The best 85/1.8 for m43?

Started 5 months ago | Discussion thread
Anders W
Forum ProPosts: 10,803
Like?
Re: The best 85/1.8 for m43?
In reply to clengman, 5 months ago

clengman wrote:

Allan Brown wrote:

clengman wrote:

bowportes wrote:

I've found it interesting recently that some -- not in this particular thread -- have begun referring to the 75mm Oly (150mm equivalent) as a "portrait lens." In this case, an 85mm (170mm equivalent) is serving for portrait work.

The shots of the lovely woman in this post, however, remind me why no one referred to 135mm, 150mm, and 200mm lenses as "portrait lenses" back in the 70s and 80s. Such focal lengths unnaturally compress facial features, as is evident in these portraits. If one cares more about bokeh than about retaining natural looking depth perspective in a subject's face, then 75mm or 85mm is a good choice for micro four-thirds portraits. If one seeks a more natural looking portrait though, the 35mm to 55mm FL range is a better choice. That is the reason the old 85mm f1.8 lenses were produced -- they were ideal for natural-perspective portraiture. Unfortunately, they cannot accomplish the same on micro four-thirds cameras, where they become 170mm equivalents. (They do get transformed into nice telephoto lenses though.)

Baloney. 135mm lenses were definitely marketed as portrait lenses and still are.

On a FF camera in a studio, for headshots, you wouldn't want to go much shorter than 135.

My favorite lens right now is my 40-150 zoom that I use extensively all the way up to 150mm for people pictures outdoors.

Not sure where you got this idea that 135mm equivalent is too long.

No, I have to disagree.

The "portrait" lenses were considered to be in the 80-110 range. Example, Nikon made the 85 and the 105 for portraits. They were more expensive than the 135. The 135 was considered a short tele that "could" be used for portraits.

If you were a Nikon portrait photographer, you would be using the 85 or the 105.

The 105 is still considered to be one of Nikon's classics.

Anyway, I have the old pre-ai 85 f1.8. This is an incredible lens on full frame but not so good on apsc or m4/3 - lots of PF. it is also heavy and short - making it awkward on m/43

I also have the 105 f2.5 and the 135 f3.5. The 105 is, by far, the best of the bunch. I got it recently in mint condition for $35. Being longer and not as wide as the 85, it fits better with my G3.

Allan

You can disagree all you want. Until recently Canon carried a 135mm f/2.8 with "soft focus control, " and Nikon had the 135/2 AF-DC with "defocus control" You don't think those were considered portrait lenses?

Not to mention the Minolta 135 STF

http://www.the135stf.net/

and the Vivitar 135/2.3 Series 1 and the way it's applicability was illustrated in the ad when it appeared in the mid 1970s:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_66quOR2lcqk/S49d3bfZDBI/AAAAAAAAAjU/DjBRA1WxjDk/s1600-h/1390_S1_bt_1.jpg

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow