70-200 4L IS as Portrait lens?

I know this is not the best choice but. Do you think this lens is good for portrait purpose on a 1.6X crop body?

For those who say yes, could you post some sample images? Thanks.

I use my 70-200 F4 on my 5D for portraits, its a little different w/ the DOF and all but its a great lens. And I here the bokeh of the IS version is better than my version and that makes it even better. I would think it would get a bit long from 130 to 200 or so because of the crop, but I love the 200mm focal length for portraits on my 5D.

Dave

I rented this lens a couple of weeks ago, mostly for landscape on a trip. The evening I picked it up I put it on my T1i and took a shot of my daughter across the room as she played a video game. It was pretty low light, just a couple of lamps and dark outside. I was just playing with the lens for the first time. I can't imagine that it wouldn't make a good portrait lens, this picture would be worst case scenario and straight out of the camera, no pp at all. Definitely take my advice with a grain of salt but here's the pic just for reference.

F/4 97mm ISO 1600 1/50 sec

IMAGE LINK: http://ragon.smugmug.c​om …Z/1/#773827212_​ygHQ4-A-LB

Muskydave22 wrote in post #9471575
I use my 70-200 F4 on my 5D for portraits, its a little different w/ the DOF and all but its a great lens. And I here the bokeh of the IS version is better than my version and that makes it even better. I would think it would get a bit long from 130 to 200 or so because of the crop, but I love the 200mm focal length for portraits on my 5D.

Dave

Thank you!. I used to have 5D and 70-200 2.8 IS for portrait. I love that combo for the purpose. For a crop camera, I am worrying the focal length.I found that I mostly used 50-160 mm when shooting portrait. So, I just wondering if the 70-200/4 IS on a 7D will work. I consider this lens over the 2.8 version because it's much lighter, sharper and reproducing more pleasing color.

I think I will go the primes instead.

MRagon wrote in post #9472017
I rented this lens a couple of weeks ago, mostly for landscape on a trip. The evening I picked it up I put it on my T1i and took a shot of my daughter across the room as she played a video game. It was pretty low light, just a couple of lamps and dark outside. I was just playing with the lens for the first time. I can't imagine that it wouldn't make a good portrait lens, this picture would be worst case scenario and straight out of the camera, no pp at all. Definitely take my advice with a grain of salt but here's the pic just for reference.

F/4 97mm ISO 1600 1/50 sec

IMAGE LINK: http://ragon.smugmug.c​om …Z/1/#773827212_​ygHQ4-A-LB

Thank you for the sample. I just think it might too long for portrait purpose.

nonick wrote in post #9471421
I know this is not the best choice but. Do you think this lens is good for portrait purpose on a 1.6X crop body?

For those who say yes, could you post some sample images? Thanks.

Works great as a portrait lens on a 1.6x. I used it primarily for events:

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Collin85 wrote in post #9472594
Works great as a portrait lens on a 1.6x. I used it primarily for events:

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

I often shoot these types of candids in limited lighting too (so a typical shutter speed could be say, 1/80th @ 200mm). In other words, the IS helps alot.

First of all, nice shots! Great samples. Sharp and good bokeh considered this is a f/4 lens. Ya.. I shoot natural light in most cases so I prefer something fast. Great to know that this lens, with the IS, can still manage some of the lowlights sitautions. I think I will still get this lens but for different primary purpose. I beleive I will go primes for my portrait needs.

Thank you for helping!

I prefer and recommend a telephoto for portraits. Although I still would say a 50mm and the 85mm are both just as good.

Just depends on if your portraits will also have to be full body. Might want to consider a 24-105L or a 24-70 if your conditions constantly change.

Creativity when shooting people is the first thing that will let you down, you can shoot people with what ever lens you like, dont let anyone tell you otherwise

Bahahha, Im only saying that because i have this lens and i love it

Telephoto + portraiture = AWESOME.

Taken with the 2.8 version.

I love it for animal portraits. It's my favourite lens.

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

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

70-200 is the ultimate portrait lens. Even on a crop. I have hashed this idea out for about 8 months now and am currently saving for the 2.8IS. Now the f/4IS is still a bit slow but the IS helps keep you steady. But ultimately you have to convince yourself that you wont need 2.8 and that you wont need IS. 4.0IS does not equal 2.8 non IS. My mistakes make me crazy when looking back. If i bought the f/?? i would always wonder if my image could have been better. SO buy the best and you wont wonder. Just my opinion. Im not a pro so take it with a grain of salt. I am already regretting my 17-40L with my crop and my demons are killing me

The 70-200 works very well for portraiture. Maybe not great shots, but decent examples of what can be done with the focal length on a crop body -

Unless you are shooting head and shoulders or tighter at 200mm, with the subject well away from any background, you might find the DOF at f4, on a crop, deeper than you wished. It is not, and was not, my goto portrait lens.

Been there, done that.

ceegee wrote in post #9473016
I love it for animal portraits. It's my favourite lens.

Beautiful shots