While my fledgling photography business is primarily equine sports type photography, I know that I am going to be doing increasingly more portraiture type starting this spring. This will be primarily head shots of owners with their horses or some classic portraiture with people in their equine show clothes.
I need to decide on a lens for this portraiture fairly quickly. Currently I am using a Canon 30D with 70-200mm F/4 L for the "action" shots and this works ideal.
While I would love to use the 85mm F/1.2L, it isn't realistically in the budget to spend nearly $2K on a lens right now. (Ultimately, I will probably go to that and a full frame sensor?) But for now, I am thinking about the 85mm F/1.8.
Will this lens work acceptably? You thoughts on this lens or alternative suggestions are appreciated.
On the 30D, the 85 f/1.8 should make for a great portrait lens. However, why not just use your 70-200 for portraits? Unless you really need the faster speed, the 70-200 should do just fine.
thedigitalbean wrote:
On the 30D, the 85 f/1.8 should make for a great portrait lens. However, why not just use your 70-200 for portraits? Unless you really need the faster speed, the 70-200 should do just fine.
Wow! Thank you for the fast response. The portrait that I had the link to above wastaken with the 70-200. But my thought was that a wider aperture might provide for more blurring of background. Maybe use it at F2.8 or wider? Does that make sense?
For the 1.6x camera (30D), my favorite lense for body portrait (like your example) is the 50mm 1.4. The 85mm 1.8 might be a tad long for full body potrait.
matonanjin wrote:
Wow! Thank you for the fast response. The portrait that I had the link to above wastaken with the 70-200. But my thought was that a wider aperture might provide for more blurring of background. Maybe use it at F2.8 or wider? Does that make sense?
Thanks again.
Indeed, a wider aperture provides more background blur than a smaller aperture IF you shoot from the same distance...
But:
1) If you move closer to your subject, the background becomes more blurred with any lens
2) If you want to get a horse and it's owner in focus, I think you will probably need at least f/4 anyway
3) The 70-200L is a fine lens and has excellent IQ at f/4
I have to second fgiksel. No exif data available but the only thing in focus is her right boob.
Shooting with a 2.8, 1.8, 1.4 or 1.2 is not going to help this image. You do need a F4 or even slower aperture.
A person's head is very 'DEEP' with a 2.8 or faster lense. Adding a horse into the equation just magnifies the problem. While it does the ego good, a 'faster' lense here would be a waste of money.
A good portrait lens for both indoor and outdoor use would be the 24-70/2.8L. The f2.8 aperture will give you a better background blur than say the 24-104/4L lens.
I would say that you need to get MORE in focus than less. I know you want to blur the background, but what about maybe not using a background (muslin, or something). You could also have the people move further away from the background and that will blur it out more. You do need to get more of the people and horse in focus.
On that note.. I LOVE my 50 1.4 for just head shots and I have the 85 1.8 and never even thought to use that. I mainly use the 24-70L and for head shots or anything that doesn't need fast zooming this lens works well.
Iīve used almost all those mentioned above but mostly itīs my trusty 70-200L 2.8 IS.
I like the idea of keeping a bit of distance to not get my subjects nervous.
100 f2.0 on a crop body is going to be just a tiny bit long for typical head and shoulder portaits, and you'll need to get even farther away to get a head and shoulder of the horse of course, but that might be a good thing. Seems like the 100 paired with a nifty 50 might be just the thing.
For this type of shot you need to get MORE in focus not less.
You need to try master your 70-200 more before spending on faster glass,which IMHO would be a waste in this instance. If you want to blur the background, step back and use it at nearer the 200mm end. It's a very capable lens.
The 85 1.8 would be fine for the people shots (with practice) but your going to need to stop it down anyway when you add the horse into the equasion.
I think your clients are going to want sharp images of themselves AND the horse.
Hope this helps, good luck, Steve
I agree with others here: this shot would require f/5.6 or smaller. Seems like a tripod would be the best investment in this case. Other than that, the 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 both are wonderful small lenses: you can't really go wrong with both.
Edited by Emile Gregoire on Feb 25, 2008 at 09:46 PM GMT
