens help

Ok.. I am on a budget for sure but I take a lot of photo's of say people on motorcycles, cars, etc.. I am wanting less DOF so it looks more like a portrait. Mainly bikini models on motorcycles outdoors.

Now I have the 300D and I have the kit lens, 18-55 3.5-5.6 and the 75-300 4.5-6 and I was reading about the Canon 50/1.8 EF Lens 50MM f.

Would that be a better lens for me to use for less DOF in this situation or should I use one of the ones I already have?

Thanks in advance..

For the shalloer DOF you are looking for you need larger f-stops, the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is a lower priced lens that should give you great results.

The smaller the number, the shallower the DOF. 50mm f/1.8 will provide a very shallow DOF at 1.8. The smaller the number the greater the diameter the aperture is, the smaller the DOF.

Basically I want something like this, the subject in focus and back ground not.. So the bike and models will pop out at ya more..

This was with the 75-300 and I was zoomed all the way to 300 and was a mile away, so it felt..

Help, any advice appreciated

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

The 50mm at 1.8 will give you that, depending on how far the object in the background is and how close to the subject you are. It's a great lens, real cheap too.

Well you have figured out that small aperture isn't the only factor in creating a shallow depth of field. It is a few things actually...
Aperture. (smaller the less DOF)
Focal length. (the longer, the less DOF)
Distance between lens and subject. ( the closer, the less DOF)
Distance behind the subject and the next element of the picture. (the more distance, the better)

So You could use your 75-300 @ 300mm and get nice blur but you would be so far away that your options as far as angle and aspect are limited. I think you should get the 50 1.8 or Tamron 28-75 2.8. Both will give you good bokeh, and the Tamron a little more versatility.

Thanks guys I appreciate it.. I have a beautiful wife to model and some other people but everything in focus no DOF stinks..

I will get the lens and post some results..

the 50 f/1.8 is a great way to get started playing with DOF - but it takes practice - for instance to get BOTH eyes in focus!

Remember that narrow dof is not just a function of aperture - it is also a function of focal length. the longer the focal length the smaller the DOF and the easier it is to isolate the subjects. try this with your 70-300, 300mm at f/5.6 will still give a very small DOF and you will be surprised. the kit lens will struggle to give a similar effect, but increasing the distance between the subject and the background will also help.

I think that as you are most likely shooting outside you might find the 85mm f/1.8 would suit better, however it does cost more, and i believe that everyone should get a 50mm 1.8 as a first prime, simply because it is cheap and fun. It's a place to get started, but it won't be long before you want something longer.

Enjoy, and don't forget to post some!

This was taken of my little 6 month old 80lb puppy using the 75-300

Is this on track or do I need LESS DOF or ?

Comments appreciated.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

It's a good shot, but if based on your first post and the examply you posted, you're not getting the depth of field here you described previously. It can be much shallower and that will make the subject really stand out from the background.

Mark

I agree.. I ordered the 50 f/1.8 and am looking forward to trying it out.

I read and read about photography but I am a hands on person and if some one could show me and explain it to me I can pick it right up.. but all the reading confuses me..

Wish I had a helpful pro near by..

What focal length did you take the above picture at? If you zoomed all the way to 300mm and got closer, maybe just taking the torso-up, you would probably get nice bokeh.

50 1.8 will certainly give you what you want! Also remember certain backgrounds make for ugly bokeh...So keep in mind even if the BG is completely oof, it may still make your photo not look it's best. So a good place to shoot still does matter.

Awsome pic of the Pooch!

Focal lenth was 75, I agree it would have worked better at maybe 200