6 of the best portrait lenses available today

Thecageyone

As suggested by The British journal of Photography at least:

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/technical-report/1934957/portrait-lenses

The usual cries below the article of "What about my favourite lens?? ... because I own it!"

But interesting article.

Borderfox

A lot of 85mm lenses in there

Thecageyone

I noticed your baby is on the list Seems to be what was once regarded as the ideal focal length for portraiture as it's less intrusive. From what I've been reading around, seems 50mm took over mostly because of space restrictions indoors.

dinneenp

I'd pick a 50mm f1.8 or similar because of the indoor factor. And I have two small kids so a lot of indoor shooting.

I've never really considered a longer lens for portraits, thinking about it now I suppose for outdoor it'd be good as you don't have to be as close so your subject mightn't be interupted by you.....

Thecageyone

If I had the funds I'd have both. I like the look of the nikkor 50mm 1.4G but would also love the 85mm 1.4 , but that's way out of reach right now unless I win something in the lotto. The 1.8 would do the job only I've seen reviews that showed up some iffy purple fringing. Hard enough save without these decisions

Cyrusmekon

would also love the 85mm 1.4

Cageyone

If your around tom night you can have a play with my 85mm (lens). Might make your decision easier

Thecageyone

You going on th photowalk? I'm hoping to, but not certain yet. Cheers for the offer, I'll certainly give it a go if I'm there [and can find you]

Cyrusmekon

Yeah ill be there.

Thats me holding the pint.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8632585@N06/5370398073/

Should be a good walk.

Thecageyone

Ah! I was stood beside you at the bar for ages, while the fumbling barman cursed at the till

It's 50-50 on whether I make it as the missus and our wee 3yr old aren't feeling too good.

Borderfox

Thecageyone wrote: »

If I had the funds I'd have both. I like the look of the nikkor 50mm 1.4G but would also love the 85mm 1.4 , but that's way out of reach right now unless I win something in the lotto. The 1.8 would do the job only I've seen reviews that showed up some iffy purple fringing. Hard enough save without these decisions

Most of these type of primes will give purple fringing to some extent in areas of high contrast, even the L

Thecageyone

I guess that's true. But one review in particular slated it for just that [if I can find it i'll post up] . Making me think it's a bit worse than other primes for the purple and green edges.

[edit] now that I'm looking for faults I'm finding nothing but excellent reviews

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=65

Some going as far as to say they find it hard to use any zooms after buying it.

DK32

One of the best portrait lenses I ever owned was the EF-S 60mm f2.8 macro
Stunning clarity and an extremely well built piece of glass. To me it had the same quality feel to it as an L series. The only downside is that its an EF-S so it doesn't work on a full frame body. Other than that I can't fault it.

I now use a either 1.8 50mm or the 24-70 depending on available light & space. For the money that the 1.8 50mm costs, every Canon owners kit bag should have one.

I would love to own the 85mm f1.2 but that would require the same of body parts to fund it. Spare kidney anyone?

dinneenp

I just spotted a Tamron SP AF 90mm 2.8 DI MACRO 1:1 for £215 which could work as a portrait lens (I have two young kids) and also a macro lens....hmmm.
I was going to get a 50mm f1.7 lens but the 90mm could work for portraits too and I'd have a macro lens thrown in too. Obviously I'd have potential issues with it indoors though. Oh to have a few grand spare to buy a bucket full of lenses....

jpb1974

Mamiya-Sekor 80mm F2.8 on a Mamiya TLR is just fantastic.

My absolute favourite portrait lens of them all.

Don't understand how it never made the list... it's fecking amazing and with the bellows you can get within about a foot of your subject.

Thecageyone

dinneenp wrote: »

I just spotted a Tamron SP AF 90mm 2.8 DI MACRO 1:1 for £215 which could work as a portrait lens (I have two young kids) and also a macro lens....hmmm.
I was going to get a 50mm f1.7 lens but the 90mm could work for portraits too and I'd have a macro lens thrown in too. Obviously I'd have potential issues with it indoors though. Oh to have a few grand spare to buy a bucket full of lenses....

Along with the 60mm 2.8 I also looked into the Tamron 90mm, I've heard great things about it. I too would love something that would be solid for both portrait and macro, but I hear the focusing is a lot slower on macro lenses. That wouldn't be a problem at home, for your set up portraits. But for candids and quick moving about, say at a wedding, they might be a little sluggish?

Never tried bellows, do you get metering and AF with those? I have tried macro tubes, which are fun, but not th easiest to use.

jpb1974

Never tried bellows, do you get metering and AF with those?

Not a chance... t'is old skool stuff. If min shutter 1/60th of a sec at F2.8 with window light doesn't suffice then the photo doesn't get taken.

Gotta keep it real cagey... none of this modern shít.

Thecageyone

I'm no stranger to full on manual with no frills. Just got back to using my old vivitar 70-210 f/3.5, no metering, af, or assist of any kind. It's a big heavy lug of a thing, push pull and twist to focus. I love it, but it's a killer hand held, as it's a constant 2 hand jobby . . . Erm, yeah does feel like you're pleasuring the lens at times

Used it only this morning to shoot birds out the back , I'm hardcore when the mood takes me :P I just get lazy for AF. And I use it for it's 1:2 macro at times.

jpb1974

It's a big heavy lug of a thing

it's a killer hand held

it's a constant 2 hand jobby

I'm hardcore when the mood takes me

Can't help you with that one I'm afraid... I thought I read you have a missus somewhere?

Thecageyone

Thought i covered that joke ready? Anyway, One can never have enough pleasure options.

Right, back on track, let's try not dominate the thread

Portrait specific or macro/portrait lens? For general usage and the option to use for occasions. Are macro lenses much slower to focus when using them out of their 1:1 mode?

DaireQuinlan

jpb1974 wrote: »

Mamiya-Sekor 80mm F2.8 on a Mamiya TLR is just fantastic.

My absolute favourite portrait lens of them all.

Don't understand how it never made the list... it's fecking amazing and with the bellows you can get within about a foot of your subject.

I always found 80mm on 6x6 to be that little bit too short if you get up close, although that portrait is definately making me out to be a liar

150mm for MF I reckon is more comfortable, at least for closeups.

Thecageyone

85mm is quite long on a cropped sensor, would be about 127mm equiv on FF. That's why I'd love to have both that and a 35 or 50 along with.

Cyrusmekon

Thought id chip in.

Currently my fav portrait lens and use it whenever i can. AKA Stubby


Untitled by cyrusmekon, on Flickr


Nelly by cyrusmekon, on Flickr


Razor sharp, autofocus is ridiculous and yeah

Thecageyone

Niiiiiiiice! You don't really need that 85mm at all, i think you should loan it to me, on a permanent basis :P

Iwannahurl

I think my Minolta 85mm f1.4 is related through marriage or something with the Carl Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Planar T* mentioned in the BJP article.

I'm far from being a technically expert photographer, but I try, and I get satisfactory results occasionally.

Thecageyone

Very nice trying

Hugh_C

The Nikon 50 1.4 G rarely leaves my D300 (crop frame) nowadays, I'm using it a lot for headshots. Also have the manual focus 85 mm f/1.4 ai-s, exquisite lens but takes a while to master, not easy in the production environment.

Thecageyone

I wouldn't mind a 50mm 1.4G at all, at all.

there's an 85mm 1.8 USM for Canon up on adverts now. Even Ken Rockwell loves that one.

jpb1974

I always found 80mm on 6x6 to be that little bit too short if you get up close, although that portrait is definately making me out to be a liar

150mm for MF I reckon is more comfortable, at least for closeups.

80mm on my Hassleblad and Bronica would do my head in as the 3ft min focus distance is just too far back for my liking.

80mm on the Mamiya TLR is perfect because the bellows allow me to get within about a foot of the subject which, as a personal preference, is what I prefer. I use the 105mm F3.5 from time to time but it forces me to take a couple of steps back and I've never had quite the relationship with it as I do the 80mm.

I picked up a 150mm F3.5 to go on me Mamiya 1000s the other week but have yet to try it yet. 6x4.5 wouldn't be my preference for portraits but watch this space...

DaireQuinlan

Hugh_C wrote: »

The Nikon 50 1.4 G rarely leaves my D300 (crop frame) nowadays, I'm using it a lot for headshots. Also have the manual focus 85 mm f/1.4 ai-s, exquisite lens but takes a while to master, not easy in the production environment.

On 35mm/FF though it's a bit distorty I find (the 50mm)


I've taken some exquisite shots with the 135mm f/2.8 AIS ...



At the moment I've either waiting for the new 85mm AFS to push down the price of the AFD versions so I can pick one up, or trawling EBay for the 105 f/2.5 ais, which by all accounts is simply luscious.

That said, a lot of stuff I've taken recently has been with the Helios 44, nice and soft wide open, and does lovely crazy stuff to the OOF areas.

jpb1974 wrote: »

80mm on my Hassleblad and Bronica would do my head in as the 3ft min focus distance is just too far back for my liking.

Yeah big time, I have a bunch of extension tubes for the bronica, 18mm one does the job when I want to get that little bit closer. They're a PITA though, because there's a gap between min focus distance when they're on and not, and of course you always want compose right in that gap. Why they didn't include that ... 1 ... extra ... cm .... of ... extension .... is beyond me. There are a couple of macro lenses for the bronica and a 180mm IIRC which focuses pretty close as well. Never liked using macro lenses for portraits though. Too harsh.

FoxT

This was with a canon 50mm f/1.4 on a 40D.

I had an 85mm f/1.8 but found it too long - all my portraits are grabbed in fairly confined spaces - but would buy one again if I ever went FF.

As for manual focus? Not a chance for me I;m afraid, 40D viewfinder is not big/bright enough for good MF in low light, plus most AF lenses now have very sloppy focus rings..

FoxT

Oh, I like me 50 f/1.4 alright....

PopeBuckfastXVI

1.4 Friends... ASSEMBLE!

Thecageyone

I really am stuck on what to go for now. I have the chance to go for a 60mm 2.8 micro, which would be sweet as it has that 1:1 ability, and I don't mind getting in close. It's the original D version too, and supposedly one of the sharpest Nikkor lenses out there, BUT some say these macro lenses are very slow to focus. I would want to do portraiture mainly, but having both in one is so tempting. I'd be skipping on the likes of the 50mm 1.4 and the 85mm 1.8 for it.

Macro or wider aperture is the tough decision.

Promac

The 1.4 is defo on my shopping list. After a nice wide-zoom. And a lens-baby...

Thecageyone

Why isn't there a lens that does it all!? For very cheap to boot. Like an 85mm f/1.4 with all the nano coatings etc and 1:1 macro ... for €400 ...

I really don't know what to opt for. You get recommendations for them all if you ask enough people. The only reason against the 60mm for me, is I may want it for a wedding in the summer, and the AF is much slower than the 50mm and 85mm. But 99% of the time I'll be using it for personal shooting, and I don't mind a little bit slow when I'm shooting for myself. I love a bit of macro.

No matter which I opt for it's going to be a compromise. Bugger ..

17-40L is the one most Canon users go for I think? Supposedly a lovely lens.

condra

dinneenp wrote: »

I've never really considered a longer lens for portraits, thinking about it now I suppose for outdoor it'd be good as you don't have to be as close so your subject mightn't be interupted by you.....

Aren't longer focal lengths supposed to be more flattering?

(edit- "longer" within reason, ie 60mm vs 20mm)

dakar

Curses. I didn't want an 85mm before reading this.

I do now. Feckin' full frame.