If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Perhaps the best general purpose lens would be a 24-70. However I have done a lot in the last year using a 70-200. Both the Canon L series versions of these are superb though obviously not cheap. The F4L version of the 70-200 is a bargain though.
Much depends of course on where you will be doing this portraiture and if space is an issue the 24-70 or similar range may be the best bet
I use my 105mm f2.8 Macro lens. Mine is a Sigma example but the Canon is excelent and I'm sure both Tamron and Tokina make very good similar lenses.
My portrait style tends to be head and shoulders, so the 105mm focal length allows this without getting to close to the subject.
Glad I spotted this thread. I was thinking the same thing a while ago. I bought one of those studio light sets in a box and want to practice portraits.
I am off to Canada in the morning so will be buying a Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM as they are cheaper over there I hope!!
When I get back home in a few weeks I will be trying it all out and obviously will be annoying everyone here with lots of silly questions about set ups etc etc!
A prime macro lens serves as an excellent portrait lens, I have a sigma 150mm macro lens which I took the pic of kaydi I recently posted, you dont have to get too in the person's face at this focal length, but if space is an issue you may struggle to get full length. This lens is best suited to street portraiture & insect and wildlife stuff, little too long for indoor studio stuff. Ide say the 50 to 100mm is the sweet spot, and although the 1.4 & 1.8's are tempting, consider the macro prime's at these focal lengths, they give 1:1 macro capability and are still capable of stunning portrait work, so effectively you get 2 lenses in one!!
Dont really understand the need for a zoom doing portrait work, use your feet, its cheaper. And primes are sharper
I find my Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro and the surprisingly cheap, sorry reasonably priced, Canon EF 50 f/1.8 primes pretty good for portraits on a camera with an APS sensor. They both give fairly pleasing perspective and the larger maximum aperture normally found on primes like these can be very useful in low light or for creating out-of-focus backgrounds..
This pic from my gallery was taken with the 60mm Macro (Canon 350D) and I was pretty close to the subject IIRC but had no issues with undue distortion (unlike some shots taken at the wide end of my EFS 17-85mm on the same day - not very flattering at all!). Looking at the shot again after a couple of years I think I may have applied some slight softening to it apart from the eyes and mouth...can't be sure though.
The 60mm is a pretty good macro lens as well (pic also from my gallery) although 60mm is arguably a bit short for nature shots like this. IIRC I inched forward on my belly until I was just a few inches from the subject. I now tend to use my EF 70-300mm with extension tube(s) when shooting wildlife in the garden - the extra distance to subject it allows makes all the difference. If I had the spare cash I'd look at a dedicated 180mm macro but there's too may other demands on my dosh at the moment
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalise advertising, and to analyse site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
And primes are sharper
Comment