What is a good portrait lens ??

[jwott]

Ok I am sure it has been mentioned before but I am going to ask again anyways. I am looking for suggestions as to a good lens for portraits For a Canon EOS Rebel XSi 450D. Keep in mind I am new to all this and don't have a large budget. Glass that goes for over $1000,00 is way out of my range. I am thinking in the $3 to $400 range is my budget.

Thanks in advance.
Jerry

[sherylt]

I'm checking into the same think Jerry. Just purchased an XSI myself. After reading lots of reviews, I think I'm leaning towards the Canon 28-105mm. Sounds like it's a good all around lens for both landscapes, portraits and even some zoom work. Check out EBay for this lense. I've seen them in price range from $229-$299. Ritz Camera is well over $300 for the same lens.

Sheryl

[rtaub]

Jerry,

I have an XTi and I have the 28-135mm IS and I have the 85mm 1.8. While I like the 28-135mm I think the 85mm 1.8 is a great lens. I have read a lot of reviews and done some research here on Proud's forums and the 85 1.8 seems to be a better lens for portraits and you can get it for right around 350 brand new if you look. I didn't see them go for much under 300 used on eBay, so I opted for 350 brand new.

Not sure I've really helped, so check out this site, http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/

They review all sorts of stuff.

Good luck,

Randy

[rawryder]

the same question and the same budget
i need the name of the lens am using D200

thanks all

[slovejoy]

Hi i have a Canon D40 and am after a great distance lens for weddings. Any suggestions. Looking at maybe the 200mm. Thankyou.

[jerryph]

Please, don't be shy to use the search feature in the future, it does save from the same information being repeated several times over. :)

I am lucky to have 4 lenses that are wonderful portrait lenses:
- 24-70 F/2.8 Nikkor at the 70mm range
- 70-200 F/2.8 Nikkor
- 85mm F/1.4 Nikkor
- 105mm F/2.8 Sigma macro

Many people like the 50mm F/1.8 lens as a starter portrait lens and it does ok, but it suffers from the facial distortions that occur anytime when a short range lens takes a picture of a face. I call this effect chipmunk cheeks. The only way to minimize or eliminate this effect is to go for a longer lens. Distortion starts to drop by 70mm and is eliminated for all intents and purposes by 150-200mm.


I believe that everyone who doesn't have the 50mm F/1.8 affordable prime... should. For the budget minded people, you will have to accept the distortion and love the price.

Above that, I think the next best one price-wise is the Sigma 105mm which is razor sharp and an incredible macro. Unfortunately, it is a little outside your budget, unless you saved up perhaps $150-$200 more, which would then give you incredible portrait shots as well as an equally good macro lens.

[jerryph]

Hi i have a Canon D40 and am after a great distance lens for weddings. Any suggestions. Looking at maybe the 200mm. Thankyou.

No you don't... lol If you are Canon, you have a 40D, not a D40, which is a Nikon camera. ;)

For weddings... well, let me vent something and then make a lens suggestion.

Weddings are THE MOST challenging aspect of photography ANYWHERE. I would kindly suggest that you leave this aspect to the professionals until you can do justice to the bride and groom.

A wedding is NOT the place to be learning about photography.

That said, because a wedding is the most complex of photographic situations, one lens alone will not be enough. You see, your average wedding happens close, far, in bright and very dark situations and so demands a great variety of focal lengths.

More importantly than that, is a camera that is clean at high ISO and a lens that is fast. I would consider nothing under a constant F/2.8 aperture on a lens that will be used in a wedding environment.

Low light environments are your biggest challenge, and you have to be able to have a camera and lens that gives you clean results at higher ISO. Example:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3596/3478333925_c9860afe4c.jpg

This shot was taken at not just an aperture of F/2.8, but also at ISO 3200 and it *still* had to have a very slow shutter speed of 1/25th to get this exposure. This room was lit 90% by candles and 10% by weak yellow and green lights... and was *dark*. Expect the same at most wedding ceremonies or in poorly lit reception halls.

You will need lenses in the wide angle range for when closer and as long as something that can do 200mm at F/2.8 for the actual ceremony. The 70-200 F/2.8 lens is the main lens that most weding photographers use the most. The next most popular is the 85mm prime at either F/1.8, or like the one that I own, the F/1.4.

For an average wedding, I use everything from 24 to 200 mm and the macro for things like the ring shots and so on. I recently purchased a 15mm Sigma F/2.8 fish eye lens and look forward to testing it out in wedding situations.

Another VERY important aspect of wedding photography is off camera flash. Yes, we are sometimes allowed to use flash (usually NEVER in the church), and on camera flash is flat, unappealing and bland. Getting the flash off camera adds a completely new challenging aspect to the wedding photographer. For this alone, I would recommend studying and MASTERING lighting 101 and 102 at the www.strobist.com website.

What I consider basic preparation for a wedding is a minimum of 10,000 focused practice pictures, at least 2 years of experience with the camera, and a minimum of 5 times ghosting a good wedding photographer as the 2nd.

I consider these the bare minimums becuase the bride and groom, whom the day is all about, deserve nothing but the best, and which brings me back to where I was at the beginning... to leave it to the professionals.

One of the hardest things to do is to swallow our pride and acknowledge that the day is not about us and our camera, but about what the B&G deserve to get on this once in a lifetime, never to repeat day.

This is NOT an area nor the time to be learning at. :)