Portrait lens should I buy (Page 2): Based om DXOMark the EF 100mm F/2 is sharper than EF 135mm F/2 L lens. This lens is smaller, cheaper and it should have been listed as L glass.

baygolf Loc: DMV

Based om DXOMark the EF 100mm F/2 is sharper than EF 135mm F/2 L lens. This lens is smaller, cheaper and it should have been listed as L glass.

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

I'm not portrait photographer, but ImageMaster suggested a zoom. Would a 70-200 2.8 fit the bill. I have an older version without IS that might fit the bill. I'm sure it could be had for a very reasonable price!

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

You have two good lenses for portrait, the 50 and 85 mm lenses and I cannot understand why you want a third one. In any case the 135 mm lens is a good choice for many portrait photographers.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

baygolf wrote:

Based om DXOMark the EF 100mm F/2 is sharper than EF 135mm F/2 L lens. This lens is smaller, cheaper and it should have been listed as L glass.

You might want to look that up again. In the DXOMark database, the 135 f2L’s sharpness (on a Canon 5D4) is listed as 24, while the EF 100 f2 is listed at 19.

Jack47 Loc: Ontario

traderjohn wrote:

"would like to add another portrait lens to my collection of the Canon 50mm 1.8 usm and the 85mm 1.8 usm lenses that I already have".
Why would you even have to ask the question? If you already have a portrait lens, you know what works, and what doesn't.

He has two that don’t work.....for him. He is looking for suggestions on something that will.

baygolf Loc: DMV

TriX wrote:

You might want to look that up again. In the DXOMark database, the 135 f2L’s sharpness (on a Canon 5D4) is listed as 24, while the EF 100 f2 is listed at 19.

My bad, I was addressing the overall score not sharpness.

Adamborz

I have a 24-105 f/4L IS II and a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II they are what I use. I find the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II to be sharper so I use it more but it’s a heavy beast and I usually have it in a tripod. The 24-105 is very versatile too and in your price range used.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

baygolf wrote:

My bad, I was addressing the overall score not sharpness.

Easy to do. I learned something also - didn’t know there was a 135 soft focus...

Cheers.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

Are you a collector or a photographer? Just wondering. 😉😉

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

out4life2016 wrote:

I’ve always wondered what portrait lens does most people recommend for a Canon 6D MarkII. I am on a budget of 800 dollars and would like to add another portrait lens to my collection of the Canon 50mm 1.8 usm and the 85mm 1.8 usm lenses that I already have. Any advice and recommendations are greatly appreciated.

I'd go with the 85mm

Adamborz

Adamborz wrote:

I have a 24-105 f/4L IS II and a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II they are what I use. I find the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II to be sharper so I use it more but it’s a heavy beast and I usually have it in a tripod. The 24-105 is very versatile too and in your price range used.

They say a picture beats a 1000 words or something like that... this with the 70-200... check the download ... 3 light set up.

(Download)

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

out4life2016 wrote:

I’ve always wondered what portrait lens does most people recommend for a Canon 6D MarkII. I am on a budget of 800 dollars and would like to add another portrait lens to my collection of the Canon 50mm 1.8 usm and the 85mm 1.8 usm lenses that I already have. Any advice and recommendations are greatly appreciated.

My favorite portrait lens was the 70-200 2.8. Can't go wrong.

ELNikkor

I prefer the 85 myself, but for versatility, the 70-200 2.8 would cover all the bases. The reason I would not use a large, heavy zoom, though, is that I like tidy and light-weight, hence that 85 1.8, or 100 2.8 are my main considerations for portraits.

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

Adamborz wrote:

They say a picture beats a 1000 words or something like that... this with the 70-200... check the download ... 3 light set up.

Important info missing, At what focal length?

Adamborz

bobmcculloch wrote:

Important info missing, At what focal length?

I just checked the info, I used the 70-200 at f/8 ISO 100 and focal length listed in the details as 123 mm. I didn’t necessarily pick that focal length, there was a desk in between us haha.