So it's summer, and I'm booking it up with senior portraits, family portraits, weddings, and some sport events. I'm looking for 2 or 3 new lenses. I bought a Canon 7D back in December so now I'm finally ready for some nice lenses to go with this amazing camera. I'm looking at Canon lenses, preferably Canon "L" series. As with what I'm booking, I want a good portrait specific lens or two and most the money I have to spend will go towards a good top notch sport lens seeing as I will be a sport photographer when I grow up. i have done hours upon hours of research for days upon days over the past couple months for the best lenses to spend this kind of money on, but now I want to hear some personal preference. What would the photographers of 365 buy if they were looking at buying probably two lenses; sport and portrait? Again, I'm looking at Canon lenses, "L" series (red ring), weather sealed, and probably IS on at least the portrait lens. Thanks, and please, voice your knowledge and opinions on some of the awesome lenses that Canon makes!
For weddings and general portrait shoots I use three lenses: 24-70 f/2.8 L, 70-200 f/2.8 L IS, and 85 f/1.2 L II. The 70-200 is the only IS lens, and probably the only one that needs it (because of the focal length). It also doubles as a good sports lens, though I've often been tempted to buy the 400 f/2.8 L (version II is in production now) - but at around $8k, the 400 is hard to justify. Of course, you have an APS-C camera, so because of the crop factor you get a pseudo-112-320mm lens if you go for the 70-200.
Now, I love, love, love my 85mm f/1.2, but it has no weather sealing. The other lenses do. It is also slow to focus, so isn't great if your subjects move erratically (children can be tricky). Can be worth it though, because you will not find a sharper lens. You could go for the 50mm f/1.2 instead, because of your non-full-frame camera, but that lens has a design fault and people lose a lot of images when shooting at wide apertures (f/2 or wider) due to it. When it is sharp, it is crazy-sharp, but often it misses. The 85 never misses, unless I make a mistake. I won't add the 50mm L lens to my kit until they fix the problem with the release of a Mark II version.
For kids and sports, the 70-200 is usually my choice. It focusses fast, the IS works great, the bokeh is really pretty, and the DOF control is superb. This lens is very sharp with great colour reproduction. It is my second-favourite lens. With this lens and that IS, I have shot hand-held, at 200mm, at 1/4th of a second. And the images have been sharp! Of course, that is extreme, and one rarely needs to do that... And, the Mark II version is out now. The Mk II version has even better IS, a slightly closer minimum focus distance, and is even sharper (if that is even possible). It loses out slightly on bokeh, but hey - most people can't tell the difference.
For general photography, weddings, groups/couples, and full-body shots at close range, the 24-70 is brilliant. I don't think it needs IS, and not once have I wished it had the option. Of course, my 5D Mk II handles low light very well, so I rarely need to shoot slower than 1/60th anyway. This lens is also great for kids, because the focal length range is so versatile. When I shot APS-C cameras, this lens was my favourite (alternately with a 50mm f/1.4). The sharpness is uncanny - almost as good as the very best primes I've owned and used. It still gets a lot of use on my full-frame and, even though it is my least favourite of the three, is invaluable to me.
I've got the 7d. The only lens I have ever had on it is the 50mm f/1.4
I love it. Though often I wish I had a wider lens. I'm saving for the 24-70 f/2.8
@jinximages I started researching the 85mm f/1.2 that you mentioned, and I was wondering if you could elaborate a little more on it from your personal use. A little more details on its focusing ability, because I know that f/1.2 is unbelievably shallow dop. Does using it at f/1.2 for portraits work well? Or is the dop so shallow that you won't be able to get the whole face in focus? Also how does the brokeh, in your experience, look in portraits? Mostly, I would just appreciate as much personal experience and info as you could give me, because I have used a the 70-200 f2/.8 IS II a bunch and loved it, but after a little research, this new 85 lens you informed me of sounds really interesting and seems like it might make for en even better portrait lens. And in the end, if you had the choice of the 85 or 70-200, which would you choose for the portraits (mostly single subject portraits). Thanks for the response!
The 85mm f/1.2 is my favourite lens ever for portraits. It wins, hands-down.
At f/1.2 DOF is razor-thin. If you are even a a touch off with your focus, you'll ruin the shot. But it is beautifully sharp, even at f/1.2, so when you nail it, well, perfection. It will get even sharper if you stop it down a touch though, to say f/1.6 (any lens will do that when you stop down).
Here's a shot wide-open f/1.2:
Here's one stopped down to f/1.6:
I hope that helps!
As for bokeh, I don't think you can beat the 85 except with maybe the 50mm f/1.2, and even then there's barely anything in it.
Horses for courses, always, but I couldn't live without my 85. :)
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Now, I love, love, love my 85mm f/1.2, but it has no weather sealing. The other lenses do. It is also slow to focus, so isn't great if your subjects move erratically (children can be tricky). Can be worth it though, because you will not find a sharper lens. You could go for the 50mm f/1.2 instead, because of your non-full-frame camera, but that lens has a design fault and people lose a lot of images when shooting at wide apertures (f/2 or wider) due to it. When it is sharp, it is crazy-sharp, but often it misses. The 85 never misses, unless I make a mistake. I won't add the 50mm L lens to my kit until they fix the problem with the release of a Mark II version.
For kids and sports, the 70-200 is usually my choice. It focusses fast, the IS works great, the bokeh is really pretty, and the DOF control is superb. This lens is very sharp with great colour reproduction. It is my second-favourite lens. With this lens and that IS, I have shot hand-held, at 200mm, at 1/4th of a second. And the images have been sharp! Of course, that is extreme, and one rarely needs to do that... And, the Mark II version is out now. The Mk II version has even better IS, a slightly closer minimum focus distance, and is even sharper (if that is even possible). It loses out slightly on bokeh, but hey - most people can't tell the difference.
For general photography, weddings, groups/couples, and full-body shots at close range, the 24-70 is brilliant. I don't think it needs IS, and not once have I wished it had the option. Of course, my 5D Mk II handles low light very well, so I rarely need to shoot slower than 1/60th anyway. This lens is also great for kids, because the focal length range is so versatile. When I shot APS-C cameras, this lens was my favourite (alternately with a 50mm f/1.4). The sharpness is uncanny - almost as good as the very best primes I've owned and used. It still gets a lot of use on my full-frame and, even though it is my least favourite of the three, is invaluable to me.
I love it. Though often I wish I had a wider lens. I'm saving for the 24-70 f/2.8
The 85mm f/1.2 is my favourite lens ever for portraits. It wins, hands-down.
At f/1.2 DOF is razor-thin. If you are even a a touch off with your focus, you'll ruin the shot. But it is beautifully sharp, even at f/1.2, so when you nail it, well, perfection. It will get even sharper if you stop it down a touch though, to say f/1.6 (any lens will do that when you stop down).
Here's a shot wide-open f/1.2:
Here's one stopped down to f/1.6:
I hope that helps!
As for bokeh, I don't think you can beat the 85 except with maybe the 50mm f/1.2, and even then there's barely anything in it.
Horses for courses, always, but I couldn't live without my 85. :)