The best small AF lens (40-50 FL) for portraits

I am wondering what the best small lens for portraits is - and how it compares to the rendering of a 24/28-70/75/2.8? Not looking for something longer than 75.

I guess the obvious contestants would be:

Sony 40/2.5 (not much separation)

Sony 50/2.5 (also not much separation)

Sigma 45/2.8 (also not much separation - lovely rendering)

Samyang 45/1.8

Sony 50/2.8 Macro

Sony 50/1.8

I'd rather stay wider than the 55.

Also curious how they render portraits compared to the Sigma 24-70/2.8 or the new Tamron 28-75/2.8 (obviously will need time for the second) at the long end.

Thoughts?

--
All the best,
TBri
https://www.flickr.com/people/130803098@N05/

travelinbri_74 said:

I am wondering what the best small lens for portraits is - and how it compares to the rendering of a 24/28-70/75/2.8? Not looking for something longer than 75.

I guess the obvious contestants would be:

Sony 40/2.5 (not much separation)

Sony 50/2.5 (also not much separation)

Sigma 45/2.8 (also not much separation - lovely rendering)

Samyang 45/1.8

Sony 50/2.8 Macro

Sony 50/1.8

I'd rather stay wider than the 55.

Also curious how they render portraits compared to the Sigma 24-70/2.8 or the new Tamron 28-75/2.8 (obviously will need time for the second) at the long end.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

50 F1.8 has the nicest rendering other than the Sigma 45. I'd use it for portraits over those others.

I just got a Rokinon AF 50mm F1.4 and haven't fully evaluated it yet. It is smaller than the GM, Planar ZA, and Sigma options. It seems a lot nicer for this usage than their little 45mm.

I've only briefly tried those zooms. I don't think either has great rendering.

Not sure what type of portraits you're interested in, but 40-50mm is generally a bit too wide to be a "portrait" lens, unless you're talking group portraits. If you want a compact <75mm lens for portraits, my top choice would probably be the Sigma 65mm F2 - tack sharp, pretty compact (400g), high quality metal build with aperture ring, and reasonably priced. You'll get a lot more separation at 65mm/F2 as opposed to 40-50, but 65mm is quite a bit wider than the more typical 85mm, so it would still be pretty useful for walking around. I've heard good things about the Samyang 75mm as well, but the build quality of the Samyangs definitely leaves a lot to be desired. The Zony 55mm 1.8 would also fit the bill, although at this point it's getting awfully long in the tooth (not very good aberration correction, AF motor is glued in place so it has some reliability issues), and it's pretty overpriced for what it is.

Assuming you're set on staying between 40-50mm, the Samyang 45mm 1.8 might be your best option. It's tiny and sharp, and would provide a noticeable aperture advantage over a 2x-7x 2.8 zoom. I'd def rule out the Sony 50mm 1.8, it's just not in the same league as modern designs, the Sigma 45/2.8 isn't any sharper or faster than a 2.8 zoom, and the Sony 40/50 2.5 G lenses only have 7 aperture blades so they don't have great bokeh rendering. It's really bonkers that both Sony and Sigma seem to have ignored the need for reasonably sized ~50mm lenses faster than F2 - it seems like there would be a huge market for someone who wants an updated 50mm prime but doesn't want to pay for/carry a 50GM.

gobucks83 said:

Not sure what type of portraits you're interested in, but 40-50mm is generally a bit too wide to be a "portrait" lens, unless you're talking group portraits. If you want a compact <75mm lens for portraits, my top choice would probably be the Sigma 65mm F2 - tack sharp, pretty compact (400g), high quality metal build with aperture ring, and reasonably priced. You'll get a lot more separation at 65mm/F2 as opposed to 40-50, but 65mm is quite a bit wider than the more typical 85mm, so it would still be pretty useful for walking around. I've heard good things about the Samyang 75mm as well, but the build quality of the Samyangs definitely leaves a lot to be desired. The Zony 55mm 1.8 would also fit the bill, although at this point it's getting awfully long in the tooth (not very good aberration correction, AF motor is glued in place so it has some reliability issues), and it's pretty overpriced for what it is.

Assuming you're set on staying between 40-50mm, the Samyang 45mm 1.8 might be your best option. It's tiny and sharp, and would provide a noticeable aperture advantage over a 2x-7x 2.8 zoom. I'd def rule out the Sony 50mm 1.8, it's just not in the same league as modern designs, the Sigma 45/2.8 isn't any sharper or faster than a 2.8 zoom, and the Sony 40/50 2.5 G lenses only have 7 aperture blades so they don't have great bokeh rendering. It's really bonkers that both Sony and Sigma seem to have ignored the need for reasonably sized ~50mm lenses faster than F2 - it seems like there would be a huge market for someone who wants an updated 50mm prime but doesn't want to pay for/carry a 50GM.

Click to expand...

Indeed, I have had 85 lenses - both a Nikon 1.8 and the Samyang 1.4 - in the past, as well as the 55, and while I agree the rendering is a better suit for portrait, I find I prefer to include some of the environment and a 40-50 allows me not to change lenses so often.

I am looking at the Samyang - and know the Sigma 65/2 is excellent (but probably too long to get as much use as I want - and agree, an excellent and small 50/1.8 is lacking in the lineup.

Just brainstorming the idea. Small and full frame may not always go together.

Here I'd say the Batis 40 mm or the new Sony 40 mm

For longer focal length and depending how important full frame is, I may look at a crop sensor body with a 50 mm something.

to my mind like the Fuji X with the 56 mm 1.2 is an excellent lens. Plus you dont need an expensive body.

IF we are talking money no object and if you are making a 8x10 print or not that much larger the Leica Q2 with the 75 mm crop is really not awful and is a FF body

Just saying many ways to skin this cat...

So when you say "best all AF lens" that is relative I think depending what you as the artist want your images to look like.

Generally speaking I have used 70-200 zooms and even 70-300 zooms for portraits as much as the 35 mm prime.

Oh and for sake of my terminology a headshot and a portrait are two different things. usually for the framing.

SO for a full length / body portrait I will want to shoot between 35 mm and 50 mm. For a headshot I like between 85 mm and longer.

The physical working distance and what may be happening behind the subject and if I am lighting the person and if I am using a background / drop indoors or is it natural outside.

LenRivers said:

Just brainstorming the idea. Small and full frame may not always go together.

Here I'd say the Batis 40 mm or the new Sony 40 mm

For longer focal length and depending how important full frame is, I may look at a crop sensor body with a 50 mm something.

to my mind like the Fuji X with the 56 mm 1.2 is an excellent lens. Plus you dont need an expensive body.

IF we are talking money no object and if you are making a 8x10 print or not that much larger the Leica Q2 with the 75 mm crop is really not awful and is a FF body

Just saying many ways to skin this cat...

So when you say "best all AF lens" that is relative I think depending what you as the artist want your images to look like.

Generally speaking I have used 70-200 zooms and even 70-300 zooms for portraits as much as the 35 mm prime.

Oh and for sake of my terminology a headshot and a portrait are two different things. usually for the framing.

SO for a full length / body portrait I will want to shoot between 35 mm and 50 mm. For a headshot I like between 85 mm and longer.

The physical working distance and what may be happening behind the subject and if I am lighting the person and if I am using a background / drop indoors or is it natural outside.

Click to expand...

The fuji 56mm f1.2 will give the same separation&light gatharing as the sony 85mm f1.8 ,however will double the cost and even increase the whight if I remember correctly.

If you know, that 40-50mm is useful for you, stick with it. But for nice separation you will probably need faster aperture, so I would choose from Batis 40f2, Samyang 45f1.8 or Sony 50f1.8. I have personal experience only with Sony, which have nice rendering for me, but painfully slow AF. So I would probably give a chance to budget Samyang.

travelinbri_74 said:

...

I guess the obvious contestants would be:

...

Sony 50/2.8 Macro

...

Click to expand...

I have no idea which on your list is the best, but I have used my 2.8/50 Macro for photographing people in the past.



























--
Richard

These are great, thanks! Would love for the 50 macro to be my purchase; not sure about how fast it focuses and the quality of the OOF areas, but these are really encouraging

richj20 said:

travelinbri_74 said:

...

I guess the obvious contestants would be:

...

Sony 50/2.8 Macro

...

Click to expand...

I have no idea which on your list is the best, but I have used my 2.8/50 Macro for photographing people in the past.

Click to expand...

--
All the best,
TBri

travelinbri_74 said:

I am wondering what the best small lens for portraits is - and how it compares to the rendering of a 24/28-70/75/2.8? Not looking for something longer than 75.

I guess the obvious contestants would be:

Sony 40/2.5 (not much separation)

Sony 50/2.5 (also not much separation)

Sigma 45/2.8 (also not much separation - lovely rendering)

Samyang 45/1.8

Sony 50/2.8 Macro

Sony 50/1.8

I'd rather stay wider than the 55.

Also curious how they render portraits compared to the Sigma 24-70/2.8 or the new Tamron 28-75/2.8 (obviously will need time for the second) at the long end.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Out of all the lenses you mentioned, the 55 is the best. There's really not that much of a difference between 55 and 50, and the 55 Zeiss 1.8 is honestly my second choice behind the GM 1.2 I'd skip the Zeiss 50mm 1.4.

I've used the 55 Zeiss numerous times and it's really quite a nice little lens. Super fast autofocus, and a pretty nicely rendered image as well.

travelinbri_74 said:

These are great, thanks! Would love for the 50 macro to be my purchase; not sure about how fast it focuses

Click to expand...

It's not a fast AF, so not good for action. However, I did capture the girl as she raised her arm (2nd photo). I use the lens mostly for landscapes and macro (flowers).

and the quality of the OOF areas said:

richj20, post: 65517740, member: 631255"]

travelinbri_74, post: 65517740, member: 631255"]
...

I guess the obvious contestants would be:

...

Sony 50/2.8 Macro

...

Click to expand...

I have no idea which on your list is the best, but I have used my 2.8/50 Macro for photographing people in the past.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Richard
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't necessarily say the FL is ideal for tight portraits, but I do like the Samyang 45/1.8 a lot, along with the 75/1.8 for that matter. I just wish they were both weather sealed like the newer Samyangs, but they're not at all embarassed by my Sony G/GM glass, and they're both far smaller than most alternatives.

The SY 45mm is like a mere 10mm longer than the 40/2.5, the 75 is smaller than any 85mm... I think the Sigma 90/2.8 is the only MILC AF short tele that's any smaller than the SY 75mm. The 45mm has a nice and shallow hood that plays into it's size advantage. Bokeh on the 75mm is a little cleaner than on the 45mm.

The Sigma 65/2 is worth a look IMO, but the FLs on the Samyangs are easier to fit into various kits. I use the 75 right alongside my 20G & 35GM tbh, been pairing the 45/1.8 with the 24/2.8 G (bonus: same filter size on both).

Edit: 45mm felt pretty natural to me, having shot a 40mm equivalent with a 4:3 AR, it's definitely a nice FL for environmental portraits and just social occasions in general... YMMV

Plus if gets you roughly the same DoF control as a 35/1.4, without feeling quite as tight as something > 50mm. I'm not averse to a little cropping on an A7R4 tho. I do think the SY 45 is sharp enough wide open in the center, not as even as my 35/1.8 was (let alone the GM) but I don't need that from it.

travelinbri_74 said:

I'd rather stay wider than the 55.

Click to expand...

I like Batis 40 for its light way and close-up capability, but if you are happy with the 55/1.8 then why change? 40mm will only give you more distortion (less pleasing portraits, although the difference might be small), and to get the same background separation you enjoy with the 55, you would need at least an f1.4 at 40mm.

So better stay with the 55. I agree

Very very nice portraits !!!

After going back and forth, I will be giving the 45/1.8 Samyang a try; seemed like the best compromise of size, focal length, aperture and price. Will report back.

Also hoping a new, physically small macro is on the way.

I had the Samyang 35mm 1.8 and 45mm 1.8. They are good lenses, but they were not for me. I replaced them with the Sony 40mm 2.5. I really enjoy using the 40mm lens. It's small, sharp, and it has an aperture ring. For a short tele I have the Samyang 75mm 1.8. I don't like carrying heavy lenses (85mm 1.4 Samyang, which I sold). The other lens on my prime kit is the 20mm 1.8. A great, great lens that is pretty small and well performing.

Almazar80 said:

I had the Samyang 35mm 1.8 and 45mm 1.8. They are good lenses, but they were not for me. I replaced them with the Sony 40mm 2.5. I really enjoy using the 40mm lens. It's small, sharp, and it has an aperture ring. For a short tele I have the Samyang 75mm 1.8. I don't like carrying heavy lenses (85mm 1.4 Samyang, which I sold). The other lens on my prime kit is the 20mm 1.8. A great, great lens that is pretty small and well performing.

Click to expand...

Thanks, may I ask in what way you find the Sony 40/2.5 superior to the Samyang 45/1.8?

I love the handling, the sharpness, the closer focusing, the aperture ring, the build quality. It's only half a stop or so slower. Optically it's better and handling wise, it's not even close. Nothing wrong with the Samyang, but it wasn't the lens for me. The Sony 40mm, on the other hand, has been mounted on my camera more often than any other lens lately.

Almazar80 said:

I love the handling, the sharpness, the closer focusing, the aperture ring, the build quality. It's only half a stop or so slower.

Click to expand...

It's much closer to a full stop than to half a stop, and the SY is only 10mm longer physically. Just saying...

Almazar80 said:

Optically it's better and handling wise, it's not even close. Nothing wrong with the Samyang, but it wasn't the lens for me. The Sony 40mm, on the other hand, has been mounted on my camera more often than any other lens lately.

Click to expand...

In what ways do you find it optically better? Rendering wise it looks somewhat worse, I'd say even at best depending on preference... 7 blades vs 9, more cat's eye at f2.5 than the Samyang at the same f-stop, similar amount of onion ringing, even more LoCA, more vignetting at the same f-stops, similar flare handling...

The Sony G trio is undoubtedly better built, and if someone is gonna do video AF with them I'd give them the nod (based on my comparison of the 45/1.8 vs my Sony 35/1.8), but otherwise you're likely paying for the sealing and the features on the 40/50 f2.5 IMO. Sharpness looks like a wash, with some variation at the edges depending on aperture.

I'm not hating on them, I bought the 24/2.8 G, tho that one has a somewhat different set of trade-offs... I knew I was still paying largely for the features and it's size vs faster/better alternatives tho. Well that and I'm usually a little less worried about Sony's sample variation these days, tho there's no guarantees with any brand IMO.

I metered the same scene with both lenses and found the difference to be about half a stop (a little bit more). Tried to compensate for the slight difference in field of view for the metering, but since this was a rather informal test the difference could have been more. I find the 40mm 2.5 sharper in the center, which is important to me. I like being able to get closer to the subject - with the minimum focusing distance a distinct advantage for the Sony. As I said, I like having an aperture ring. It makes a big difference (for me) in usability. The focus hold button is nice. The lens feels better to me. That's totally subjective of course. And unlike Samyang, I can be pretty sure that the sample to sample variation, while it does exist, won't be as big an issue with the Sony.

I am not as invested in great bokeh as other people, though the Samyang 85mm 1.4 that I had was great for that purpose. Ultimately, I wanted a lighter kit and the 75mm 1.8 Samyang fit my needs better. I really like the 20/40/75 progression, but that again is personal preference.

The 40mm 2.5 is not a slouch wide open (even in the corners), but it does improve stopped down (like many lenses). I do like the contrast the lens provides compared to the Samyang 45mm. Again, maybe I am just seeing things, but I like what the Sony provides more than what the Samyang provides. YMMV of course.

And the 40mm Sony does focus faster, with less hunting.