# Portrait Lens for Canon 550d



## stephenjohntomkinson (Jun 15, 2011)

Hi everyone,

I wanted your views on what lens I should buy next.  I've just upgraded my camera from the Sony alpha a390 to the Canon EOS 550d and wanted to start taking portrait shots.  

Your views would be much appreciated... 

Stephen


----------



## o hey tyler (Jun 15, 2011)

What's your price range?


----------



## Big Mike (Jun 15, 2011)

EF 85mm F1.2 L


----------



## stephenjohntomkinson (Jun 15, 2011)

I'm looking at around £200 - £300


----------



## o hey tyler (Jun 15, 2011)

stephenjohntomkinson said:


> I'm looking at around £200 - £300



The 50mm f/1.4 Canon makes is a good lens. I've also heard decent things about Sigma's 50mm f/1.4 and 30mm offerings. You may want to check those out too.


----------



## analog.universe (Jun 15, 2011)

EF 85mm F/1.8 USM    (1.2's little brother, disproportionately less costly)


----------



## stephenjohntomkinson (Jun 15, 2011)

Thanks so for the the input everyone 

I've just checked the Canon 50mm - F/1.4 @ £325 and also the f/1.8 @ £85.  I'm guessing if I want to save money the f/1.8 may be a good starting point?


[h=1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT][/h]


----------



## Big Mike (Jun 16, 2011)

Portraits are more about lighting than lens choice.  So what lens do you have now, and why do you feel the need to upgrade from it?  

Usually when we talk about a 'portrait' lens, we recommend a 'fast' lens.  That is a lens with a large maximum aperture (low F number).  So that is why the F1.4 & F1.8 lenses get recommended most.  That large aperture allows for a faster shutter speed but also a shallow Depth of Field (DOF).  The shallow DOF is often desirable for outdoor portraits because it may allow you to throw the background out of focus, while keeping the subject sharp.

Another factor for a 'portrait' lens is the focal length.  People usually look better if we shoot them from farther away, that is, it gives them less perspective distortion.  In other words, people don't look great when shot with a wide angle lens and the camera 2 feet away from them.  But if you back up to 20 feet, you will likely need a longer (telephoto) lens, and you will have a much more flattering perspective.  

So because of that, it's usually recommend to use a focal length of 50mm or longer for portraits.  Actually, 100mm was the most common recommendation for a long time.  So in that sense, the 85mm may be a better choice for portraits, than the 50mm.  But you also need to keep in mind that if you are shooting a full body portrait, or a group shot, then that 85mm focal length may require you to be really far away from your subjects, maybe too far away and you would have to shout instructions to them.

That is where a zoom lens (or having multiple non-zoom lenses) comes in handy.


----------



## subscuck (Jun 16, 2011)

If you have the money in your budget, skip the 50 1.8. While it's great value for the money, other than having better than you would expect optics for it's price, there's really nothing else about it to recommend it. Cheap plastic build, harsh bokeh due to only 5 aperture blades (and square blades at that), loud, clumsy, slow AF, and AF is dodgey at best in low light, low contrast settings. If you want a 50, go for Canon or Sigma's 1.4. Depending on space, I'll agree with Big Mike that the 85 1.8 would make an even better portrait lens.


----------



## jokesonu (Jun 17, 2011)

subscuck said:


> If you have the money in your budget, skip the 50 1.8. While it's great value for the money, other than having better than you would expect optics for it's price, there's really nothing else about it to recommend it. Cheap plastic build, harsh bokeh due to only 5 aperture blades (and square blades at that), loud, clumsy, slow AF, and AF is dodgey at best in low light, low contrast settings. If you want a 50, go for Canon or Sigma's 1.4. Depending on space, I'll agree with Big Mike that the 85 1.8 would make an even better portrait lens.



I agree. I have the 50 1.8 and the 85 1.8. I especially like the 85 for outdoor portraits cause it allows me to back up a bit its a really nice lens with fast usm focusing. The 50 is shorter so it lends itself better maybe indoors or where space is less like group pics in a smaller living room. But the 50 hunts for focus in low light and is slower and sometimes misses a little. Plenty of light outside and it's great but if you want to shoot with a 50 get the 1.4 it has the usm focusing its worth the extra money. I've pretty much decided I'm getting one and sticking my nifty fifty on my old rebel body I never use anymore and gift it to my daughter to chase my grand daughter with. It's a good starter lens but no more than that.


----------



## Pgeobc (Jun 17, 2011)

Ditto for Big Mike!


----------



## KmH (Jun 17, 2011)

stephenjohntomkinson said:


> Portrait Lens for Canon 550d


Portraiture requires a suite of lenses.

Prime lenses are popular because many of them have wide maximum apertures, though they are frequently used wide open, most of them perform at their best when stopped down 2 or more full stops.

Longer focal lengths are often used to take advantage of background compression, which gives the illusion of a shallower DOF than a shoerter focal length provides.

So, look at building a suite of portraiture lenses that includes 50 mm, 85 mm, 105 mm, and 200 mm.

If you anticipate doing group portraiture you will also need focal lengths shorter than 50 mm.


----------

