 Andres Llopart |
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM or EF 100mm f/2.0 USM I mainly take candid portraits pictures in low light situations. I already own an EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and an EF 200mm f/2.8L lenses. But I am still looking for something in between. My dilemma comes trying to choose between the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM or EF 100mm f/2.0 USM. I like to take candid portraits and for that I was thinking buying the EF 100mm f/2.0 because of its telephoto range (take pictures without people noticing) but then I thought the EF 85mm f/1.8 will help me more to use it handheld in low light situations… If anyone has some experience with these lenses I will appreciate some info or advice. I use a Digital Rebel so I have to think also on the 1.6 crop factor. PD: I am stuck with Canon Prime Lenses…
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
Re - low light conditions The difference between f/1.8 and f/2 is only 1/3 stop. If the lighting gives you 1/30 sec. @ f/2, then being able to open up to f/1.8 would only bump the shutter speed to 1/38. IMHO, the difference between f/1.8 and f/2 is insignificant.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Michael H. Cothran |
You won't see any real difference in useable shutter speeds between f1.8 a f2. Personally, I'd opt for the 100/2 since it is half way between your 50 and 200. In Nikon, I've always preferred their 105 lens over the 85 anyhow. Michael H. Cothran www.mhcphoto.net
|
|
|
|
||
|
Andres Llopart |
Thank you for your opinion. I think a 100mm f/2 is a better lens but, the question of low light still-hunts me. I know that from an aperture of f/1.8 to f/2.0 is minimal but if you get in the equation the focal range of 85mm plus the f/1.8 against the 100mm f/2 (the difference on the aperture and that 15mm form 85 to 100)… will this make a significant difference in low light situations for hand held pictures? I don’t want to be that picky and really put to much thinking on this but this is my dilemma: A) I was thinking that if I go for the 85mm f/1.8 in the future maybe I can save money and get EF 135mm f/2.0 (and have 50mm, 85mm, 135mm, 200mm )… B) OR just get the 100mm 2.0 that look like a better lens than the EF 85mm f1/8... Having to many lenses will lead to invest to much money on lenses that I will rarely use… Is any one with a similar situation that wish to share their experience?
|
|
|
|
||
|
doug Nelson |
I have the manual FD versions of these lenses. Michael is right in that there's no practical difference between f1.8 and f2. You wouldn't use either except in desperation, because almost NO lens is at its sharpest wide open, and depth of field would be knife-thin. You may eventually want both. The 100 is better for head shots, for picking people out of a group or for isolating parts of a landscape. It is extremely sharp, maybe too unflattering for folks who don't want every skin pore in sharp focus. The 85 shines as a portrait half-body lens, for a journalism carry-around, and its not quite so sharp at wider apertures, desirable for portraits. Join the rest of us. You will always have lenses you rarely use, but it'll be there when you need it.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Michael H. Cothran |
If you are considering the 135/2 lens in the future, then I'd definitely go with the 85 now. the 50-85-135-200 is a fantastic spread. Can't beat it. You are also correct, that technically speaking, you will have the potential for more camera shake with a 100 compared to the 85, but just like the f-stop comparison of 1.8 to 2, it would be so minimal as to be almost nonexistent. Sounds to me though, that you're leaning towards the 85. And if that's where your leaning, then by all means go for it! You won't do wrong with either lens, and the 50-85-135-200 spread is more attractive and useful than a 50-100-200 spread. In Nikon , I actually own them all - 50-85-105-135-200, just not in the high speed versions you're looking at. Michael H. Cothran www.mhcphoto.net
|
|
|
|
||
|
Andres Llopart |
Thank you for your advice... I have been researching more about these lenses and their applications and I am going for the EF 85mm f/1.8 for half body portraits... I will save and get the 135mm f/2 L later for headshots... I guess this setting is more common than I thought… Thanks again for your input...
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||