Photographer
Chris Macan
Posts: 12975
HAVERTOWN, Pennsylvania, US
Case AVP Photography wrote:
I think a lot of people are missing the fact that the OP is using an APS-C sensor, thus the 50mm lens would be roughly an 80mm and the 85mm would be a 136mm.
For studio headshots with an APS-C sensor camera, I would prefer the 80mm lens (that is - the 50mm f/1.4). On a full frame camera certainly I would prefer the 85mm f/1.8. Greg Cobb Photography wrote:
This comparison is often misunderstood. Your focal length does not change. Yes you are correct, the focal length does not change.......
but the place you stand on the floor does. (field of view)
Clearly he was talking about equivalent focal lengths for different sizes sensor formats.
Meaning if you wish to compose the same shot that you get using the 85mm and an APS-C using a 35mm (full frame) camera then you need to use the 136mm lens that the previous poster mentioned.
So the perspective benefits of using a 135mm for portraits on a 35mm camera can be achieved using an 85mm on a APS-c Camera.
Photographer
JamesMcGrew
Posts: 138
Lake Oswego, Oregon, US
Lots of talk about the 70-200 and saving up etc so consider the following:
I own many primes and zooms and use them differently. I almost never use the 70-200 f4 for portraiture since its not that fast and f4 doesn't create as nicely blurred background unless shooting at the longer end of the focal length and shooting close to the subject. Its a great lens and I always carry it outdoors. I occasionally use the 2.8, but 90% of my portraits, indoor sports and candid people shots are done with the 135 f2L or the 85 1.8 with my 1Dmk2. Occasionally I use a 50mm 1.8.
Several years ago, I made extensive objective and subjective tests side by side with several copies of the 70-200 f4, 70-200 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 IS. Hands down, the original f4 blew the other two 70-200 version out of the water for color, contrast and sharpness and realism. The IS version of the 2.8 was considerably darker, greener, with a noticeably less natural tone curve. On the other hand, 2.8 from f4 makes a big difference in background blur.
The primes produce images that feel like looking at real life while the zooms feel like looking through a glass window. Don't get me wrong, they are all outstanding workhorse lenses for any pro and I use the non-IS zooms often. They are great for cropping in the field, but in the studio, you can move closer or further from your subject easily. But if you want that extra life to an image, be aware that the primes are all brighter, sharper, and overall look more natural while offering greater speed and bokeh. But watch the DOF and your focus.
Finally, if you are serious about photography, you'll eventually grow frustrated with a rebel and ultimately buy a different camera body like one of the 1 series bodies or a 5D at which point the 85 or 135 will really become more important. Think long term.
Photographer
Monito -- Alan
Posts: 16524
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Stroke Of Light photos wrote:
ok pros and simi pros alike heres a question for you on the cropped sensor of the rebel xt witch would you recommend for shooting portraits... 50mm 1.4 $ 319.95 or the 85mm 1.8 $ 333.95 50 mm f/1.8 $80 and 85 mm f/1.8 $334 = $414.
On the crop sensor, the 50 is equivalent to 80 mm on full-frame, which along with 85 mm is the classic focal length for head and shoulder portraits for the kind of perspective one perceives (not sees, perceives) from a friendly one on one conversation, for example over a small restaurant table. On the crop sensor the 85 mm is also very good for tighter portraits of the head.
The 50 mm f/1.8 is the best bang for the buck of any new lens you can buy: sharp, lightweight, fast, compact, inexpensive to buy or replace. Both lenses are very sharp, but the 85 mm is an outstanding quality lens.
Photographer
Casefoto
Posts: 19
Boston, Massachusetts, US
Chris Macan wrote:
Case AVP Photography wrote:
I think a lot of people are missing the fact that the OP is using an APS-C sensor, thus the 50mm lens would be roughly an 80mm and the 85mm would be a 136mm.
For studio headshots with an APS-C sensor camera, I would prefer the 80mm lens (that is - the 50mm f/1.4). On a full frame camera certainly I would prefer the 85mm f/1.8. Yes you are correct, the focal length does not change.......
but the place you stand on the floor does. (field of view)
Clearly he was talking about equivalent focal lengths for different sizes sensor formats.
Meaning if you wish to compose the same shot that you get using the 85mm and an APS-C using a 35mm (full frame) camera then you need to use the 136mm lens that the previous poster mentioned.
So the perspective benefits of using a 135mm for portraits on a 35mm camera can be achieved using an 85mm on a APS-c Camera. Thank you. That's exactly what I was saying. 
Photographer
The Alternative Image
Posts: 4129
London, England, United Kingdom
OK I am gonna throw a spanner in for the 85mm, if your shooting a full lenth portrait, your will have to be a long way back from your subject when using a cropped sensor.
You will be efectively be using a 135mm lens or there abouts, so bare that in mind before you buy.
Get a second hand 5D when the new one hits the shelves, then all your lenses work how they should do.
Photographer
DiamondCreek
Posts: 27294
Parkton, North Carolina, US
Stroke Of Light photos wrote:
hmm ok that's what i thought you guys were gonna say i used to have a 50 1.8 and loved that little f er till my gf knocked off a table at a location shoot and it snapped in 2 and im just getting caught up enough to buy another one.. i am thinking the 85 1.8 and then maybe a 50 1.8 as well then the 70-200mm 4l after i can afford it They're expensive at nearly $1,000, but the 24-105L is definitely on my shopping / wish list.
I have a 50mm 1.8 and love it.
|
