 Kristina M. Covey |
Best Prime Portrait Lens I took some candid portraits of children with a rented 85mm 1.8 lens. I thought they turned out great, but a friend suggested that I should use a 105 mm to get in a bit closer, and another has suggested a 135 mm, this being the "classic" portrait lens. Before I make a purchase, I would like some recommendations! P.S. If it matters in regards to lens, candid portrait shots are my preference.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jeff S. Kennedy |
Why not rent them all and decide for yourself? It really is a matter of preference. Personally I love my 85mm f1.8. The f1.8 comes in handy all the time and the 85mm focal length seems very easy to deal with. It's a light lens and extremely sharp. I used to have a 135mm lens and I really liked it but it was a bit too long for all around use. If candid shots are your goal I would say the handholdability of the 85 is for you.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kristina M. Covey |
Thanks Jeff, I appreciate your input. Renting them all is an excellent suggestion.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ken Henry |
I prefer to use a 70-300mm lens. A zoom lens gives me a lot of versatlity especially for shooting candid shots at parties, etc. You can't always be at the right spot every time. I'm now looking at Tamrons new 28-300mm lens, for doing groups to singles without changing lenses.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jeff S. Kennedy |
I'll weigh in on Ken's response. As a general rule I like to shoot portraits with a faster lens. The 70-300 is an alright lens but it's too slow for portraits. When I do weddings I will use my 70-200 f2.8 lens for candids and ceremony shots. But I'd much rather use my 85mm if I can simply because it is so much lighter. When you are shooting candids of people you are often focussing on them and waiting for the right moment to click the shutter. With a long heavy zoom this can get tiresome very quickly. The 85mm is so light, sharp, and fast it more than makes up for the loss of zoom convenience. As for the 28-300 theory, life is about trade offs. You may gain the convenience of not having to switch lenses but you lose quality and speed. My 2 cents anyway.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kristina M. Covey |
On the zooms: I own a 70-300 and have enjoyed it enormously in situations where I wanted to catch my subject completely unaware of my presence. I have found though, that with candid portraits, the longer lens had 2 disadvantages: 1 being the need for a tripod at the longer focal lengths to avoid possible camera shake and 2 being that a long lens can sometimes intimidate the subject. I have to agree with Jeff on the quality difference. The 85mm had beautiful blurring of the background and was extremely sharp. 28-300 is quite a range! Good luck with that Ken. Thanks both for your responses.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Perry Young |
Though I like the 85mm focal length (I use both the minolta and nikon AF versions), lately I've been finding fast 100 and 135mm lenses provide a more comfortable working distance for posed studio portraits, and the more limited DOF for the longer lenses give more creative choices when shooting outdoors. If you can afford to buy them all, do so.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||