DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

70-200 2.8 IS II vs. 85 1.2 II for Portraits?

Started Jun 29, 2013 | Discussions thread
Steve Balcombe Forum Pro • Posts: 15,582
Re: 70-200 2.8 IS II vs. 85 1.2 II for Portraits?

Press Correspondent wrote:

DOF (the amount of blur) is the same: 2.8*85/200=1.19 with the same subject framing (different dustance).

That's the calculation for distant background blur, not depth of field.

Yes you get about the same background blur if you use the lenses wide open, but you get much less depth of field with the 85/1.2. This can be highly relevant to subject separation, because the hair can blur so much that it tends to blend into the background.

There's no "better" or "worse" here, they're just different. If you want the effect of a sharp head and shoulders against a blurred background, use the longer lens; if you want a sharp face fading into blurred ears/hair, use the shorter lens.

As ok55 pointed out, there is a huge difference in perspective which is equally important to composition.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
fad
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow