Seeking my ultimate portrait lens

[jake337]

There is no ultimate portrait lens. Maybe some are favored. A great portrait can be achieved with almost any focal length. Why limit yourself? I find using the same focal lengths to be repetitive and boring.

 

[nickgillespie]

I shoot Canon. That said, I hate the fact that there is such a huge gap between their L line and the gold ring stuff. The L lenses are awesome. 85 1.2 and 105 2.0 would be my choices... the 85 1.8 is decent... definitely good enough for what you're doing, but trying to compare the L line to the gold ring stuff is crazy; the quality is "walmart bike vs lance armstrong bike". If you're not making money (or if you're not making a good amount of money) from these photos I'd go with the 85 1.8.

Personally, I hate shooting portraits with the 200. I have the 200 2.8 and I don't like that I'm in the next timezone to get waist-up. 85 and 105 let you get good compression and not have to use a walkie talkie to communicate.

 

[andrewdoeshair]

Thank you! I tried the 100mm F2 in a store and thought I looked horrible. Low contrast, jarring bokeh, it just didn't "feeeeel" good. I ended up landing on the 100mm F2.8L macro lens that I had been borrowing. It's perfect for my needs (again, I can't go any tighter than 100mm in my tiny studio). I test drove a tamron 85mm and I've borrowed a Canon 85mm F1.2 but I didn't like the Tamron enough to pay full retail and I couldn't afford the canon no matter how I feel about it. I looked into the old looking Zeiss 85mm (I forget their model names) but since I have a perfectly capable 24-70 and a 100mm that I'm more than happy with, I gave up on the 85mm search. Also, during this lens hunt I got some studio strobes and realized that I needed to improve my lighting more than I needed to improve my lenses. I spent my lens funds on a beauty dish, soft box, various reflectors, and some solid stands. This was taken with that 100mm F2.8L. I have a LOT more to learn about lighting, but it's been a nice distraction from just buying all the lenses.

 

[table1349]

I shoot Canon. That said, I hate the fact that there is such a huge gap between their L line and the gold ring stuff. The L lenses are awesome. 85 1.2 and 105 2.0 would be my choices... the 85 1.8 is decent... definitely good enough for what you're doing, but trying to compare the L line to the gold ring stuff is crazy; the quality is "walmart bike vs lance armstrong bike". If you're not making money (or if you're not making a good amount of money) from these photos I'd go with the 85 1.8.

Personally, I hate shooting portraits with the 200. I have the 200 2.8 and I don't like that I'm in the next timezone to get waist-up. 85 and 105 let you get good compression and not have to use a walkie talkie to communicate.

Just curious, Which Canon 105 f2 are you talking about?

 

[Derrel]

Thank you! I tried the 100mm F2 in a store and thought I looked horrible. Low contrast, jarring bokeh, it just didn't "feeeeel" good. I ended up landing on the 100mm F2.8L macro lens that I had been borrowing. It's perfect for my needs (again, I can't go any tighter than 100mm in my tiny studio). I test drove a tamron 85mm and I've borrowed a Canon 85mm F1.2 but I didn't like the Tamron enough to pay full retail and I couldn't afford the canon no matter how I feel about it. I looked into the old looking Zeiss 85mm (I forget their model names) but since I have a perfectly capable 24-70 and a 100mm that I'm more than happy with, I gave up on the 85mm search. Also, during this lens hunt I got some studio strobes and realized that I needed to improve my lighting more than I needed to improve my lenses. I spent my lens funds on a beauty dish, soft box, various reflectors, and some solid stands. This was taken with that 100mm F2.8L. I have a LOT more to learn about lighting, but it's been a nice distraction from just buying all the lenses.

View attachment 136593

Good choice on buying LIGHTING gear instead of a bunch of lenses. Lighting is what differentiates photos very markedly.

 

[nickgillespie]

I shoot Canon. That said, I hate the fact that there is such a huge gap between their L line and the gold ring stuff. The L lenses are awesome. 85 1.2 and 105 2.0 would be my choices... the 85 1.8 is decent... definitely good enough for what you're doing, but trying to compare the L line to the gold ring stuff is crazy; the quality is "walmart bike vs lance armstrong bike". If you're not making money (or if you're not making a good amount of money) from these photos I'd go with the 85 1.8.

Personally, I hate shooting portraits with the 200. I have the 200 2.8 and I don't like that I'm in the next timezone to get waist-up. 85 and 105 let you get good compression and not have to use a walkie talkie to communicate.

Just curious, Which Canon 105 f2 are you talking about?

Oops. I meant 135.