Portrait lens help?

[sarahr_7]

I'm looking for a portrait lens (I know there is no "specific" lens that is for portraits only but just one that will be good). I am looking to do all types of portrait work (head, full body, etc)

I currently have a Canon 70D & Canon 50mm 1.8

I was really interested in the Canon 135 f/2 but I'm afraid it'll be too long on my cropped body, any opinions? I also like the 85mm 1.2 or the 70-200mm 2.8 but I just don't know! I'm trying to spend under $1000 on a used lens. ANy sugestions or advice would be much appreciated! 🙂

Attached are some photos I've done with my nifty-fifty:

[TTMartin]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

I think I'd start with a 50-150mm f/2.8 telephoto. (Yes, I'll concede that Sigma must have had some trouble selling theirs. But theirs wasn't of "L" quality, and there was no 7D2 in those days.)

---

Sigma didn't actually have any trouble selling theirs. They ran into patent trouble with Nikon, who sued Sigma over patent infringements of Nikon's Image Stabilization system with that lens. Sigma lost the lawsuit and it killed the lens. 

[RobertTheFat]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

I think I'd start with a 50-150mm f/2.8 telephoto. (Yes, I'll concede that Sigma must have had some trouble selling theirs. But theirs wasn't of "L" quality, and there was no 7D2 in those days.)

---

Sigma didn't actually have any trouble selling theirs. They ran into patent trouble with Nikon, who sued Sigma over patent infringements of Nikon's Image Stabilization system with that lens. Sigma lost the lawsuit and it killed the lens. 

---

I'll take your word for that, but I don't see how it could be the whole story. I have what I believe was the original version of the 50-150, and it isn't image-stabilized. My recollection is that its short-lived successor wasn't either. Loss of an IS version to Nikon's suitt doesn't explain the disappearance of the 50-150 from Sigma's product line. After all, Canon still makes (or did last I looked) non-IS versions of their 70-200's.

[TTMartin]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@TTMartin wrote:

Sigma didn't actually have any trouble selling theirs. They ran into patent trouble with Nikon, who sued Sigma over patent infringements of Nikon's Image Stabilization system with that lens. Sigma lost the lawsuit and it killed the lens. 

---

I'll take your word for that, but I don't see how it could be the whole story. I have what I believe was the original version of the 50-150, and it isn't image-stabilized. My recollection is that its short-lived successor wasn't either. Loss of an IS version to Nikon's suitt doesn't explain the disappearance of the 50-150 from Sigma's product line. After all, Canon still makes (or did last I looked) non-IS versions of their 70-200's.

---

PM sent with links to lawsuit information.

[sarahr_7]

I was originally looking for a 135mm or 70-200mm so would an 85mm 1.8 on a crop be an okay substitute? 

[TTMartin]

---

@sarahr_7 wrote:

I was originally looking for a 135mm or 70-200mm so would an 85mm 1.8 on a crop be an okay substitute? 

---

85mm on a crop camera is almost identical to a 135mm lens on a full frame camera.

[diverhank]

---

@sarahr_7 wrote:

I was originally looking for a 135mm or 70-200mm so would an 85mm 1.8 on a crop be an okay substitute? 

---

A 85mm on a cropped sensor camera equals to 136mm on a full frame.  A 70-200mm on a cropped would equal to 112mm - 320mm.  Both of these lenses will cause you to be kind of far from the subject to get the entire subject in the frame.  So as long as you realize that the 85mm will be good for half-body type of portraits and not for full body...you will be fine.  Having a fixed 85mm is not as versatile as having the 70-200 where you can zoom in and out.

It is a matter of preference (no right or wrong) but I think the 85mm f/1.8 is way better than the 70-200mm at 85mm when it comes to portrait (if you love blurry, creamy bokeh).

[sarahr_7]

Okay thanks! I'm really after the bokeh I've seen in shots taken with a 135mm on a FF so if an 85mm on a crop can get me similar results I'm excited!

[ScottyP]

---

@sarahr_7 wrote:

Okay thanks! I'm really after the bokeh I've seen in shots taken with a 135mm on a FF so if an 85mm on a crop can get me similar results I'm excited!

---

Unfortunately the bokeh is not increased when using a crop camera the same way the angle of view (the telephoto effect) is increased.  You would still have the same depth of field, and bokeh, as you would have had if you had taken an image using a full frame camera using an 85mm lens and then cropped the edges off in post production to the framing you'd see if you had used a crop camera.

I will say, however, that is not a bad thing; you can get really good bokeh and subject isolation with an 85mm lens open to f/1.8.  

[ebiggs1]

In addition to what Scott said,

The lens used determines the shape and size of the visible bokeh. Usually seen more in highlights, bokeh is affected by the shape of the diaphragm blades of the lens. A lens with more circular shaped blades will have rounder, softer orbs of out-of-focus highlights, whereas a lens with an aperture that is more hexagonal in shape will reflect that shape in the highlights.

So if this is important to you, you need to know more about the aperture blades in the particular lens you are considering.

If on the other hand you are confusing bokeh, as lots of folks do, with 'out-of-focus' (OOF) background, it is an entirely different thing.  Large apertures are really needed for OOF backgrounds..  The aperture blade shape has little to do with OOF backgrounds.

[kvbarkley]

Wouldn't this mean that every lens shot wide open would have the same Bokeh? As far as I know, this is not the case.