Lets talk portrait lense options

[Tulsa]

I did some searching on the forums, but didn't quite see what I was looking for. I am currently using my 50 1.8 for portraits, I am wanting to add a lens for portraits. Price, I would like to be under $600 in the used area. I have seen the 17-40 F4 L go for $400-500 on ebay used. What options other than L series do I have that one could recommend?

 

[Robin Usagani]

85mm sigma!

 

[bigtwinky]

Depends if you are shooting crop sensor or full frame.

I'm thinking you are on a crop sensor, for which 50 is a nice range. 85mm is a great range for portraits on a full frame, and actually, some like to have a longer focal range for portraits.

I've used a 70-200 for portraits, shooting around 135mm on a 7D. Longer focal ranges tend to squish the image a bit, making it a bit more flattering for portraits. Wide angles make things look bigger, which is not always the best for portraits. And by portraits, I'm assuming you are doing either head shots or full body shots, but filling the frame with your subject.

So the 17-40 wouldn't be a great portrait lens (although don't let that stop you from exploring wide angle portraits, be creative!).

With that said... when purchasing a new lens, you need to know what your current lens lineup isn't doing for you. Shooting a 50 1.8 at say 2.8 will give nice sharpness and dof for portraits. The only I can think of for a wider portrait lens are portraits i tighter places, usually during weddings and events.

A 24-70 L lens (I know, you said no L) is great for portraits on a crop body. Gives you the wider for small groups and longer for tight in closeups with nice dof. An alternative to that can be the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, should be in your budget. I've had mine for a few years and love it. Took me a few tries to get a sharp copy as quality control with 3rd party lenses isn't as strict as with the manufacturer lenses, but it can be an option.

For portraits:
50 1.4
85 1.8
135 2.0 L
24-70 2.8 L
Tamron 28-75 2.8
70-200 2.8 L

 

[Tulsa]

Thanks for the input, yes I am using Crop. I actually prefer a wider angle for full body portraits. I do not do many headshots, but when I do, they 50mm 1.8 is perfect. For full body I have been using my 10-20mm Sigma, while its great for landscapes, and does well at 18-20mm I want something with a bit more range around the 20mm to 50mm. I would love the 24-70L but I really dont want to spend that much. Seems used on ebay are going for around $800-900.

Thanks for the input!

 

[Big Mike]

Yes, you can pretty much shoot portraits with any lens...it's mostly a matter of preference and necessity.

Typically, portraits tend to look more flattering when the subject isn't distorted, so it's usually best to avoid wide angle lenses and the wide angle distortion they can cause.
So, one school of thought is that you want to use the longest lens that you can. Of course, that's not always practical, as you may have to be pretty far away from your subject, depending on how much of them you want to be in frame.

What part about using your 50mm for portraits do you wish you could change? (why not just continue to use that?)

 

[Tulsa]

What part about using your 50mm for portraits do you wish you could change? (why not just continue to use that?)

Well, it does well, I just would like something wider. Some of the locations I shoot requires me to be closer to the subject, and I cannot capture everything I want. Thats why I tend to use my 10-20mm in those spots, but I do get some distortion below 20mm, so I would like some more options above 20mm.

For example this first one is shot at 12mm, not really ideal for portraits... some distortion.

I feel comfortable with the look of this one, which was at 20mm. I dont see any distortion... EDIT, now that I look closer, maybe there is a fair amount? Her foot looks pretty big, right?

 

[bluetibby1]

Tulsa I believe those shots are...what's the word...beautiful!! Amazing work man. On the actual topic, I can not say because I font do portraits yet, but I torment my co workers with my fifty all the time.
Blue

 

[willis_927]

Great shots, but ya the 2nd one does have distortion. You are right Tulsa, her foot looks massive haha.

 

[Tulsa]

I guess I will leave the 10-20mm to landscape only, and pickup something with a higher range. I am considering the Tamaron 28-75 2.8

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Thanks for the input, yes I am using Crop.

What happened to your 5D?

 

[Tulsa]

Thanks for the input, yes I am using Crop.

What happened to your 5D?

I never had a 5d. I have a 50d. Looking into getting a 5d though.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Oooooooh. My mistake.

 

[Tbini87]

I was using a 50 1.8 for a while shooting portraits and liked it a lot. Finally picked up an 80-200 2.8 and have been loving it. I could see it being a little too long if you are working in tight spaces though so I could definitely see something like a 24-70 2.8 being just right for you.

 

[fokker]

What about the canon 28-105, good focal range, good sharp lens and you can pick them for $100-200 used.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

I had a Tokina 16-50 f/2.8. Little faster and wider and longer than the 17-40L, built like a tank, great color and contrast an could be had brand new with warranty under your budget. Downside is it is not for full frames cameras and not sealed. Also it is not internal zoom.