Wanting a good portrait lens for my canon 6d ? I would like to buy a good portrait lens with nice bokeh, looking at the canon 100mm f/2 usm prime non L and the 135 mmf/2 L prime, I...

natureshot Loc: Kirkwood, IL

I would like to buy a good portrait lens with nice bokeh, looking at the canon 100mm f/2 usm prime non L and the 135 mmf/2 L prime, I also was wondering about a 100mm f2/8 macro non L lens to take some macro shots and read it is good for portraits. But was wondering if you can take macro and portrait shots without a tripod because it does not have IS ?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

natureshot wrote:

I would like to buy a good portrait lens with nice bokeh, looking at the canon 100mm f/2 usm prime non L and the 135 mmf/2 L prime, I also was wondering about a 100mm f2/8 macro non L lens to take some macro shots and read it is good for portraits. But was wondering if you can take macro and portrait shots without a tripod because it does not have IS ?

For strictly portraits the 100 f2 and 135 f2 will give good backround blur - the 100 being much cheaper ( and less blur). Consider using a 1.4X Kenko or Tamron with either when appropriate for more blur/distance. For close up work ( not 1:1) , use an extension tube or Canon 500D close up lens on the 100 or 135. The 1.4X will allow you to get more magnification ( seemingly closer focus) just by itself. Using good lens support with any non-IS lens is always a good idea.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

natureshot wrote:

I would like to buy a good portrait lens with nice bokeh, looking at the canon 100mm f/2 usm prime non L and the 135 mmf/2 L prime, I also was wondering about a 100mm f2/8 macro non L lens to take some macro shots and read it is good for portraits. But was wondering if you can take macro and portrait shots without a tripod because it does not have IS ?

You do realize that IS did not even exist until 1994?
High shutter speed takes its place.
Most of the great photographers whose pictures you admired never had IS. You just need to learn to compensate.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

imagemeister wrote:

For strictly portraits the 100 f2 and 135 f2 will give good backround blur - the 100 being much cheaper ( and less blur). Consider using a 1.4X Kenko or Tamron with either when appropriate for more blur/distance. For close up work ( not 1:1) , use an extension tube or Canon 500D close up lens on the 100 or 135. The 1.4X will allow you to get more magnification ( seemingly closer focus) just by itself. Using good lens support with any non-IS lens is always a good idea.

A properly used monopod is your friend.

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

Another good portrait lens is the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM. The new model is a terrific lens. You also don't have to be in the face of your model. You can just zoom to make your shot. The Tamron 70-200mm is a little sharper.

B

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

natureshot wrote:

But was wondering if you can take macro and portrait shots without a tripod because it does not have IS ?

Nature, how good you are at handling your camera and lens will dictate how much IS is even needed.
But when I think portraits, I usually think, "strobes"!
When using strobes IS is pretty much irrelevant.
You must be talking about existing light portraits!
I usually use my 24-105 L lens for portraits. It's a good size and the bokeh is decent. Its not f1.8 bokeh but it's only one stop slower than 2.8, so almost the same and not real expensive. ;-)
SS

natureshot Loc: Kirkwood, IL

imagemeister wrote:

For strictly portraits the 100 f2 and 135 f2 will give good backround blur - the 100 being much cheaper ( and less blur). Consider using a 1.4X Kenko or Tamron with either when appropriate for more blur/distance. For close up work ( not 1:1) , use an extension tube or Canon 500D close up lens on the 100 or 135. The 1.4X will allow you to get more magnification ( seemingly closer focus) just by itself. Using good lens support with any non-IS lens is always a good idea.

Thank you imagemeister, I will look into the Kenko & Tamron 1.4X, and maybe it will help me make up my mind which to get. I have been looking at the Canon 500D and think I will try it, maybe it will be close enough for me.

natureshot Loc: Kirkwood, IL

robertjerl wrote:

You do realize that IS did not even exist until 1994?
High shutter speed takes its place.
Most of the great photographers whose pictures you admired never had IS. You just need to learn to compensate.

Thank you robertjerl, I will try that, just trying to learn more about the camera and been working in manual mode instead of auto.

natureshot Loc: Kirkwood, IL

imagemeister wrote:

A properly used monopod is your friend.

I just bought a new tripod and it can be used as a monopod. Thank you imagemeister.

natureshot Loc: Kirkwood, IL

Bill Emmett wrote:

Another good portrait lens is the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM. The new model is a terrific lens. You also don't have to be in the face of your model. You can just zoom to make your shot. The Tamron 70-200mm is a little sharper.

B

I have looked at the Canon one if it is the same one around
$2100. I think, more than I want to spend because I still have to buy a flash for my camera, but I wish I could afford it. I will look at the Tamron one, Thank you Bill.

4 but not the Tamron, I will look into them also

natureshot Loc: Kirkwood, IL

SharpShooter wrote:

Nature, how good you are at handling your camera and lens will dictate how much IS is even needed.
But when I think portraits, I usually think, "strobes"!
When using strobes IS is pretty much irrelevant.
You must be talking about existing light portraits!
I usually use my 24-105 L lens for portraits. It's a good size and the bokeh is decent. Its not f1.8 bokeh but it's only one stop slower than 2.8, so almost the same and not real expensive. ;-)
SS

I have the 24-105L lens I bought with the camera, I am taking pictures of my grandchildren and family. I haven't had the camera to long, still trying to get used to a full frame I have a rebel t2i was my first camera and really miss the reach on the full frame for wildlife, but I still have
the rebel. Thanks Sharpshooter, I am still learning how to use my camera and get off auto what I used most of the time on the rebel.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

natureshot wrote:

I have the 24-105L lens I bought with the camera, I am taking pictures of my grandchildren and family. I haven't had the camera to long, still trying to get used to a full frame I have a rebel t2i was my first camera and really miss the reach on the full frame for wildlife, but I still have
the rebel. Thanks Sharpshooter, I am still learning how to use my camera and get off auto what I used most of the time on the rebel.

That 24-105 is a great lens. Except when using my Tamron 150-600 for birds etc. the 24-105 is on my camera at least 80% of the time. In very poor light I use a 50mm f1.8 and in close quarters I use a 14mm f2.8.

heyjoe Loc: cincinnati ohio

go with the 70-200 2.8 with IS buy an older model
they can be found for around 1200,great lens

Chuckwal Loc: Boynton Beach Florida

I have a 6 week old 6D use both 100 mm 2.5 macro and 50 mm 2.0
Mostly for flowers and open landscapes,sunsets etc. do not do portraits
When I purchased the 6D it came with a 24 105 mm l f4 great lens
Attached is a unset I did last night I have taken photos of my gran kid
And they turned out great. Hope his helps
Chuck

(Download)

Gifted One Loc: S. E. Idaho

I have shot the T2i & 60D. I recently added a 6D with 24-105 f/4 L, my first L. I find it a very solid lens as a walk-a-round. I carry a Canon CPL and 25 extension tube. I like tubes better than diopter filters. I have a 50mm, 85mm, and 100mm BlkMac. I love the look of fast glass primes. I have done good work with all the glass. The 100mm f/2.8 non-L was a sleeper and bought used as was the 85mm f/1.8.

This weekend doing a trial shoot of the Tokina 16-28 f/2.8 and my Grand Daughter. A professional me a long time ago put your nest lens on and find the most creative way to use it.

Hard to find an excuse for not getting the shoot.

J. R.