Reading mode: Light Dark

Oh another guy seeking a portrait lens... to shoot flesh and clay

Go to last post
S

Sebb

Member
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Location
US
Hi, ( sorry for the length and english )

I know the topic has been covered a billion times, but my situation is a bit special.

As some of you know, I'm sculptor and recently took the decision to take a Canon 400D because I want to move a step forward in the Photo world. You can see the best I can do with my old Olympus 2000Z on my website : http://www.sebzar.blogspot.com .

For economic reasons my choice is on the 400D ( so I can put money on a good lens )
Of course the lens question remains..

Here's what I need :

-- shoot the models to get enough "information" in order to do the sculpture. Need sharp pictures, I mean all the head / shoulders without blur (or minimal ). I'm concerned by this point as a lens that would give one eye sharp and the other blured would be of very little use here ( question of settings, not lens ? ).

-- after the sculpture is finished, have to take nice pictures to display in my portfolio / website / catalog for customers. Here sharpness isn't that important as the goal is to convey a certain "mood", so a lens with some bokeh could give nice results ( still want the two eyes in focus though).

-- macro would be a plus, although some non macro lenses seem to give very good detail shots. I have the preconcived idea that a lens like the 60mm 2.8 macro can't make "glamour" style of pictures, if you see what I mean.

-- of course distortion is the enemy, but again fix focal lenses will probably be ok, and there are sofwares to correct this problem( if the problem exists )

-- often the model and final sculpture are shot in a "normal" room, that means 8' to 12' of distance between me and the model. In this regard I'd like to say that several people said me to forget the 85mm f 1.8 for my indor use.. while the Barnack calculator seems to indicate that a 9' distance is ok to shoot a portrait with shoulders... ?

If a lens is very good and needs a little more room I can push the walls a bit :)

I guess that the choice is going to be between 3 lenses ( all Canon ) : the 50mm 1.4, the 85mm 1.8 and the 60mm 2.8 macro ..

Thanks :)

Seb
http://www.sebzar.blogspot.com
 
Used to use 50 f/1.8 for portrait, now I just use 17-55 f/2.8 IS for everything. My other portrait lens is 70-200 f/2.8L IS.
 
I'd recommend getting the 50 1.8 (cheap and very nice) and the 85 1.8. For about $400 you'll have 2 great lenses to choose from.
 
Thanks guys,

Jschro yes I was thinking about getting that 50 f1.8 to complement either the 85 f1.8 or the 60 f2.8 macro.. What lens do you use ?

Yongbo if you can take two children in the same picture with a good margin at just 2m with a 50mm, the 85mm f1.8 will probably allow to shoot a single person head and shoulders in a realtively close distance, isn't it ?
Is it possible to take some details shot with lenses like the 50mm or 85mm ?

cheers

Seb
 
Sebb said:
I guess that the choice is going to be between 3 lenses ( all Canon
) : the 50mm 1.4, the 85mm 1.8 and the 60mm 2.8 macro ..
Click to expand...
Any of those three lenses would be more than fine, but you can add the Sigma 50 / 2.8 macro and 70 / 2.8 macro to the mix. If it were me, the 60 / 2.8 macro would be my first choice, if the FL is not too long.

--
--joe

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/

Please feel free to criticize, make suggestions, and edit my photos. If you wish to use any of my photos for any purpose other than editing in these forums, please ask.
 
It's funny cause yesterday I wanted to contact you after having seen this photo from you : http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/69811708

Nice one :)

Also seen this gallery > > http://www.pbase.com/hochiabaya/kharu2 He's using a 85 f1.8 and I have to say that I will be pleased if I can get the quality of the second one.... taken with the cheap 50 f1.8

i think that something is misleading about the 50 f1.4 : when looking at people's galleries most of the time I see blurred photos, probably because they use large apertures. But from what I understand the 50 f1.4 is sharper than the 50 f1.8 when both are set on the same aperture , right ?

Seb
http://www.sebzar.blogspot.com
 
My experience with portraiture has been that at 50mm shooting a full-length subject sitting down, f/4 is as large an aperture I could use and still get both eyes reasonably well in focus. This depends in part on how the head is turned. My preference is f/5.6 except for special shots where shallow DOF is part of the effect.

If you need full-length portraits, then 50-60mm will be about right at that distance. Remember that on the 400D the field of view for a 50mm lens will be the same as an 80mm lens on a full frame camera.

The 50 f/1.4 will give you incredible DOF control and should be about the right focal length while giving you very sharp photos, especially when stopped down to f/2 or above. The images I've seen from this lens (and the few that I've taken with for demo) show that it also has a nice bokeh. The minimum focus distance may or may not be an issue.

On the cheap you can get a 50 f/1.8. It is reasonably sharp though some complain about the bokeh. I am pleased with the portraits that I have gotten from this lens (borrowed, I don't own it).

If you think that you might need a range of focal lengths, then the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is hard to beat. I've used this lens for child portraiture and am quite pleased with the results. It has a nice focal range too if wide-angle is not needed.

I have the 60mm macro and can attest to its great image quality (sharp and decent bokeh). I also just got the Tamron 17-50 and it too is very sharp and has a reasonably nice bokeh. I have the 85 f/1.8 too, which is very sharp and has excellent bokeh. However, it seldom gets used because it is just too long.

--
-Gene L.
http://ttl-biz.com
 
Since you need greater DOF than normal portrait, you may have to consider using aperture between f4-f8 to get the result you want. Based on that, your shooting style do not neccersory requires any faster lens like f1.4 or 1.8. They will not give you enough DOF.

For your room size, you possibly wouldn't need anything beyond 85mm. You certanly do not want distortion so anything below 35mm is not in consideration. The choice are restricted to 35- 85mm.

Beside the 50mm/1.8 & 85mm/1.8, why not consider the 35mm/f2, 50mm/2.5 compact macro. All these lens are capable of excellent potrait as you required. They are all tack sharp at medium aperture.
Just my 2c.
--
http://www.pbase.com/ltjiang
 
Sounds like the 60 macro would be ideal for your purposes. While it's probably a notch below the 50 and 85 in terms of it's ability to do strict portraiture, that's not what you need it for. If you need to take clear pictures of models for your own use, and then take photos of your sculptures/products for catalogs, etc, then the 60 macro is what you want, You'll be able to take good sharp portraits AND SHARP close-up detail shots that the other lenses won't get you.

A random shot with the 60 macro of the block of knives in my kitchen:



--
-----------------------
Andrew Melvin Helmboldt

 
thx guys,

looks like the 60mm macro could do the job well. The 50 1.4 is tempting for the "dreamy" look, but could be limited when I want to shoot the model to get "information" before the sculpture.

I'd be curous to see sharp portraits shot with the 50 f1.4

Seb
http://www.sebzar.blogspot.com
 
Sebb said:
It's funny cause yesterday I wanted to contact you after having
seen this photo from you :
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/69811708

Nice one :)
Click to expand...
You know, I absolutely love that pic, but, as you can see, the focus is a bit off -- an endemic problem with the 50 / 1.4 at f / 1.4. Not every time, mind you, but often, like maybe 50% of the time, and usually far worse than in the pic you linked. None of my other lenses do that. It's why I'm going to be out $1600 for the 50 / 1.2L. I'm not dissatisfied with the 50 / 1.4L when it nails the focus , but 50% does not cut it by a long shot.
Sebb said:
Also seen this gallery > > http://www.pbase.com/hochiabaya/kharu2
He's using a 85 f1.8 and I have to say that I will be pleased if I
can get the quality of the second one.... taken with the cheap 50
f1.8
Click to expand...
The 85 / 1.8 is a pip of a lens, but it may be too long for what you're looking for.
Sebb said:
i think that something is misleading about the 50 f1.4 : when
looking at people's galleries most of the time I see blurred
photos,
Click to expand...
Cha-ching! : )
Sebb said:
probably because they use large apertures.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. Recently, someone was posting pics from their 135 / 2L talking about how sharp it was, and the pic was super soft. A lot of people simply do not know how to sharpen when resizing for the web, or miss focus all the time and think it's sharp. Who knows?
Sebb said:
But from what I understand the 50 f1.4 is sharper than the 50 f1.8
when both are set on the same aperture , right ?
Click to expand...
Yes, but at large enough apertures, such as f / 5.6, there is little difference, if any, in terms of sharpness.

From what you described, ultra shallow DOF is not a necessity, or even desirable, so f / 2.8 should be just fine. To that end, a macro is probably your best bet as they have minimal distortion and are very sharp. Of course, the 50 / 1.4 fits all those criteria at f / 2.8 as well, and has less vignetting at that aperture to boot.

--
--joe

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/

Please feel free to criticize, make suggestions, and edit my photos. If you wish to use any of my photos for any purpose other than editing in these forums, please ask.
 
Sebb said:
I'd be curous to see sharp portraits shot with the 50 f1.4
Click to expand...
...to get a sharp shot with the 50 / 1.4 (all on a 5D):

http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/66982987



http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/64139012



http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/67874439



And while sharp shots at f / 1.4 are possible:

http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/63828152



http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/67168389



http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/65064333



...the chance of getting them is only about 50% (for me).

--
--joe

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/

Please feel free to criticize, make suggestions, and edit my photos. If you wish to use any of my photos for any purpose other than editing in these forums, please ask.
 
Dave1234 said:
Yeah Joe, but those 50% are marvelous!!!
Click to expand...
Thanks, and, at the risk of sounding immodest, yes, they are. It's why the 50 / 1.2L is so important to me. A lot of people are slamming that lens as a "show-off" lens. Not so. If the 50 / 1.4 were consistent at f / 1.4, then I'd not have any "need" for the 50 / 1.2L, it would just be a "want". But, as things stand, the 50 / 1.4 is the only inconsistent lens I own (wide open, that is) -- every other lens nails it wide open almost all the time.

In case people are wondering, it's not a matter of shallow DOF, either. I've taken plenty of shots with my other lenses when the DOF was much more shallow and they consistently nail it. Nor is it a matter of low light, either, as I use my other lenses in the same low light as I use my 50 / 1.4.

However, it is possible that, somehow, the 5D does not AF consistently at f / 1.4, but I can't imagine why that would be the case. I owned the 35 / 1.4L far too briefly after I got my 5D to say (I sold it almost immediately to get a 16-35 / 2.8L). Still, I find that unlikely.

All I can say is that the 50 / 1.2L better be the dream lens I expect it to be, or I'll not be a happy camper. I was happy with the IQ of the 50 / 1.4, but not happy with the AF. But, for $1600, I expect more than perfect AF from the 50 / 1.2L -- I expect a corresponding increase in IQ as well, even if it's modest.

Does that count as a rant? : )

--
--joe

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/

Please feel free to criticize, make suggestions, and edit my photos. If you wish to use any of my photos for any purpose other than editing in these forums, please ask.
 
Thanks :)

Joe, great photos !! You have convinced me to take the 50mm f1.4 .

I wonder what will be the difference between using this lens with a 400D and your 5D for example ? I know there's the 1.6 crop but that probably doesn't change the quality of the photo. My question is about quality. Of course I suspect the quality to be better with a more sofisticated cam, just wonder where it does make the difference.

Great job here, very inspiring.

Cheers

Seb
http://www.sebzar.blogspot.com
 
Sebb said:
Thanks :)

Joe, great photos !! You have convinced me to take the 50mm f1.4 .

I wonder what will be the difference between using this lens with a
400D and your 5D for example ? I know there's the 1.6 crop but that
probably doesn't change the quality of the photo. My question is
about quality. Of course I suspect the quality to be better with a
more sofisticated cam, just wonder where it does make the
difference.
Click to expand...
On a 1.6x DSLR, you'll get less vignetting wide open than on a FF DSLR, and the DOF will be 1 1/3 stops greater than in the pics I posted (1.6x has a 1 1/3 stop deeper DOF for the same FOV). In other words, the 50 / 1.4 behaves on 1.6x as an 80 / 2.2 would on FF. Thus, 50mm, f / 2.8 on 1.6x would equate to 80mm, f / 4.5 on FF, in terms of FOV and DOF.

At f / 2.8, the IQ of the 50 / 1.4 is stellar on either FF or 1.6x, so that should not be an issue. In addition, the AF performance of the lens at that aperture is also on the money.

The advantage of the 50 / 1.4 over the other lenses discussed is that the faster speed is available for when you need it, but it comes at the expense of macro capability (unless, of course, you use extension tubes).
Sebb said:
Great job here, very inspiring.
Click to expand...
Glad you like! Just to recap, at f / 2.8, it's a slam dunk to get a great pic from the 50 / 1.4, but at wider apertures, specifically f / 1.4, the AF is hit and miss.

--
--joe

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/

Please feel free to criticize, make suggestions, and edit my photos. If you wish to use any of my photos for any purpose other than editing in these forums, please ask.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top