I'm mostly an outdoor photographer. So assuming I have a lot of space to work with---Sony 135/1.8 GM. The headshots look very beautiful with it. And full body shots look amazing as well.
Sonys 70-200/2.8 GM II is hard to beat. Regardless of manufacturer. Its sharp, focuses fast, and gives you a bunch of range without having to lug around a bag full of primes.
Sony 50 f/1.2. Yes it's a bit short for headshots but for everything else it works well. I personally love the rendering style and shooting a f/1.2 is something only a few lenses can achieve - giving it a unique and special look compared to a cellphone for example.
TheEmrys wrote:
Minolta 100/2 on the LA-EA5. Just a great lens. And the smallest AF portrait lens out there.
Love that lens. I wish it was better with IR, but, as strictly a portrait lens, it's lovely. The Minolta AF 80-200/2.8's another Minolta portrait banger, as is the 200/2.8.
If I had to pick one lens to be my only portrait lens, I would want either the Sony 50-150mm f/2 GM or the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8. If I could get a fast 35mm into my kit as a general purpose lens or something like that, I'd probably go with the Sony for the constant f/2, but otherwise it would be a difficult choice but I think I might go for the Tamron. (I should add I haven't used either lens so I cannot talk from personal experience. It also depends on where (if) you draw the line between portrait and environment portrait / people photo.)
An honourable mention to a 70-200mm or 70-180mm f/2.8, but it wouldn't be wide enough for me if it was going to be my only option. An honourable mention also to my Sigma 65mm f/2. It wouldn't be my choice as a one and only portrait lens but I do like it.
Any focal length can be used for portraits, but I am assuming you're asking about the classic head&shoulders portraiture. If that's the case, the Sony 85mm f/1.4 GM II is my choice. Why this one? Beause:
1. 85mm is the great for tight portraits with natural reproduction of facial features
2. Quite small and light for its speed
3. Offers an aperture ring
Also, I second the 70-200mm f/2.8 GM II recommendation. But as it's always the case with zooms, it's heavier and slower. The price for extra versatility.
And if environmental portraits and manual focus are allowed, I would recommend the Voigtlander Nokton 40mm f/1.2. Focusing wide-open requires some practice, but the results are spectacular.
For AF, I'd opt for Viltrox's 85/2 EVO; for manual focus, my Simera 75/1.4. Among Sony's offerings, I like the 50/1.4 ZA and FE55. It's all very personal and can keep you up at nights. People are the hardest thing, even harder for impromptu shot-making.
The lens producers have not covered all bases yet, so pressure needs to be maintained on them for enough character lenses to balance out all the 'sharpness' technical lenses. Nikon does better with their f1.4 series, from their long tradition. The Chinese are promising.
Sony is a johhny-come-lately and only been in the fuil-frame game since 2008 or so. They are super competent but unimaginative. It's why people loved their early output: RX1, ZAs, etc. (the Zeiss influence) but now they are like Zeiss in the cine world, super clean and mainstream players.
Tamron 35-150 is my most used lens for events and portraits as there is really nothing like it in range and versatility, I also really like it's rendering. If I want a wider aperture my humble FE85/1.8 is more than adequate.
I'm not a fan of the Sony 70-200/2.8II, I find the bokeh is often questionable, but of course it all depends on subject/background distance. It can certainly be fine, but it's not a lens that 'sparks joy'. I have a Canon EF 70/200/2.8 L IS which renders backgrounds beautifully, but it doesn't adapt well to Sony A7R2 or A7R4 (Metabones or Sigma MC11). I haven't given up on the Canon yet however, a great lens for people.
The Sony 50/1.2 is hands down my favourite people lens, razor sharp wo with superb, soft bokeh. It rarely disappoints.
The majority of my photography since 2010 has been for portraits. I have used mainly 3 lenses for portraits with Sony since 2018, Zeiss Sonnar 55 f1.8 FE, Batis 85 f1.8 and Batis 135 f2.8. My favorite is the Batis 85mm f1.8 because it is the most versatile for me and it has OIS, which allows me to shoot at base ISO longer into the golden hour.
Previous to Sony I used Nikon DSLR's and had the Nikkor 58 f1.4G, 85 f1.4 D and 135mm f2 DC, so almost the same grouping. The 85 was my go to lens then too. I also had the Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8, but learned that f2.8 is not the same as portraits done with a f1.4 lens (or f1.8 / f2.)
I think I would have to vote for 50/1.2GM. It works well for portraits and group shots. Rendering is pleasing and low light capabilities are amazing. 2nd place, but a near tie is the 135GM. It seems like all shots are winners. It needs a bit more space, but for me largely replaces a 70-200.
JohnJ wrote:
I'm not a fan of the Sony 70-200/2.8II, I find the bokeh is often questionable, but of course it all depends on subject/background distance. It can certainly be fine, but it's not a lens that 'sparks joy'. I have a Canon EF 70/200/2.8 L IS which renders backgrounds beautifully, but it doesn't adapt well to Sony A7R2 or A7R4 (Metabones or Sigma MC11). I haven't given up on the Canon yet however, a great lens for people.
The Sony 50/1.2 is hands down my favourite people lens, razor sharp wo with superb, soft bokeh. It rarely disappoints.
Ditto your comment about the EF 70-200/2.8 L IS version 1. I still have that lens (I'm a dual system user) and the bokeh is silky smooth the whole range. When dpreview did a review for version II way back when it mentioned that the bokeh for v1 is better albeit v2 is sharper wide open.
Regarding adapters, I'm really tempted to get one for my EF lenses to my A7V. However, both Metabones and MC11 have so-so reviews. So since I shoot also with the R6MKII I'll just use my Canon lenses on it.
Everyone's answers are interesting and are correct for them. I shoot mostly portraits and while I have a great Sony 35 1.4, a Sigma 85 1.4, Sony 70-200II and others in that range, I find more shots are taken with the 24-105 than anything else. Yes, others are faster, other have better bokeh (mostly immaterial for any studio portraits) and some have better range but non are as practical as a single lens that covers a great range from environmental portraits to studio head shots in one lens.
