Best lens for portraits

[07ROUSHSTG3]

another question for you camera guys. like i have said in the past, my wife is starting to get into the photography thing. has pretty much spent most the time messing around with nature shots and taking pics of our daughter. she recently started taking family photos for relatives and everyone seems to like them?!? she doesn;t charge any of them and it is just a hobby right now. a freind of ours that is having a small wedding asked if she would want to take some pics at the rehearsal and reception. they have a photographer for the wedding part, but figured if they could get a few of the rehearsal and the reception that would be cool. i guess my question is, what is the best lens for shooting portraits? she has a 50 MM ??? lens, the standard lens it came with, and the zoom lens that also came with the camera?? just wondering if there are any better ones or anything that she should add to the current lenses. i see people with filters and those goofy looking shield like things?!?! also, any el cheapo lenses out there that will suffice for a couple years until she really gets into it.

i would like to surprise her with a lens for christmas and do not want to spend a lot?!?!? still unsure of where this photo thing is going.

thanks in advance for any help!

[twirkin50]

If you don't mind a prime lens, these are my two favorites:

Canon 50mm/f1.4
Canon 85mm/f.1.8

[07ROUSHSTG3]

also i should add that if anyone has any photo equipment that they are trying to sell, let me know.

[07ROUSHSTG3]

If you don't mind a prime lens, these are my two favorites:

Canon 50mm/f1.4
Canon 85mm/f.1.8

what does the f value stand for and what does a lower or higher one mean?

[twirkin50]

The aperture (f) stop is an important element in most optical designs. Its most obvious feature is that it limits the amount of light that can reach the image/film plane.
The size of the stop is one factor that affects depth of field. Smaller stops (larger f numbers) produce a longer depth of field, allowing objects at a wide range of distances to all be in focus at the same time.

So, in portraits if you want to allow more light, sharpness, and great depth of field the lower the f stop the better it will be. The 50mm/f1.4 will be super sharp on the exact spot you are focusing on and everything else will be blurred.

Most DSLR's in manual mode can adjust where you want the f-stop. The lower the number the better the depth of field and the higher the number the more of the total picture will be in focus.

[twirkin50]

First pic was with a nifty fifty (50mm/f1.8) with the f-stop set at around 8 on my XSi.
Second pic was the same lens with the f-stop at f1.8 on my canon XSi.

[Exitspeed]

50 1.4. Don't go the 1.8 route. You'll regret it.

I have a 1.4 and the lens is amazing for portraits. A friend og mine who works at BVK who is a photography guru will tell you the same thing.

[jamest]

Here are a few examples of adjusting your fstop will do. I would experiment with fstops if she is not familiar with them.

Example of shooting at a lower fstop.
http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/londonmet/library/z27654_8.jpg

Example of shooting at a higher fstop.
http://www.focusontheclouds.com/images/178.jpg

[07ROUSHSTG3]

so when looking at a lens that has an f stop of 1.4, does that mean that that is the lowest fstop possible out of that lens??

thanks guys. i have to check and see what the 50 lens that she has at home is. might be what you guys are recommending?!?!?

[Exitspeed]

so when looking at a lens that has an f stop of 1.4, does that mean that that is the lowest fstop possible out of that lens??

thanks guys. i have to check and see what the 50 lens that she has at home is. might be what you guys are recommending?!?!?

Yes that is correct.

[07ROUSHSTG3]

she has a 50 1.8 currently.

[twirkin50]

Which is still a very good lens. I have taken a ton of photos with my 50mm/f1.8, but for extra clarity and sharpness the f1.4 is WAY better.

A lot of the portrait photos that Nick used to post up were from his 50mm/f1.4. Pricey, but worth it.

[Exitspeed]

The difference between the 1.4 and 1.8 is a LOT.

http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

Some people will call the 1.8 the nifty 50. If you know better the 1.8 is the Nifty-Thrify, and the 1.4 is the Nifty-Fifty.

[domokun]

24-70 is known to be the best Canon Portrait lens. but then you are getting in the L series ( more money )

the 50 1.8 gets REALLY soft when wide open ( 1.8-2.2 )

50 1.4 is much better when wide open, little soft around the edges though when wide open

[twirkin50]

The difference between the 1.4 and 1.8 is a LOT.

http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

Some people will call the 1.8 the nifty 50. If you know better the 1.8 is the Nifty-Thrify, and the 1.4 is the Nifty-Fifty.


:thumbsup

Nice link!

[07ROUSHSTG3]

so do you think it would be worth spending the money to get a 1.4???? or would it make more sense to buy something different seeing that she already has the 50.

[domokun]

it all depends on how much you want to spend too.

24-70 $1000
16-35 $1200
85 f/1.8 350
17-55 f/2.8 ( awesome lens for a crap camera ) $650 I think

[Exitspeed]

so do you think it would be worth spending the money to get a 1.4???? or would it make more sense to buy something different seeing that she already has the 50.

She can always sell the 1.8 to recoup some of the cost. Nice thing about glass is that it holds it's value well. Bodies just aren't worth shit. Especially with how much more frequently the next best body is coming out.

[07ROUSHSTG3]

http://www.adorama.com/SG247028NEOS.html?searchinfo=24+70

would this be a decent lens for a starter??

[twirkin50]

I just bought this lens and LOVE it!! On photography on the net's site, this lens was compared in quality to an "L" lens. Some sold their L lens to purchase this one and can't even tell a difference in clarity and sharpness. Nice lens for walking around and shooting everything from portraits, close ups, to landscapes.

http://www.adorama.com/SG1770MAXK.html

[DirtyMax]

The 24-70 is a nice lens. I also have this Tamron. 28-75 and 2.8 all the way across. Can be had for about half of the Canon 24-70L and I've gotten some very nice shots with it. It's not "L" glass but it's certainly not junk either.

http://www.adorama.com/TM2875EOS.html?searchinfo=28-75+canon

The 85 1.8 is very nice but I'll buy the 50 1.4 next. 85 1.2 is too baller for me...

Some test crap from when I bought it. No post. Just testing depth of field and colors....

at f2.8
http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t227/jdallard/Tamron%20Test%20050809/-9202.jpg

at f7.1
http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t227/jdallard/Tamron%20Test%20050809/-9203.jpg

My buddy's Saleen. Again, very little post done to these. This was like the day after I got it and didnt even have filters yet. The lens still produced good color IMO...

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t227/jdallard/2004%20S281/DPP_736.jpg

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t227/jdallard/2004%20S281/DPP_734.jpg

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t227/jdallard/2004%20S281/DPP_729.jpg

[Goat Roper]

50 f/1.4, the best $300-ish dollars you can spend on a lens for portraits. Creamy bokeh, stays relatively sharp all the way down.

All with the 50

http://www.webtrendsguy.com/images/dcfall/dcfall13.jpg

http://www.webtrendsguy.com/images/ryan10.jpg

http://www.webtrendsguy.com/images/ae2.jpg

[domokun]

mmmmmmm Creamy bokeh.........

nothing else compares to a 85 f/1.2 boken though. those are delicious!

[Goat Roper]

mmmmmmm Creamy bokeh.........

nothing else compares to a 85 f/1.2 boken though. those are delicious!


So true but for the $1500in savings that 50 1.4 is the best bang for the buck

[DirtyMax]

So true but for the $1500in savings that 50 1.4 is the best bang for the buck

This was what I meant about not being baller enough for 85 1.2. I really love my 1.8 though!