I head the the 50mm 1.4 and 50mm 1.8 are good for portaits, which one do you thing is better and what is the difference between this two?
What kind of lens do you use for portraits?
Eunice wrote:
I head the the 50mm 1.4 and 50mm 1.8 are good for portaits, which one do you thing is better and what is the difference between this two?
What kind of lens do you use for portraits?
I use a Canon 85mm f/1.8 on a crop camera for portraits. The difference between the 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 is about $200.
The generally accepted answer is a lens between 70mm and 105mm or the equivalent for an APS C camera (These numbers times the crop factor. Wide aperture lenses are preferred for the abilith to soften the background (Bokeh).
85 mm or 135 ar considered portraid lenses. Neither of the lenses you have are portrait lenses they are considered landscape or wide angle.
A 50mm on a 1.6x crop body is 80mm. This is actually a nice portrait lens for a crop sensor. The bonus is that both the f/1.4 and f/1.8 are still prime lenses and better optically. If you can afford the f/1.4 then this is an all round better lens than the f/1.8 and well worth the extra money but the latter is still a pretty capable lens. Alas I do not use either lens for this purpose but do own both and would feel my kit was missing something without either. In fact I have 2 of the f/1.8's as they are pretty delicate but I purchased the second copy a one-time-only offer price so keep it boxed ready to pounce if required.
Also even on a full frame body I would not class 50mm as a wide angle lens. This is a mid point lens and equal to what the world looks like through our naked eyes.
You didn't say what camera you use, Assuming it Not a full frame camera both will work just fine, the 1.4 is a little faster, meaning a little better in low light, but cost a little more also. Personally don't think it worth the extra money for portraits.
I use a 50mm 1.7
My camera is a Canon EOS Rebel 3t
gym
Loc: Athens, Georgia
I don't shoot portraits for a living, but have had good results with the Canon 100mm macro, as well as Canon's very decent 28-135 'kit lens'.
The latter seems to cover most of the bases.
Eunice wrote:
My camera is a Canon EOS Rebel 3t
That will work just fine Eunice.
gym wrote:
I don't shoot portraits for a living, but have had good results with the Canon 100mm macro, as well as Canon's very decent 28-135 'kit lens'.
The latter seems to cover most of the bases.
The Canon 100mm macro is a great portrait lens, and it is a great macro lens. :thumbup:
That's two for one. Hard to beat.
i have a nikon 85 mm @ f1.4 it lives on my D300s it is the best lens for me sharp as a pin
Eunice wrote:
My camera is a Canon EOS Rebel 3t
Welcome to UHH, Eunice. You can get some good advice on here.
BboH
Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD
marty wild wrote:
i have a nikon 85 mm @ f1.4 it lives on my D300s it is the best lens for me sharp as a pin
I started down that road, bought that lens after several shoots and haven't used it since. Oh well, the oportunity is still looking for me - wish it would get a move on!.
Eunice wrote:
I head the the 50mm 1.4 and 50mm 1.8 are good for portaits, which one do you thing is better and what is the difference between this two?
What kind of lens do you use for portraits?
My fav is the Nikkor 105 2.8 micro
marty wild wrote:
i have a nikon 85 mm @ f1.4 it lives on my D300s it is the best lens for me sharp as a pin
Thanks for that. I am getting tired of hearing "tack sharp." Tacks are not very sharp. Yes, I know this pictures isn't very sharp, either. I took it a while ago, before I became an "expert." :D
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.