Which would be my best bet for a portrait lens?

[bells]

I know I asked a few days ago, but of these three which would you guys suggest as the best one?

Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Lens
Reg. $449.95

Sigma AF 50mm F1.4 HSM EX DG (Canon)
Reg. $599.95

Zeiss 50mm F1.4 ZE Planar Lens (Canon)
Reg. $799.95

 

[Rosshole]

Are you puting it on a FF body or a crop body?

I would suggest a 85 mm prime either way

 

[bells]

I have a T3i

Something like the EF 85mm F1.8 USM?

 

[analog.universe]

I'm usually a huge Zeiss fan, but the word is that the 50 1.4 is not that sharp around the edges, I think it's cheaper than every other lens in their lineup for a reason... the 85 1.4 ZE seems to get the praise for Zeiss portraits. The reason I'm a Zeiss fan though is more about color and depth and subjective stuff, it's just nice that most of them are tack sharp, not to mention the build quality. The Sigma is probably the best technical performer of the bunch, and would probably be my choice out of these 3. Everyone I've spoken to prefers the Sigma over the Canon.

 

[Rosshole]

I don't have an extensive Canon knowledge, but I believe that is a well priced and well reviewed lens choice.

 

[bells]

Holy lord I'm confused lol!

 

[analog.universe]

I love my 85mm 1.8 for portraits, it's a fantastic lens for the money, and actually sharper than all the ones you've listed. The thing is in low light, you lose 2/3 stop in aperture and 2/3 stop in shutter speed vs. a 50 1.4. Since you listed a bunch of 1.4's I assumed that was a concern. That 85 is an amazing little lens though.

 

[bells]

It's going to be mainly for outdoors.

 

[KmH]

Portrait lenses cover a range of focal lengths.

50 mm is at the low end of the range, and the range can go as high as 300 mm.

On beginner photography forums the 50 mm focal is often touted because the camera makers make some inexpensive 50 mm prime lenses that have pretty good optics and wide maximum apertures. But, 50 mm is not always the optimum focal length for doing portraiture.

I make most of my portraits using a 200 mm prime lens.

The most used portrait focal length is 85 mm.

 

[jake337]

What kind of lighting setup do you have? I think focusing on posing and lighting would be a good start for portraits.

Or else I would look at 85mm, 105mm, 135mm and longer focal lengths first.

 

[bells]

I'm mainly looking for a portrait lens that I can use in outdoor natural light. I'm very new to photography so I'm still learning lots, I've found a great mentor where I live who is allowing me to hang out with her on her shoots and I'm learning a lot.

In a nut shell I'm looking for a good portrait oriented lens that I can use with the skills I currently have to get pictures of friends, loved ones, pets etc but something that will also allow me to grow with it, if that makes any sense lol!

Right now I'm leaning towards the 85mm F1.8

 

[analog.universe]

Right now I'm leaning towards the 85mm F1.8

:thumbup:

 

[jake337]

Right now I'm leaning towards the 85mm F1.8

:thumbup:

:thumbup:

 

[KmH]

The 85 mm f/1.8 is a good start.

Most prime lenses give the sharpest focus when they are 'stopped down' a couple of stops. Two stops smaller lens aperture from f/1.8, is f/3.5.

Most professional portraiture is made at around f/8 when using prime lenses to get crisp, tack sharp focus. However, today many use a prime lens wide open (f/1.8) to use selective focus, and then wonder why their photos aren't as sharp as a pros photos.

By my definition a pro is an expert at doing photography, not just someone that charges people to take photos. By my definition of professional, it's quite possible your 'mentor' is not a professional photographer.

 

[MBasile]

I'll 8th the 85mm comment. 50 wouldn't be bad for showing the subjects full body in the surroundings, but for close up/bust shots with a 50mm you'd be waaaay too close for comfort!