Prime vs zoom for portraits

ceemac · Jul 26, 2018

Do you get better results with a prime lens for portraits? I don't see a studio in my future so this will be mostly outdoors. I'm looking at a canon EF 85 f1.8 USM.

tirediron · Jul 26, 2018

I think that really depends on the lens; a top-end zoom will likely give better results than a poor quality prime. In general for one and two person portrait work, the 85mm 1.4 and 105mm 2.8 are my go-to glass with the 85 doing probably 90% of the work. Larger groups I tend to shoot with the 24-70 or 70-200, depending on size of the group and available space.

Designer · Jul 26, 2018

ceemac said:
Do you get better results with a prime lens for portraits? I don't see a studio in my future so this will be mostly outdoors. I'm looking at a canon EF 85 f1.8 USM.

I think generally that is the case. To properly judge the image quality of a lens, there are several qualities to evaluate, and where one lens excels in some factors, it may be eclipsed by another lens in other areas.

When looking at the resultant image quality of a lens (like online examples, for instance) learn to look critically at details that you might not have considered before, and compare those same attributes with a comparable lens in order to know which one(s) to buy.

In general; less glass (as in most primes) equals better light transmission, and therefore a better image. Zooms are something of a compromise optically in order to keep most of the frame well focused and undistorted as you zoom through the focal range.

I think you will be happy with the prime. Good luck!

ceemac · Jul 26, 2018

tirediron said:
I think that really depends on the lens; a top-end zoom will likely give better results than a poor quality prime. In general for one and two person portrait work, the 85mm 1.4 and 105mm 2.8 are my go-to glass with the 85 doing probably 90% of the work. Larger groups I tend to shoot with the 24-70 or 70-200, depending on size of the group and available space.

Thanks

Derrel · Jul 26, 2018

I used to own Canon's 70 to 200 mm f/2.8 L IS-USM, the model with image stabilizer feature, and it was a very good lens. I also owned the EF 85 1.8, but because the zoom was so handy and so good I seldom used any of the Canon primes I owned. Personally I believe that the focal length flexibility and the multiple angles of view that a zoom lens offers far outweigh any minor gain and technical image quality for portraiture.

If there is a fantastic canon prime though it's their 135 mm F2 model. Now that is an amazing lens!

mrca · Jul 26, 2018

For fast paced shooting where there is no time or ability to alter distance to the subject, I use zooms. But if I have a choice I use primes. My selection of a prime for portrait head or head shoulders/torso shot depends on a number of factors. If I want the background to be a buttery unrecognizable wash, I use a nikon 135 2.0 dc. Incredible, adjustable bokeh. The totally blurred bg makes the subject pop. However, when I want some context in the bg, I use a 100 mm Zeiss makro planar. The subject pops with almost 3d appearance from the recognizable bg. I also choose a Zeiss if I need super sharpness or maximum micro contrast, especially in low contrast or b&w shots. If I am shooting 2 or 3 subjects an 85 1.4 zeiss has gorgeous bokeh or can be stopped down for the zeiss pop from an in focus bg. For faster paced events, the nikon 85 1.4 has auto focus. For environmental shots including a good deal of bg, the Zeiss 35 provides the subject pop from a sharp, contextual bg. Remember with a 35, there is lots of dof so you can bracket focus using the dof scale on the lens and not need to focus. The Zeiss lenses are for more structured, slow paced portraiture since they are mf. I don't have time today, but tomorrow if it isn't raining, will try to take identical shots using both 85 mm primes and a pro grade nikon 70-200 zoom set at 85. The zeiss is a 6 element lens, the zoom nikon a 21. As is mentioned above, pushing light through more glass costs quality. I shoot high end professional work so I need to be able to select the specific maximum performance characteristic of each lens. For amateur work, a zoom will work fine. I'll bet more wedding and event shots have been taken with a 24-70 zoom than any other lens with the 70-200 next. I agree with tirediron, the 85 is the more versatile prime, but if I have the room, I will back up and use a 100 because I like the compression. However, that is only a step or 2 back and with 46 mp, I can crop to that with mp to spare so if no time or don't want to change lenses due to time or dust/wind, will do that and get the same compression. Same with the 135, selecting the DX crop in the 850 I am shooting and storing at 21 mp at an equivalent of 200mm or can just shoot FF and crop later. Hang a 3 lb body/battery pack and a 3lb 70-200 over your shoulder for 8 hours and you will see why. When it comes to lenses, the old adage "horses for courses" applies and more goes into selecting a lens for a shot than just it's "reach."

Braineack · Jul 26, 2018

ceemac said:
Do you get better results with a prime lens for portraits? I don't see a studio in my future so this will be mostly outdoors. I'm looking at a canon EF 85 f1.8 USM.

ac12 · Jul 26, 2018

There is no ONE solution. It all DEPENDS.
#1 You need to define what you mean by portraits. In my book it can range from a multi-generation 30 person group shot, to 5 person immediate family, to couple full length, to couple waist up, to individual head and shoulders to "tight" face. This huge range results in different requirements.
#2 With primes you need space to zoom with your feet and have space behind the subject. Do you have the space or not?
#3 How many lenses can you realistically deal with. In a studio, just put them all on a cart, easy. Not so simple on-site.

Not an easy question.
Personally, I would go with one or two GOOD zooms, just for simplicity and flexibility.
Warning, a 70-200 f/2.8 is a HEAVY lens. The weight could end up cramping your style on a long shoot. But if you are young, your muscles can handle the weight better than my old senior citizen muscles.

ceemac · Jul 26, 2018

Thanks, Braineack. Good video. I'll have to watch a few times.

Derrel · Jul 26, 2018

You asked, "Do you get better results" from a prime or zoom.

Depends on what is meant by better? if the framing is not right, or the angle of view behind the subject(s) is not right, or the shooting area is not right for a particular focal length of lens...then you will easily get "better results" by having the best focal length for the photo type you want to make.

Honestly...an 85mm lens is too short a lens for many types of photos...it shows a LOT of recognizability to the background, especially on full-length shots.

Let's look at the basics: with a Canon APS-C sensor body and 85mm lens, yo shoot a full-length standing portrait, you need to be about 35 feet away to get an 8.5 foot tall picture area, about right to show a 6-foot tall person, with some room for the feet to be included, and some space above the head. That means there's plenty of depth of field at f/5.6, because the camera-to-subject distance is...35 feet. With a full-frame camera body and the same, exact 85mm lens...you're at 20 feet to get the same picture height, but the background defocus effect is somewhat stronger on the FF camera shots than with the APS-C sensor camera and a 35-foot camera-to-subject distance.

Anyway...the zoom lens gives many,many more options in terms of the background angle of view, and the subject size in the final frame, and on the camera-to-subject distances that you can actually use. You have choices with the zoom; with the prime, you are limited to what the lens length "does".

This makes the zoom lens the winner for better results, in many shooting situations. I sold off my Nikkor 105/2 DC lens and sold off my Nikkor 135/2 Defocus Control lens and sold off my Nikkor 85/1.4 AF-D...three of the most-fabled Nikkor lenses for people pictures. I had owned those lenses for between 15 and 12 years.

chuasam · Jul 27, 2018

I usually use my 105mm f/1.4
it has a look that I can't replicate with my zooms

EJA64 · Sep 5, 2018

Many pros use nothing but zooms, and then mainly The Holy Trinity. Other pros use nothing but Primes. Try some of each, and use what you like best. I sometimes use zooms, but generally prefer Primes. Prime lenses tend to get sharper images. Years ago, the quality difference between primes, and zooms, was great. These days, it is not so great, and you can get great shots with zooms...though primes will still be a bit better...though you may, or may not, notice the difference. You can find high quality zooms, and high quality primes, so it is mostly a matter of what you like best. With primes you will move around more, and carry more bulk, and weight. With zooms, you can have less bulk, and weight, and stand in one place more. To each his own.

shadowlands · Sep 5, 2018

70-200 F2.8 all day for me. Did the 85mm 1.8 for a while, but missed the zoom.

Braineack · Sep 5, 2018

I used to be all-zoom, all-day.

Going to shoot a wedding soon and plan to only use the: 17mm 3.5, 35mm 1.4g, 58mm 1.4g, 85mm 1.8g, and 104mm 1.4e

my second shooter can use my 24-70 and 70-200

mrca · Sep 6, 2018

Do you think a zoom or even most primes including newer or "art" lenses are going to give you the sharpness, micro contrast, bokeh, subject pop of this prime, a Zeiss 100 mm makro planar? It is $1000 pristine used.