Portrait Lens

[hop]

Hello,
I am currently trying to launch my photography career focusing on portraits. I have a Canon 500D and just the 18-55mm lens. Can anyone suggest a Canon Lens suitable for portraits to enhance my shots?
Cheers
HOP

[kelleyrie]

my favorite portrait lens is my 60mm 2.8 macro, a lot people also love the 50mm 1.8

[SusanH1970]

Do you have a budget? Do you shoot indoor/studio or outdoors?

[NgaiHill]

Canon 50 mm f1.8 II is a great wee lens and well priced too. If you want something marginally faster look at the 50mm f1.4L but personally, I don't know if its worth the price difference.
Hop on over to the Photography Gear page and read what others have to say about the 50 mm.
And hopefully some of the other more experienced portrait photographers here will give you some advice as well.

[RichardTaylor]

On relatively small budget, and your shooting style, either a 50mm (preferably F1.4) or the Canon 85mm F1.8.

On a larger budget a 24-70 (or 28-70) F2.8 would be great.
Canon make a 24-70mm F2.8 L lens which should last for years and be a very versatile lens (not just for portraits).
If I didn't have a 24-105 all ready that would be my choice.

[Biomech]

I have a 50mm 1.7 and a 30mm 2.8. They are 75mm and 45mm equiv so I find the 50mm is far too tight. I have had great results from my 30mm but it is very noisey.

note: noisey like loud not like grain. :P

[mshockley]

Originally Posted by RichardTaylor

On relatively small budget, and your shooting style, either a 50mm (preferably F1.4) or the Canon 85mm F1.8.

I have found that both these lens are my go-to choices for all my portrait work. If I have a little more room to move or am shooting outdoors, I tend to grab the 85, and in the studio I use the 50. Love 'em both!

[Rentham]

The best value, in my opinion, is the 100mm f/2.8L macro. It's around a thousand bucks, has almost no distortion, very crisp at 2.8, and razor sharp in the middle apertures. Unlike most Ls it is made of engineering plastic instead of metal. You really come to appreciate the weight savings in your bag. It's also a macro lens, if you're into that. I think the 135mm f/2 is around the same price point if you want an alternative.

I also have the 50mm f/1.4, which I find to not be worth the extra money over the f/1.8 version. If I were doing it again, I probably would have opted for the 85mm f/1.8. I find the 50 to have a surprising amount of distortion, and clunky construction.

Of course if money isn't an issue grab the 85mm f/1.2 and call it a day.

[eyalg]

If your budget is really low, there's no way around the 50mm f/1.8.
If you can afford it - the 85mm f/1.8 is the best portrait lens I know for ~$400.

[Yogesh Sarkar]

Get the 50mm f1.8 and save rest of the funds for either flash and reflectors or one of the 70-200L versions.