question about portrait lens and quality

[SincerePhoto]

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.

[ebiggs1]

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.

[SincerePhoto]

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

[ebiggs1]

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.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@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.

[TCampbell]

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.

[ebiggs1]

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?

[ebiggs1]

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.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@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! 

[SincerePhoto]

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