So, I'm using this event as an excuse to get a new lens. What do you guys think would be the best portrait lens under $500? All I've got now are a 50mm 1.8 and a Tamron 17-50. I was thinking about the 85mm F1.8. What do you guys think?
I find that my 17-55, 50/1.4, and 85/1.8 cover most things with my son (9 mos old) in and around the house. My 70-200 I use for more "setup" types of portraits.
With my 1D Mark II & 50/1.4:
With my 5D & 85/1.8
With my 30D & 70-200 2.8L IS
The 50 is good on a crop body indoors, but may be a little tight. The 85 is *very* tight indoors on a crop, but I love it on my 5D.
I dont have any images handy from my 17-55, but the 2.8 is a little limiting under indoor, incandescent light...
Yeah, I've got an XT. Hmm... yeah, maybe the 85 would be a bit long. I would do the 60, but that doesn't seem fast enough. My zoom does 2.8 very well. I guess I could just stick with my good ol' 50. Or maybe pick up the 50mm 1.4.
Get something fast, unless you want to shoot with a flash. Kids simply don't cease moving unless they are asleep. Photographing them can be hard before a certain age.
I'd recommend you look at the sigma 50 1.4. There is a lot of activity on the forums lately about this, but when it's on, it's on. I think it is an excellent value for the price range. This shot is wide open, the wall is just 3ft behind her, but the lens just obliterates the bg.
The 85 is nice too. For me, it's not so much that it is too tight, more so a problem of focusing distance - I often find myself backing up indoors because I can't get close enough to fill the frame the way I want to.
Super thin DOF is not such a great thing for baby shots, in my opinion. You need to get closer because they are so small and then almost nothing is in focus.
I suggest you spend some money on a decent flash unit so that with bounced light or some other diffuser you can get a well lit shot with sufficient DOF and sufficient shutter speed. After that you can consider another lens.
My 30 and 50 did okay when he was a baby and not moving round as much. Shooting a toddler is different however. I tend to use the 50 and my 70-200 now - Less chasing around.
joekraft wrote:
I'd recommend you look at the sigma 50 1.4. There is a lot of activity on the forums lately about this, but when it's on, it's on. I think it is an excellent value for the price range. This shot is wide open, the wall is just 3ft behind her, but the lens just obliterates the bg.
That looks like a really nice lens. I had no idea it even existed. I love a razor-thin DOF. I think I may have to give that one a try.
pkulak wrote:
That looks like a really nice lens. I had no idea it even existed. I love a razor-thin DOF. I think I may have to give that one a try.
Do a search for 50 mm lenses, as it has been discussed here a LOT recently. In a nutshell, each has their strengths/weaknesses and none is really a near-perfect. You just have to pick the poison(s) you're willing to live with.
I personally use my 50 f/1.4 (Canon) for most of my indoor shooting on both a crop and full frame camera body. Since you already have the 50 mm f/1.8 I don't think it makes sense to go out and get another 50 mm lens. Depending on how you like to shoot I would suggest either a 35mm f/2 or the 85mm f/1.8.
Congrats! I've got a second little one on the way also, but I find the 50/1.8 to be a pretty good length for the very little ones, so no new lens for me. It is a little difficult to keep my hyper four year old boy in the frame, and I have been looking at getting the Sigma 30/1.4 as an indoor ambient light lens to make it a little easier . . .
The 85 1.8 does not focus close, so you can't get tight baby head shots. Otherwise, a superb lens. Might suggest a Sigma 50 1.4 as an upgrade to your 50 1.8.
mcarr wrote:
The 85 1.8 does not focus close, so you can't get tight baby head shots.
That's not true at all. MFD may be limiting to an extent, but you can get nice tight images, specifically when using it on a 1.6x crop. See my images above, they were taken on a 1DIII and most are un-cropped.
