I can't decide on zoom or prime

So I've stumbled upon a couple extra hundred bucks. About six hundred dollars to be exact.

I can't decide whether I want to spend it on the 85mm f/1.8 or the 70-200 f/4L. I've read reviews on both lenses, and i can't really go wrong either way. One is slightly more expensive than the other, but that doesn't really matter too much as they're built for slightly different purposes.

I guess my question is - how would the 70-200 do as a portrait lens. I know that the f/2.8 would be a better lens for portraits and even indoor portraits for that matter, but I can't justify spending that much money on a lens right now. I do know that I have the sigma alternative.

I am also looking at getting rid of my 70-300 APO so that i can spend it towards the 70-200 if that's the decision i choose to make. So if i get rid of the 70-300 then that would leave me without a longrange zoom. The most focal length i'd have would be from my 28-105 USM.

I am a little torn. Please help me out. thanks in advance for the advice.

sell the 70-300 and buy both.
I own the 85 and LOVE it! My own version of the 70-200 is on it's way. They're really two different lens, although both can do potraits very well.

Both the 70-200 and the 85 are a bit long on the 30D for portraits. I use my 70-200 and the 85 on my 5D for portraits and it works well.

But I'd vote for the 85, if I were you.

JaertX wrote in post #2138791
Both the 70-200 and the 85 are a bit long on the 30D for portraits. I use my 70-200 and the 85 on my 5D for portraits and it works well.

But I'd vote for the 85, if I were you.

Well, i'd like to get into doing some more candid shots and a little bit of sports photography. The 85 would be nice, but I'm afraid that it won't be long enough for everything that i want to do. If i get it, i'd probably be limited to only portrait photography. I know a few people on the board use the 85 for basketball games, and such, but that would mean they're on the floor level shooting up close, does it not?

I like the versatility on the 70-200 and the reviews are pretty good, but speed and bokeh are my only quarrels. f/4 vs. f/1.8

Thanks for the opinions though, i really appreciate them. Keep em coming.

EDIT: I'll end up getting both eventually, but like i said, i've got some money to spare right now so i'm trying to decide between the two.

Mr. Clean wrote in post #2138781
sell the 70-300 and buy both.

I agree 100% with Mr.Clean.. get both

Speed between 1.8 and 4 is pretty big. Really it boils down to what you want to shoot. Technically you've got the 7X-XXX zoom covered already. Buy the 85. However bear in mind it will make the rest of your lenses look like crap and you will go downhill with G.A.S.

I'd say the 24-70L would be a better choice for portrait work

JulianL wrote in post #2138979
I'd say the 24-70L would be a better choice for portrait work

Yep! I have one, but I didn't get it for anything near the $600 the OP has to spend.

I love my 70-200L for portraits.

Woogie wrote in post #2138767
I guess my question is - how would the 70-200 do as a portrait lens.

I don't see anything from 70mm to 200mm as a good portrait lens for a 1.6 crop factor format. Let's see...$600, right? If you could beg, borrow or steal a about $100 you could get the 28mm f/1.8 (for full body and 3/4 body shots) and the 50mm f/1.4 (for tighter shots, like head and shoulders) and get $80 back on rebates. Net result is just a bit over $600 and two fine lenses for portraits.

Mr. Clean wrote in post #2138781
sell the 70-300 and buy both.
I own the 85 and LOVE it! My own version of the 70-200 is on it's way. They're really two different lens, although both can do potraits very well.

I agree with Mr. Clean. I've been up to my neck in senior portraits for the past three weeks, and these are the two lenses I use for the majority of my portrait work.

JaertX wrote in post #2138791
Both the 70-200 and the 85 are a bit long on the 30D for portraits.

you're right but they are my two favorite portrait lenses on the 20d .

ed rader

UPDATE:

I pulled the trigger on the 70-200. I hope i made the right decision.

Woogie wrote in post #2139905
UPDATE:

I pulled the trigger on the 70-200. I hope i made the right decision.

there is no wrong decision but i would have definitely gotten the zoom first (in fact I DID).

you have a bit more DOF control with the 85 1.5 but the zoom is sharper, more versatile and produces better portraits, imo.

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #2139944
there is no wrong decision but i would have definitely gotten the zoom first (in fact I DID).

you have a bit more DOF control with the 85 1.5 but the zoom is sharper, more versatile and produces better portraits, imo.

ed rader

That was sort of the deciding factor. the 85 f/1.8 is a pretty sweet lens and i intend on picking it up in the future. My reason for picking up the zoom tonight is for the sake of versatility in focal lengths and in type of photography that i can do.