Is there a "Best" Portrait Lens for Crop-Sensor Canons?

[Cory]

My current jewel is the 85 1.8, but there's also the Sigma 50-100 and the upcoming Sigma 85 Art.
Maybe just keep the 85 1.8 and stop splitting hairs or is there anything that jumps out? I have 4 portrait sessions planned and am starting to build a business founded on portraits.
THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Mikehit]

Everyone will have their preference for 'best' but 'portrait' covers so many styles: head and shoulders, half body, full body and it depends on how much room you have to move around.

What is your current set of lenses? I would be inclined to say use those and get used to them if you haven't already (and if you have used them for portrait you should already know which focal lengths you want to gravitate to as well as aperture options).

The classic portrait lenses on FF would be 90-130mm which translates to 60-90mm on APS-C but a lot of people vary from that. The 24-70 f2.8 is the workhorse for some but you also have the 17-55 f2.8 EF-S, 24-70 f4 and 24-105 f4.

 

[Cory]

What is your current set of lenses?

35 2.0 IS for groups and when space is limited and 85 1.8 when I can.
Thanks.

 

[atkinsonphoto]

I love the 85 F1.8, except for the purple fringing, which can be avoided in a portrait situation. I also use the 35 F2 is and the 200 F2.8L. The 200 is addictive, but much harder to dial, at least handheld. You will need extra space between you and your subject too. The 35 is the easiest to use, but can be too close for comfort with some subjects.

 

[Mikehit]

What is your current set of lenses?

35 2.0 IS for groups and when space is limited and 85 1.8 when I can.
Thanks.

I think the 32 and 85 on the APS-C would be fine. I would be tempted to get the 50mm f1.8 as an interim - cheap but remarkably good - until you get a feel of how you want to work.

 

[pwp]

Q: Is there a "Best" Portrait Lens for Crop-Sensor Canons?

There's no "Best" that anyone could recommend to you. People will recommend their personal favourites.

It depends entirely on your style. As someone who has been shooting portraits for literally decades, I wouldn't be without zooms. The flexibility just can't be ignored. I buy primes, often impulsively, use them a little then re-sell them. My far and away two most used lenses are 24-70 f/2.8II & 70-200 f/2.8isII on FF & APS-C (7DII). The far and away most used portrait lens is the 70-200. I think you'll find that not all, but a majority of professional portrait photographers worldwide most used lens would be the 70-200.

Some people take amazing portraits with wide angle glass, others are rusted onto their 85 f/1.2 glass, others swear by their 135 f/2. They're all valid choices because it suits their style. A good zoom just gives you that often appreciated instant choice.

The lens won't "make" your portrait any more than hand-tools build a house. It's the creativity, magic and a light human touch that you bring to a job that will set your work apart from the rest.

-pw

 

[Luds34]

I used the 85mm f/1.8 on crop. It worked pretty well for portraits. Especially if you used any sort of strobe/flash and were stopping down to f/4 or something. Biggest complaint was that it was a little long and therefore could be tight if used indoors. I actually found myself using the 60mm f/2.8 macro a lot for portrait shots and I thought it delivered some excellent results.

 

[timmy_650]

The Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 is a great lenses for crop camera. But it will matter on your style.

 

[3kramd5]

Q: Is there a "Best" Portrait Lens for Crop-Sensor Canons?

There's no "Best" that anyone could recommend to you. People will recommend their personal favourites.

It depends entirely on your style. As someone who has been shooting portraits for literally decades, I wouldn't be without zooms. The flexibility just can't be ignored. I buy primes, often impulsively, use them a little then re-sell them. My far and away two most used lenses are 24-70 f/2.8II & 70-200 f/2.8isII on FF & APS-C (7DII). The far and away most used portrait lens is the 70-200. I think you'll find that not all, but a majority of professional portrait photographers worldwide most used lens would be the 70-200.

Some people take amazing portraits with wide angle glass, others are rusted onto their 85 f/1.2 glass, others swear by their 135 f/2. They're all valid choices because it suits their style. A good zoom just gives you that often appreciated instant choice.

The lens won't "make" your portrait any more than hand-tools build a house. It's the creativity, magic and a light human touch that you bring to a job that will set your work apart from the rest.

-pw

I was just going to answer "no," but pw made it entirely unnecessary.

The thread should be locked after your post, fine sir.

 

[Cory]

Before it's locked I think there's a slight chance that I'm starting to become drawn to the 50L. Nothing against zooms, but I'm a "prime" ho and just can't help it.

 

[pwp]

Before it's locked I think there's a slight chance that I'm starting to become drawn to the 50L. Nothing against zooms, but I'm a "prime" ho and just can't help it.

I've had a couple of 50L lenses. As far as 50 L's go, they were good copies. Neither kept more than six months.
If you must go with a 50, I'd be looking at Sigma...

You'd be better off with an all-rounder, a zoom, and maybe pick up a good 50 somewhere along the track as your shooting style evolves.

-pw

 

[d]

As another mentioned, the Canon 60mm 2.8 macro is a quality performer that's worth a look.

 

[axtstern]

Let me sum up the advice of roughly 30 years:

If you want to be a professional and have the skills required almost any lens will be sufficient.
But if you want to either ease your live or gain that specific advantage to distinguish yourself from others through the hardware you use than you will need dinstinctive lenses.

Let me run through what I used or have stopped using...

The Canon 2.8 soft focus lens.... obsolete in the age of Photoshop and Portrait Pro

The Ef 85 1.8 (you have it)
This is the lens I always tell myself that it is the best compromise but which I somehow always carry around and seldom use. Almost nothing to complain and so much easier to use than the 1.2 Grapefruit

The EF 85 1.2
Heavy, slow, unforgiving as with 1.2 the usual aim for the eyes than compose workflow will result only in almost sharp pictures. However this lens has a unique picture style and can save you from having to repair the background afterwards thanks to the shallow field of depth. I have long stopped carying this lens arround so it is studio only for me.

The EF 200L 2.0
Rented once, loved it for everything it is, can't afford to buy it, and you will shout yourself hoarse using it on a crop as the distance to your model is simply to long. So one more to forget about.

The EF 180L 1.8
Bought it for 1300 Euro, unbelievbale nice portrait lens which you never will use as it requires your private Askari to carry it and each time you use it something in the backside of your brain says: No more spareparts for this one... do not break anything further than it already is.

Any Canon EF TSE lens you like
now here is my private hot tip.
Use an TSE for some of your portratits. align the optical axis though tilt and shift with the cheekbones or dependening on your model with other protuding bodyparts. You now have the DoF going almost diagonal through your picture. For example left side of the face sharp from Eye to Ear, right side facing the full effect of shallow DoF and Bokkeh.. Can be photoshopped but with this lenses you have it out of the camera.

Canons and Sigmas line up of 50s
Have bought the EF 50 1.8, 1.4 ,1.2 and the Sigma 1.4... have sold the EF 50 1.8, 1.4 ,1.2 and the Sigma 1.4
It all blurs in my mind but to heavy, strange bokeh, bad focus, slow focus ahh non I liked on a crop.. but still looking for the perfect one.

Sigma 18-35 and the 50-100 1.8
To be honest I do not know what can beat this duo.
Both together with an 80D make for a heave load in your bag, but since I use this combo I have tretired:
Canon Ef 85 1.8
Canon EFS 17-55 2.8
Sigma 24 1.4
Sigma 50-150 2.8

Oh and last but not least:
The dinosaur of all lenses:
Tamron 35-105 2.8
can be shot at the bay for small coins.
Not sharp...but eh you can achieve your own Billitis style without any post production
AF speed and sound is close to a cheap accu drill
and touch and feel is more retro than any of Nikons latest camera attempts but 35-105 on a crop at 2.8 is very handy if you have to shot candid portraits especialy when paired with the Sigma 18-35

 

[Alex_M]

+1. In addition, both lenses are parfocal. I hope that recently anounced Sigma 85 1.4 Art will turn this duo into trio.

... Sigma 18-35 and the 50-100 1.8
To be honest I do not know what can beat this duo.
Both together with an 80D make for a heave load in your bag, but since I use this combo I have tretired:
Canon Ef 85 1.8
Canon EFS 17-55 2.8
Sigma 24 1.4
Sigma 50-150 2.8 ...

 

[Cory]

Thanks, everyone, for the help. It, along with significant agonizing, clarified my thinking -

Keep the 85 1.8 and possibly replace it with the Sigma 85mm Art (if the new Sigma is 100% perfect in every way).

 

[pwp]

Thanks, everyone, for the help. It, along with significant agonizing, clarified my thinking -

Keep the 85 1.8 and possibly replace it with the Sigma 85mm Art (if the new Sigma is 100% perfect in every way).

Note of caution...there is no such thing as a 100% perfect anything.
I'd be putting most of your attention on building your portrait business.

-pw

 

[Cory]

If I can sell my Canon 50 STM and 85 1.8 I think all fingers are pointing at the Sigma 50-100 1.8.
If anyone knows - how might the Sigma 50-100 compare with the Sigma 50 Art at 50 and at the same aperture?
Pretty sure I'm leaning towards the 50-100.
THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[rfdesigner]

Pretty much all lenses are "best" if you use off camera flash!

(you use light rather than focus to produce seperation, and so operate at F8 or so, almost all lenses are good at F8)

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

The Sigma 50-100mm Art performs very well against 50mm Art.
I love my 50mm Art, but I'm tempted by the 50-100 as well.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=1048&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jHsQPpMrIk

 

[NancyP]

Head and shoulders only, or environmental? It all comes down to how you like to work, and your available studio space or environment.

85mm is good for the head-and-shoulders, so is the 60mm f/2.8 macro. If you can back off further, there's always the deluxe 135 f/2 L, more bokeh, but not everyone likes to work relatively far from the client. At some point you might like to have a lens in the "normal" range as well, for environmental portraits. If so, there's the cheap but good 40mm f/2.8 STM, and the more expensive and faster Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art.

IF you like the 85 for your style work, keep it, don't worry about lenses, and spend your money instead on more lighting, stands, and modifiers (soft boxes, reflectors, flags, white and black foam-core, etc), and any gels and backdrops you might need. Also, RF transmitters and receivers are cheap and good.