gratzi9274 wrote in post #5525976
Yeah, as I was reading more reviews and checking the offers on amazon.com (just for info on approximate prices), it did cross my mind that a 70-200 f/4L might be too fancy for me at the moment, especially that 80 % of my current portfolio includes portraits (mostly, close ups). Everyone suggested that I buy a 18-55 f/3,5-5.6 IS as standard lens. For portraits, I'm oscillating between the 85 1.8 and the 60 2.8 (which can be used for portraits, macro and landscapes with fantastic results). For the long zoom, I might drop the idea of buying the 70-200mm(which is pricey anyway) and get a 55-250 IS instead (I anticipate I'm not gonna use it on a daily basis like the other lenses).
Which one do you think is better: 85 1.8 or 60 2.8? I want to take landscape pics as well (just occasionally) and it seems that the 60 2.8 would cover that.
Thanks so much for your help.
Gratzi,
What is the focal lenght equivalent of your Olympus P&S? It should say so on your camera, likely around the lens somewhere.
Next question would be where you use it most, or at which spots do you use it most? The short end? Long? Middle? Close-up you say, how close?
BTW, i fyou decide to spend a little less on lenses, you could indeed consider the 450D/XSi, which comes a kit with the 18-55 IS, and this is the cheapest way to get the 18-55 IS, with a camera that is improved again over the 400D/XTi. The 55-250 IS is a lens that has good IQ as well, and it is a very good beginner's zoom, and less than half the price of the 70-200 F/4.
The picture quality of any dslr is going to beat your P&S by quite a lot, so you'll always come up tops 
.
Regarding the 85 vs the 60: the 85 is usable at F/1.8, gets really good at F/2.2 and excellent at F/2.5 or thereabouts. The 60 starts at F/2.8, and is excellent immediately. I reckon that for portraits the 85 is a little long, compared to FF or film it has an AoV similar to 135 mm. That is ok if you can go backwards a few steps, generally speaking. The 60 mm is a little slower, by 1 1/3 stop, but its focal length provides an AoV similar to a 100 mm on a FF body, which is the classic length for portraits and slightly compressed short tele landscapes. At F/2.8 in a frame filling portrait, you won't be able to get the tip of someone's nose up to and including the ears sharp; you'll have to stop down to at least F/4 if not F/5.6 to achieve that, so even F/2.8 provides you with an option to play with shallow DoF, although not as good as the 85 F/1.8 of course. The biggest advantages of the 60 over the 85 are that it is smaller, lighter, and focuses much closer (it is a macro lens after all). Those of the 85 over the 60 that, although they both have USM, the 85 focuses a little faster, and that it has a 1 1/3 stop advantage over the 60, and therefore can still continue a little longer when it gets darker, plus shallower DoF.
Regarding XTi vs XSi: both are very capable cameras, but the XSi is newer, so has newer technology, plus it has inherited some of the stuff its larger cousin, the 40D has, like a larger LCD, LiveView and spotmetering, and it has slightly better AF again, better than the XTi that is, even has AF in LiveView mode (be it slow), plus 2 MP extra (although that is only about a 7 % advantage).
HTH, kind regards, Wim
