topic Re: question about portrait lens and quality in EF & RF Lenses

question about portrait lens and quality

SincerePhoto — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 21:30:46 GMT

So, I am full time active duty in the Navy and photography is currently side money.

I am going to be getting out and going to school while pursuing photography as a career.

That being said I am one who believes if you need the best buy it from the beginning and never deal with it again.

I was using the 100mm L for a portrait lens for a long time. Beautiful lens, no complaints. I just wanted something different.

I bought the 70-200 2.8II and recently returned it to downgrade while buying a macbook as well for a work station.

If I don't do anything more than normal internet usage of images would I really see a difference between the 135mmL and the 85mm II(besides bokeh and lower aperture) in terms of contrast/IQ/Color

Quite frankly I've got like $500 bucks left after all the recent gear I bought and I need a portrait lens.

I was eyeballing the 135mmL, 85mm Mk I, the 85mm Zeiss, Tamron 70-200, maybe a used canon 70-200 (older body.)

I really want my portraits to be L series.

I own a 35mm IS F/2 and thats it ha

All around the same price used. I could also get a brand new 85mm 1.8 for $350.

I used to have this lens and it was a work horse but I want the best qualiy I can get since I will be paid for my images.

I could save for a little bit, or over extend to get the best one I can get now and pay it back with money I earn. I just wanna know if the IQ difference is honestly enough to justify a $1500 used lens as opposed to half the price for the same IQ that I would see.

My gut tells me know but I'm not huge into this.

Sample work to show my current standards can be found below.

http://www.sincerephotography.us/portfolio/portraits/

Ideally I can justify about $1200 total and pay it back over a few portrait sessions when I have spare time.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

Skirball — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 21:59:29 GMT

@SincerePhoto wrote:

Beautiful lens, no complaints. I just wanted something different.

To be frank, I interpret this as - you're just not happy with your photography, not the quality of the photo, and you're hoping that a new lens will magically make you're portraiture better. That's fine, and all of us do it to some point, but it seems to me that you really just want to buy something new and looking for someone to say it's the right thing to do. We'll, you've come to the right place, there are several people on here to do just that. In fact, they'll tell you to buy the best of the best. Maybe you'll even get a witty quote with it, like "buy the best and only cry once!".

But you hit the nail on the head here:

@SincerePhoto wrote:
If I don't do anything more than normal internet usage of images would I really see a difference between the 135mmL and the 85mm II(besides bokeh and lower aperture) in terms of contrast/IQ/Color

Nope. Just as you suspected. The pixel peepers might argue otherwise, but if you're not using a big expensive lens wide open, and you're downsizing to internet, then there's very little difference in any of them.

Now, I'm not saying to not get good lenses. Just be realistic in why you're buying them. If you want/need a fast lens then nothing can give you that look buy a fast lens. And if you're going to do a lot of portraiture there's nothing wrong with investing in a trusty lens to do your work with. Or many. I LOVE using primes for potraiture, and if you're going to do portraiture with primes, you're going to own a lot. But I also love shooting wide open. If you're not doing that, then shooting primes is just an expensive way to go about it.

That said, I own and still use my 100mm (non-L) for a ton of portraiture work. It's a great lens. I only pull out my 85 1.4 when I need a fast lens, or a wider field of view (though I usually grab my 50mm 1.4 for that).

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

ScottyP — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 00:32:33 GMT

Did you say what camera you shoot? If it is a crop sensor the 135 May seem pretty long in a lot of situations and a 50mm or an 85mm would be more versatile for you.

The 85 L is a heck of a lot more expensive than the 135 of course. Perhaps it would be helpful to rent one or both and try them out.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

ScottyP — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 00:41:35 GMT

I like your shots btw.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

SincerePhoto — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 01:25:01 GMT

Hey, all. Sorry I was in the middle of an extensive response and this mac rebooted itself

Quick responses, I am alright with my work. I just need a good quality lens that is built well and will give me the quality I want.

I loved the 70-200 but I felt like I would be better off with a better laptop for editing and that I could get a cheaper portrait only lens since i won't be doing much wedding work and I think a wider aperture may give me a better look overall.

I look at a lot of samples from every combo and lens from the 85mm 1.8 to the 85mm 1.2 II

I see noticeable differences but so much comes into play with why the difference. post processing, skill level, camera used, settings

I loved the 100mm macro

Not sure why I sold it besides clearing up money to get the lens I just returned.

I shoot a Canon 6D btw

sorry I forgot that

I was thinking I may snag a cheap used 85mm 1.8 but If Itd be better to just snag the 135mm for a little more used I think that may hold me over.

I just prefer the 85mm for tight spaces

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

TCampbell — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 06:49:08 GMT

The 135L will certainly develop a stronger and more attractive background blur if you're going for shallow DOF.

But depending on what body you're using, the 135 makes you walk back a bit from your model to frame the shot. If you're doing indoor and don't have a big room to work in, the 85 may be easier to work with.

You can check out samples for yourself by going to pixel-peeper.com. Under "Equipment" look to the "Lenses" row and click "Canon", then pick the lens you want to look at ... the 85 f/1.8 or the 135 f/2L -- and you can view tons of sample images from each.

They index Flickr and they only use photos where the EXIF data was supplied so you can see what body (really you want to know if it was a full-frame vs. crop-frame body) and aperture they used.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

Skirball — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:31:45 GMT

@SincerePhoto wrote:

I just need a good quality lens that is built well and will give me the quality I want.

Is there a lack of quality in your photos that you think is from the lens?

Again, the effects of a wide aperature are evident, and if that's what you're looking for then you need a fast prime. But if it's some other, harder to define, "quality" of a photo, I really don't think a new lens will change it. As you said above, I think having a better laptop with better editing skills will have a more noticable impact than a higher quality lens.

As to the 135, I highly recommend renting one if you're looking at buying. It's a great lens, but not without it's own traits. 135 is fairly long, even on a full frame. It's fantastic when you have the space, but it's pretty much for outdoor portraiture unless you have a rather large studio. Also, I don't know if you shoot using flash, but the 6D's sync speed of 1/180, which means I'm usually at 1/160 with flash, puts your rather close to the 1/focal length rule of thumb for min shutter speed. I frequently use a fill flash even when outdoor and I was getting too many blurry shots from camera shake when I was really rolling with the moment and firing away. Not an issue if you only shoot natural light of course. THe f/2 aperture is fantastic, makes some great shots, but unless you plan on solely using it wide open I'd recommend saving the money for a f/2.8 70-200 with image stabilization.

The 85mm is a nice lens and a focal length you should have in your arsenal as a fast lens portrait photographer. I opted for the Sigma f/1.4. It's a very nice lens, great photos, but the AF is fairly slow. I can't speak to the Canon f/1.8 from personal use, but I've read that it seems to perform pretty well given the cheap price.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

SincerePhoto — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:57:32 GMT

The lack of quality it was mainly from when I had the 85 mm 1.8. Since then I have used L series lenses only and they have been beautiful. Image stabilization is not something I need or will use. I would check out the sigma 1.4 if that is an 85 mm. I just want better IQ then the 85 1.8. The 135 seems a little long for me since my studio is pretty small indoors. That is the only reason I've considered a 70 to 200 for now so I have the different focal lengths and tighter compression when I was outside or had the room

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

ebiggs1 — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 17:21:22 GMT

SincerePhoto

There are two kinds od "pros". The ones that buy some expensive photgraphgy equipment and think that makes them a pro. These folks all have regular jobs they go to all week long and shoot a but now and again. Yeah, they make a little money and that really makes them a "pro".

Then there is those of us who actually put groceries on the table, pay for the daughter's dance school and buy the family car, etc.

It depends on which you are. If you are really serious you buy equipment that makes you money. You buy equipment that fits.

Usually this means the best. Not simply for it's IQ but for it's durability and realibity. A pro can not afford to have equipment fails. Clients do not underdstand that. Also most people don't want you to use the same camera that uncle Bob has and will do it for free.

Now you can take advice from somebody that's been there or not but you must decide what you are after. What are your goals, your plan?

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

SincerePhoto — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 17:55:40 GMT

I plan on making it a career. I will upgrade to the 85mm II when I have the cash. Until then I just want the best secondary option. I already make money from this and would do it full time but sadly the military causes me to miss a lot of opportunities

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

ebiggs1 — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 19:38:04 GMT

OK, I will take your word on it. IMHO, the EF 85mm f1.8 is a good lens. It is not a great lens. I sold mine in favor of the Sigma 85mm f1.4 EX DH HSM. Neither of these are "L" quality, however, but the 85mm Canon L is pretty expensive for starters and such a limited use lens.

If you are serious you can not afford to turn down work even if it is not in the direct field you like. Work is work. Again the difference beween a true professional and a 'hobby pro'.

IMHO, you had the best lens, the EF 70-200mm f2.8, for all around work. Outstanding build and extremely versitile and the best IQ.

DId you mention what body you are using? This also figures into the lens choice.

As a side note, what post editor do you have? Another important part and something you must be proficient at. This can make you or break you. I recommend Photoshop and Lightroom. A course in business is another good idea.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

SincerePhoto — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:32:18 GMT

Well currently I have a Best Buy gift card for 260 so I may just scooped the 85 1.8 just to have something. The 70 to 200 was an amazing lens but like I said I traded it in so I could get a MacBook for editing and traveling. I may just get a tempt and use that until I can afford the 85 mm L. It's been a lens I have sought after for a long time. The 135 mm seems awesome so I may just snag that give it a try and keep it even when I get the 85L. I use Photoshop and light room and I'm slowly learning those and getting better. Unfortunately I have no spare time working 14+ hour days for the Navy. Once I get done and can go back to school that will be a whole Nother story. Also shoot a canon 6D

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

ebiggs1 — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:48:22 GMT

I really don't know how much advcie you want but here is some more that is important and you must learn it.

Canon and Photoshop do not make you a dime! That camera setting there will not make a cent. It only does it's job when it is in your hands. You selling a finished, retouched, photo does. Canon and PS or whatever are just a tools and it must become just that.

I have used Nikon and Canon all my life. I still have a couple Nikons but now that I have retired I am true blue Canon. I admit now that it is a hobby, it is a lot more fun but when you are working it is different. You need to change your mindset that just because something is cool, you should get it.

Personally I prefer the 85mm for portraits over the 135mm so I suggest you forgo any thought of buying both. On a 6D the 135mm is workable but again, IMHO, the 85mm is better.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

ebiggs1 — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:52:30 GMT

I will also suggest you get the battery grip for your 6D. I know it shouldn't but appearence does matter. The grip makes the camera look more professional and people like to see that.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

SincerePhoto — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 22:06:54 GMT

I own a grip from the day I bought this camera. I also prefer 85 mm for portraits as well on full frame. As I said eventually I want just the 85 Mk II for portraits. But until then the 135 will do I guess at that point if I can sell it I will but I honestly wouldn't mind because each lens has its own individual outcome. Also I have never had the mindset that since something is cool I should have it. I always do thorough research and make sure I buy what is going to be best for me. Otherwise I would have an arsenal of garbage odd lenses

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

RobertTheFat — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:31:34 GMT

@ebiggs1 wrote:
I will also suggest you get the battery grip for your 6D. I know it shouldn't but appearence does matter. The grip makes the camera look more professional and people like to see that.

I'm in a grumpy mood today. (Here in the Boston area, the snowstorm-related collapse of our public transportation system is driving us all nuts.) So here goes:

"The grip makes the camera look more professional"?!! Are you serious? The OP is at most a semi-pro wannabee. His very demanding full-time job leaves him struggling to find time to learn photography and evaluate his equipment needs. How could he possibly care whether his camera makes him "look more professional"? He has enough to worry about just finding potential clients and getting them to take a look at his work. And I'd argue that in most shooting situations the photographer's interest is best served by making himself less, not more, conspicuous. Size wasn't always so highly vererated; in the film days smaller was considered better.

As for grips, they've always struck me as among the least useful tools in a photographer's bag. Unless you really, truly need the extra battery power, a grip adds dead weight for at most a marginal increase in convenience. The extra set of controls for vertical shooting seems silly to me, since I find it just as easy to shoot with my hand above the camera as at the side. I'm as old and arthritic as the next guy, and I don't find it to be a contortion at all. If I'm missing something, I sure don't know what it is. Finally, I'd point out that the cost of a $500 grip is about half the difference between a 6D and a 5D3. Or almost the cost of a top-of-the-line speedlite.

Thanks for letting me get that off of my chest!

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

RobertTheFat — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:47:13 GMT

@ebiggs1 wrote:
...
Personally I prefer the 85mm for portraits over the 135mm so I suggest you forgo any thought of buying both. On a 6D the 135mm is workable but again, IMHO, the 85mm is better.

OK, somebody needs to stand up for the 135mm lens, so it might as well be me. I always had a 135 for my various Nikon film cameras, and I found it to be a very useful portrait lens, especially for close-in head shots. Even in rather small rooms I never found it confining.

But frankly, it occurs to me that I'm not really standing up for the 135mm lens, but rather for the 135mm position on a 70-200mm zoom. Like it or not, prime lenses are nearly superfluous in this day and age.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

TCampbell — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 15:21:36 GMT

If you like bokeh, the EF 135MM f/2L is a cream-machine. It will send diabetics into insulin shock. It's easily the strongest of any lens I have except for possibly the 300mm f/2.8L.

Re: question about portrait lens and quality

ebiggs1 — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 16:00:33 GMT

Bob, the Snowman from,
Boston, Massachusetts USA

Good morning Bob besides the snow how are things?

I don't know your level into photography or how much you depend on it for your livehood. Your opinions are simply different than mine and the experience I have had. Over the years I have noticed clients expect a pro photographer to have, well, pro equipment. We used to call it the, uncle Bob with the Rebel, delima. Why am I paying you for something uncle Bob can do for free?

You are going to see the real full time pros using a 1 series or a brand-N D series. They "look" the part. The inconspicuious photographer thing is a myth. People want to know that we are there and with the best pro camera and equipment.

You do whatever it takes to get you the job. If they should say stay out of the way, you do. But that, to me anyway, was very rare.

I have been specifically asked what I intended to use. Many times! Don't ever think that first meeting in the studio doesn't make a big impression.

As to the 135mm, it is my least used lens. It does a nice job filling it's spot in the camera bag. I much prefer the 85mm f1.4.

I am questioning our OP's real desire to become a full time pro. Because he certainly does not need the 85mm and the 135mm in the same bag before he aquires more of the things he does need. Get one or the other, not both, but I recommend the 85mm.

A web site explaining what he offers would be a better idea than to spend money on both of those lenses. But to each his own, there is more than one way to make it. Right?