85mm vs 24-85mm?

[Tanya Kurnik]

I do a lot of portraits and I was wondering which lens to get, 85mm f/1.8 or Canon EF 24-85 mm F/3.5-4.5 Lens?

[Steve_S]

Originally Posted by Tanya Kurnik

I do a lot of portraits and I was wondering which lens to get, 85mm f/1.8 or Canon EF 24-85 mm F/3.5-4.5 Lens?

I just got an 85 f/1.8. It is a really nice lens, and inexpensive as well. Sharp, fast focus, and nice bokeh , what's not to like.

[Rentham]

The 85mm f/1.8 is a truly great lens. Probably one of the best in terms of value per dollar in the entire Canon lineup.

[inkista]

Just me, but I still think if you're going to drop $2500 on a 5D Mark II, that getting an 85/1.8 USM is kind of like getting budget tires for a new sportscar. I'd go for the EF 135mm f/2L USM.


5D Mark II, EF 135mm f/2L USM, iso 50, f/2, 1/500s.

And I really really doubt you're going to find ANYONE who would tell you to get a mid-range, slow, variable-max.aperture, walkaround zoom for portraiture over the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM.

I thought you were going to get the 24-105L or the 24-70L for the 5Dii. Why would you even be looking at the 24-85?!

[Tanya Kurnik]

Originally Posted by inkista

Just me, but I still think if you're going to drop $2500 on a 5D Mark II, that getting an 85/1.8 USM is kind of like getting budget tires for a new sportscar. I'd go for the EF 135mm f/2L USM.


5D Mark II, EF 135mm f/2L USM, iso 50, f/2, 1/500s.

And I really really doubt you're going to find ANYONE who would tell you to get a mid-range, slow, variable-max.aperture, walkaround zoom for portraiture over the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM.

I thought you were going to get the 24-105L or the 24-70L for the 5Dii. Why would you even be looking at the 24-85?!

I got the Canon 24-70mm L and the Mark ii. I was up in the air about the 85mm.

[andrewdt]

Originally Posted by Tanya Kurnik

I got the Canon 24-70mm L and the Mark ii. I was up in the air about the 85mm.

If you already have the 24-70 then it is pure madness to be thinking about getting a 24-85 which is slow and probably really crap compared to this.

You could get the 85 1.8 if you are going to get anything in that range, but I think Inkista hit the nail on the head about the 135, as your 24-70 covers you almost to that point very nicely as a great portrait lens.

[gturner]

get a 70-200 - any one of the 4 versions.... THEN get prime

[ik631]

Is the 85mm good for low light indoor shots with action like a dance recital? The 50 1.8 sucks because it can't focus in low light. Sorry if this looks like I am hijacking the thread but I thought it would be ok since it was on the same topic and didn't really need a new thread of its own. I was looking at it for low light indoor kids events which means faster movements.

[inkista]

It should be better (the 50/1.8 II is notoriously bad at this), but low light AF performance is always going to be a bear.

[Tanya Kurnik]

I went with the Canon 100mm f/2.8. I also got the 24-70 not the 24-85.