Good Portrait Lens? please help!

[squawshell]

Hello!
I currently have the Canon 40D with a 17-85mm 5.6 IS lens and am looking to purchase a good CANON portrait lens that will give me some great bokeh etc. I was hoping to spend less than $500.

I am just getting started with turning my hobby into something more exciting... so, based on my limited photography knowledge here is what i am leaning towards:

1. Canon lens
2. around $400 or less
3. 1.4, 1.8 or 2.8? which is better for portrait?
4. something preferably around 50 to 60mm i think, because i dont shoot in a big studio so i dont have much room to back up to capture more of my subject.
5. Do I want a Macro Lens?
6. here are the lenses i was considering... am i way off?
Canon EFS 60mm 2.8 macro lens, but it looks like that might not fit on my camera?
Canon 50mm 2.5 macro lens - but do i want macro etc?
Canon 50mm 1.4 usm
any others?


There are so many lenses out there, and so much to consider.
All thoughts or recommendations would be GREAT!
Thanks Greatly!

[cphoniball]

IMO, the best budget portrait lens Canon offers is the 85mm 1.8. Overall I'd say this is really the best option for someone looking to get into portraiture; if you're concerned about not having enough room, take your subjects outside.

You mentioned that this might be too long for you though, in which case I'd recommend checking out the Sigma 50mm 1.4 or the Canon 50mm 1.8. I've heard too many bad things about the 50mm 1.4 from Canon to recommend it, but the version Sigma offers is supposed to be very good if you can get a copy that AF's well.

[eleuthardt]

I shoot with a 40D, and have used the 85 1.2L and found it was hard for more than headshots in a fairly large studio. I currently use and love my 50 1.4, and have even used and liked the 50 1.8. I would suggest the 1.4 for the price and quality of the lens and what you can do with it.

[Eyad]

You can kick start with 50mm f/1.8 II.... Will NEVER go wrong with this choice.\\Cheap, Sharp and super small..... Excellent quality!

[natek313]

Originally Posted by cphoniball

IMO, the best budget portrait lens Canon offers is the 85mm 1.8. Overall I'd say this is really the best option for someone looking to get into portraiture; if you're concerned about not having enough room, take your subjects outside.

You mentioned that this might be too long for you though, in which case I'd recommend checking out the Sigma 50mm 1.4 or the Canon 50mm 1.8. I've heard too many bad things about the 50mm 1.4 from Canon to recommend it, but the version Sigma offers is supposed to be very good if you can get a copy that AF's well.

This! Shooting with my 85mm f/1.8 USM is such a joy.

Oh, and don't worry about the 60mm f/2.8 Macro fitting your camera; it will. You can get a macro lens and use it as a portrait lens if you want. Macro lenses are super sharp, which may not always be ideal for portraits. If you're going to want/need a macro lens for macro work, then I might consider purchasing the macro lens and using it as a portrait lens as well.

[inkista]

The Canon EF 50 Macro isn't a true Macro (i.e., does not achieve 1:1 magnification unaided), so I'd leave it out of the mix. As mentioned above, the EF-S 60 Macro is probably a better choice if you want a double-duty lens.

Things to keep in mind:

The shorter the focal length of the lens, the deeper your DoF will be, the closer you can get to your subject, and the more chances you'll find for distortion (particularly below 20mm).

The longer your focal length, the shallower the DoF becomes, the faster your shutter speed needs to be, and the farther away you have to be from your subject.

A 50mm on a crop body may be too long for comfortable portrait photography, say, across a table or in a casual social situation, and probably too long for full-body shots in a small studio space. A 35mm lens may be more ideal in those kinds of situations.

The 50/1.8 II is a great starter lens, because it's incredibly cheap. It's about $100, and optically very good, and is the best bang-for-the-buck bargain in the entire Canon lineup. It does have drawbacks, but for the price, you can put up with them, unless you planned to shoot landscapes with it. But very few people buy an f/1.8 lens for landscape shooting.


The 50/1.8 will teach you whether you want to go longer or wider. If you want to go longer, then the 85/1.8 USM, the 100/2 USM, and the 135 f/2.8 Soft Focus are all low-cost possibilities, and all are terrific lenses. If you want freaking amazing, the 85L and 135L are there, but they have four-figure prices.

The two things you may want to consider are a) renting before you buy to see if the focal length is a good fit of whatever prime you buy, and b) analyzing your photos with something like FocalPlot to see what focal lengths (if any) you tend to sit at.

[squawshell]

Wow, thanks everyone. i really appreciate all the feedback. i am going to check into the lenses you all mentioned above, and hopefully find something this weekend!

thanks again!