For a family portrait, 35mm. For a full person, 50mm. Head and shoulders, 85mm. For the face 180mm. For the face with ludicrous bokeh, 300mm prime. No zooms for posed portraits, but fine for beach, wedding, etc. Same brand as camera or Sigma. Nothing wrong with breaking the rules either. Generally, around f1.4 but once in a while stop it down for a changeup in depth of field. For special cases I have a soft focus lens (you can smooth in post, but it's not quite the same). I can't say I have a favorite lens. I like them all. I plan to experiment with wider (maybe down to 24 or even 20) but I did not try it yet. I saw an interesting demo of that by a Finnish photographer.
I love my 135mm f/2 and 85 f/1.2 for portraits! 50mm will also get the job done quite nicely as long one does not get too close to the subject to avoid distortion.
"Back in the day" when I was learning to shoot on film, 105 was the go-to portrait lens. Now the 85 seems to have weaseled its way into the top spot. I don't own an 85, because I don't do portrait work, but I have a 105 f/2.8 macro that I use occasionally for shooting live music, and I think it's a great focal length for portraits. But what do I know. I'm old. ;)
105 is also a great focal length lying between 70 and 135, the suitable range for portrait photography. The difference between 85 and 105 is not a big deal. If you already have 105, no need to buy the 85 one at all. Either you need around 150mm or 70mm if at all required.
105 is THE best focal length for a full frame camera due to the excellent compression and rendering. It makes portraits very flattering. I'm using the Nikon 105 f1.4 on my Z6II and it's absolutely unbelievable.
My workhorse lens, which includes portraits, is my EF 70-20mm F2.8L IS II USM. Adapting it to my R5 and R6 after moving into the RF system, and I kept it instead of getting the RF model as the EF model has almost no focus breathing. I haven't got to trial the RF version, but I have heard it is not as good against focus breathing as the EF is, and for that reason I will keep that EF lens until Canon can get me and RF lens that outperforms it. I've done just an absurd amount of work with it. I'd say a close second is my Sigma 50mm F1.4 Art HSM. But it's not my main portrait lens, its more for specific stuff that has more context in the shot.
RF f2.8 doesn't breath that bad. But your EF mk2 is so capable. I would say if you have opportunity, try the f4. The RF f4 version is so compact that you can easily take it out as daily lens.
I have always been a 50mm photographer. To me, it has always had the most visual appeal to me. But, having used a 110 Fuji camera for so many years in my youth, I also love what both the 35 mm and 85 mm brings to my composition. The three really complement each other.
The lenses you mentioned are known as holy trinity of lenses. Most of the shots you usually take have focal lengths in these ranges. Rarely we need extra wide or telescopic photos in portrait photography. Even for group shots in full frame, 35 mm is one of the best focal lengths. These focal lengths look very natural to our eyes. 35/50/85 also have approx 1.5 ratio between them, so no need to get any other focal lengths between them.
Fun video you two!! I gotta go with Tony on the big zoom! I'm a Canon shooter, and my first (and so far only) "L" lens is the RF 70-200mm f/2.8, and I use it exclusively for portraits. The clarity, color, and clean images I get with it just can't be matched by any of my non-"L" primes (tho the RF 85mm f/2 is also pretty fantastic!) And the variety of tight-to-SUPER-tight gives me some flexibility with my compositions without having to run all over creation! And since in the studio, I'm usually shooting above f/4 anyway, the slightly slower aperture isn't a factor.
Many Canon shooters don't know about the real budget 100% portrait lens - *EF 135mm f/2.8 (with soft focus)* . It is so good for its price. Designed for shooting against the light and unique (no other Canon lenses have it) SF feature leaves something more to play with.
@@simonmaduxx6777 What do you mean by "too long"? It is actually very lightweight and compact. It is old, yes, but the AF is quick and precise enough. And the sharpness is very good even wide open.
I had the 135 ‘soft’ my experience, with any “soft” setting manual focussing is a nightmare, especially stopped down a bit, the degree of softness is aperture dependent and my personal preference was fully open was too much so f4-5.6 was the useable range. Full wide open, full softness seemed very?? Autofocus greatly improved my user experience. I wondered if the softness settings were by sitter’s age, 30-40 = softness 1 f4.5 , 50-60 softness 2 f4 , 60+ softness 2 @2.8. At f8 it’s a sharp lens, the other consideration is its very warm colour ( I’m British, we spell correctly) balance.
Y'all are going to call me crazy but I have been using a Sony A6400 with the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 and a Sigma 30 F1.4 with good results. At a 16x20 the portraits look awesome! Knowing what you are trying to communicate with a portrait is 70% of the "gear". The equipment in the hands of a skilled person can then get the job done.
35 is my favorite portrait lens for non-traditional portrait work ie environmental portraits. Great especially for portraits at events where the scene is sometimes just as important as the main subjects.
I was taught to take portraits at a distance of around 1-1.5 meters and using the appropriate focal length to how much of the person I want in the frame. This gives me a compression that looks like what people see in the mirror.
Thank you for another very useful perspective on photography. I provide session portrait photography and use a Nikon Z7ii with a Z85mm f1.8 for the studio (clean studio backdrops do not require wide-open apertures to blur the background. To provide some insurance that I do not miss focus, I typically shoot at f4.0 to f5.6). I use the Nikon Z 24-70mm f2.8 for outdoor shots. This pair of lenses are a great duo! They have helped me produce some amazing images and, most importantly, have met my customers' needs!
Right now, my favorite is the 50 f/1.8 because that's what I can afford. I'm saving up for a used 850 and 24-70 from KEH. Love those guys. And, you guys, too !
Would love an 85 f/1.2 but have an EF 1.8 adapted to my R6. Just picked up a used 135 f/2 and really love it. I still am used to the 85 length more....
I got into primes as an escape from the chromatic aberration and flare of my zooms. It would take a lot for me to switch back. Still I am excited to learn that zooms are improving too. The past few years have been wonderful for lens development.
Primes all the way! Lighter, more selection over character, and the consistent field of view. The Nikon F 105mm f/1.4G is amazing (the Nikon F 200mm f/2 is even better, when it makes sense to use). Still trying to decide my preferred 35mm option, it's currently manual focus.
At the introduction of the A7RV, Sony allowed me to use the 1.2, 50 mm in combination with the A7RV, what incredibly sharp photos I was able to take in a short time. I have an A7RIV with a 200-600 lens and a 24-105 lens. If possible, I will buy another wide-angle lens for my holiday to Italy next spring. After saving a lot I also want to buy a 1.2 50mm, used I think. I enjoy your videos every time and also the setting of my camera is a success thanks to you. Good luck in your life and I wish you a fantastic Christmas and a wonderful New Year. Fred van Schaagen from the Netherlands
I'm an Amateur too, only been shooting for 18 months now, and to combat my confusion, my first two lenses (for my Canon 90D, which I sold for an R6 a year later) were a Tamron 24-70 G2, and a Sigma 70-200 2.8 Sports. Now I know for a fact I love the 135mm f/1.8 Focal length, an 85 (might honestly swap that out for a Sigma 105, because of how bossy that lens looks... xD), a 50, a 35 and a 24
Great video as always. My dream lense by far has always been a 70-200 f2.8. Now that the kids have left home, maybe I'll be able to afford one! Might even get my number two which is a 50 f1.2.
Have you considered the Tamron 35-150mm f2.0-2.8? In my opinion the focal range is also far more useful than 70-200mm. For people photography I'd pick the Tamron any time over the Sony. For sports the GM2 is probably the better choice because the af of the GM2 is definitively faster.
The 35 even with its distortion produces some really really nice portraits as well. My 35 was originally bought to do backstage with 2.8 for its wideness. Since then I've used it many times over to get some portrait flexibility from using the 50.
My fave lens for portraits is the 50mm 1.4. Not crazy sharp but Bokeh is awesome and its relatively well priced. I also use the Tamron 70-200 G1 which is stunning on my Eos R but to heavy to carry around for long.
My current portrait lens is the 7Artisans 50mm f/0.95, which creates a perfect dreamy vintage look with a ton of bokeh. Also love to work manually with this lens...
I have 24mm GM , 90mm G OSS F2.8, and the 70-200mm G F4. I'm making good results with 90 and 70-200. as much as possible on my budget. 90mm is deadly sharper , you need just a nice light and magic is on . Of course none of them perform as well as 50mm f1.2 which seem to be awesome and also neither 70-200mm which is No1 on my purchasing list ! because ALL of its versatility. To end up here is my dream lens kit: 24mm for night street photo, 90mm for food and some portret details, 70-200GM OSSII for events, and 50mm F1.2 for special bokeh body parts portrets . Unfortunately you need at least 1 assistants to carry this with all the gear ...:)
Canon 28-70mm f2.8L is my workhorse... but if I know that I'm only shooting portraits, then the 70-200mm is better. It depends on what I know when I pack my bag.
Canon 85 mm 1.4 L is my fav portrait lens. Plenty of bokeh. But the Canon 70-300 mm 4-5.6 L is also pretty amazing. Just have to be more careful with ISO speed to keep blur from slow shutter speed.
I really like the Canon EF100 f2. It is surprisingly good. It’s super sharp and light. Doesn’t draw attention and if you have the working space you can get good sniper candida.
35-150mm F/2-2.8 is a really cool range. But what is that image for the "canon" 50mm f1.2 @ 7:31 :) Other than that, a 35mm 1.4 or 50mm 1.2 in combination with an 70-180 f2.8 works really well.
I agree with Tony about the bokeh of prime lenses but I'm so glad Chelsea mentioned a wider angle like 24mm. The amazing work of cinematographers like Bradford Young or Emmanuel Lubezki or photographers like Deana Lawson (and I'm sure many I don't know) is just as influential as smartphones or first-person shooters.
I use the Nikon Z 70-200 F2.8 S Lens on my Z7 >> far better than any 85 f1.4 I used before >> Have you tried it >> If you had it would be No 1 on your list
I got a Leicaflex camera in 1967 at a Canadian PX in Germany. Kept till early 1980s. Had the 50 mm lens it came with it. Wish I kept it. Sometimes used a hand meter for lighting. It was a great lens for portrait. Just briefly did photos of people mainly in the 70s while going in college.
That 85mm f/1.2 is roughly 3.5k dollars in Sweden. I saw that they also have a DS (defocus smoothing) version. The main thing with the DS is that it smoothes out the bokeh balls from light sources, looks rly cool. Oh and the DS version is roughly 4k.
The Lumix G Leica DG Vario-Summilux 25-50mm F1.7 is a crazy fantastic lens. With a 2x crop, it provides parody with FF 50-100mm @ f2.8 - 3.4 bokeh. I also have the M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 that is phenomenally sharp. Practically the only two lenses I need for portraiture… Never realized that a Leica 50 - 100mm focal length would be so convenient and affective, especially capable of f1.7. If I need something for wide, the Leica 15mm/1.7 will suffice. However, the Leica 12mm/1.4 or the Leica 9mm/1.7 might be a bit better, but I do not yet own the later two… Keep in mind, since the subject is portraiture, lighting is usually not a issue… And before someone says a particular system is not professional; I would say, a camera does not make the results professional, but rather the talent that snaps the photo does… 🤔
For travel portrait photography, 135/2.0 is my absolute favorite. The lens is relatively compact and you don't have to get too close to the subject. Shooting strangers with a big white lens can be intimidating sometimes. :)
For an event, I prefer a wide to portrait zoom so I can do table shots and portraits quickly. In a more personal setting, for portraits of self conscious older women, I like to use an 85mm soft focus lens. I know you can do soft focus in post, but I find that I have to show the lady a few pics off of the back of the camera to convince her that her wrinkles won't show. I've always been an amateur and always recommended to people who asked for my (free) work to hire a pro. I found that the cheapest people are the most demanding so I'm actually happy that the cheapskates are these days relying on their friends with cellphones to get their free work and no longer bothering me - I get to shoot whatever I want for myself.
Happy owner of the RF 85 1.2, 50 1.2 and 70-200 2.8, but before I shot these amazing lenses, I was (and still am) a huge advocate for the older and cheaper EF 135mm f2L, simply stunning smooth bokeh, great colours and all round pop. 😃👍
I have the Canon 24-70mm F 2.8 EF for my Canon R5. But when I do portrait shots I use my Sigma 50mm F 1.4 EF Art lens. I have had issues with the 24-70mm but not with the 50mm. Prime lenses are far better for portraits. I'm now looking for the Samyang 85mm 1.4 EF since Canon put a stop to the RF version
I choose the Nikon 70-200 F2.8 all day, there's something special about that lens that no other has, but that's just me and I'm not proffessional by any means, I'm always learning from the pro's like you guys, thank you
I have several prime lenses, some more expensive, some cheaper... but my inexpensive nifty fifty 1.8 always wins them over in the end... I just love that lens!
I myself use the sigma 70/200 because i got a terrific deal on it although it was not my first choice and at the end of the day, it's a great lens too, comparable to those three.
I’ve always found my 85 and 50 primes to be too short. I find myself way to close when taking headshots and even waist up. Especially when working with children with special needs. I’m general, too, though. I find 135mm prime to be ideal for most circumstances (portrait)
I’ll be shooting wigs on models so true color and definition. I’m fairly new so I bought a Canon R8 and a 35, 50, and 85mm RF 1.8 lenses. Any recommendations is helpful, also I’m gonna check out that photography website. Thanks for the video!
Nice video, Northrups. Rich in useful information. My favorite portrait lens *would* be the 85mm f/1.2, BUT. It scares people. Models see this hugemongous eye and tense up. Even when I've had a bath. So, even though it's larger, the 70-200. It's not blobular, it's size doesn't seem so threatening.
My favorite portrait lens of all time is the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art ! Period ! But I never feel unconfortable using an 85mm f/1.4, a (very good) 70-200mm f/2.8 or even my 35mm f/1.2 which gives me stunning results !
Ive hung on to my Canon 5DIII is the old 135L because I dont think sharp is everything but the older sensors seem better for portraits. For sharp Im using a fuji
While I have primes, for most work where I don't need the reach of the 70-200, I use the RF 28-70. The F2.0 gives a little more bokeh, I don't have to zoom with my feet, and just works. The 2 drawbacks are price and weight. Not being petite, this lens works great for me.
I’m going to go with Tony on this one. The 70-200 is so unique and sets me apart from all the people who avoid it because it’s too heavy. It also stands apart from phone cameras so much so that you can remain a pro where phones can’t go.
Thanks for this video. I have a 24-70 2.8 GM and I don't like it, despite it being a good lens. I can't use it. Do you have any other reviews like mine?
i've got a grip of primes, the 16-35 Zeiss f4 and the Sony 24-105g, and i never really thought i was gonna want a telephoto range much, but i think i'm gonna go w the Tamron 35-150 next, just bc it's a 2.0 up to 85, which is crazy, fastest zoom on Sony and fastest zoom outside the ubiquitous Sigma 18-35 1.8, and if i want extra range i can use clear img zoom...
Dear Chelsea & Tony, i follow from Chile. I've bought your book 4 years ago. In South America, it's more commom DX camera. I love 35mm DX, 50mm DX and recently 24-70mm. I agree with Chelsea: quite versatile (dynamic opinion with time we live).
I have all three of those lenses (except my 50mm is a 1.4). Now I'm completely confused! However, I will say my Canon RF24-70 f/2.8L IS stays on my camera most of the time. And, yes, I can add more bokah in PS if needed.Still a great video. Thanks.
85mm Zeiss batis, 100mm RF macro, 135mm Zeiss batis-I’m usually outdoors. Loved the 28-70 RF but it was way too heavy, actually just switched fully back to Sony for a few reasons (thanks keh!)
85 f2, 105 2.5, 180 f2.8 on my Sony a1. Portraits need compression. Wider lenses just look like regular phone pics. with fake bokeh added. I often use the 180 to shoot 2 shot individual portraits and 2-3 shot family or group pano's with nice blurry, magnified backgrounds. The compression along with the bokeh leaving some almost-identifiable background features really pop. I found When I use zooms for portraits I often will drift away from my goals , become lazy and fixate primarily only on my subject, speed up too much , end up moving closer and next pay less attention my focal length compression, blur and composition. It's is easy to drift off. The manual and AF primes force you to maintain the composition, slow down, work with the subject more intimately, and pay more attention to the overall composition. 180mm multi shot group pano's look extra, extra sharp, even better than medium format with a wide angle look only with better bokeh. They display well on Social media with greater detail to zoom in on, even when the file size is reduced for posting. I do still use my zooms for the kids and family shots but 70mm is just never enough. That said, for pro portrait work it's still primes.
Hey Tony, could you please make a video about the difference between a normal sensor and a stacked sensor and how they work? I haven't found any video or website that described that enough for me to fully understand. Thank you!😃
The 70-200 F2.8 is the premiere workhorse portrait lens coupled with a prime 85mm and you’re, “cooking with gas”. The thing is, with all lenses distorting the image to some extent, as a portrait photographer, you want a pleasing distortion, as well as great bokeh. These lenses can give you those characteristics. Cheers
I think too many photographers get hung-up on the amount of bokeh in an image. The last photograph in your video is an EXCELLENT example of that. Look at how BEAUTIFUL that background is, why blur it all out? Embrace the background! It's too easy to lose too much shooting away at f1.4 and forget what's behind everyone and everything. All that said, I use a Zeiss Milvus 50 f1.4. As always, great video!
hello , should i add 70-200 gm ii ( weddings, portraits and maybe street) or 135 1.8 gm. I already have 24 1.4 gm , 35 1.4 gm , 50 1.2gm and 85/1.8. Just your opinions .Thanks
My lenses are the cheap primes from the EF mount: 28mm F1.8, 35 F2, 50 F1.8, and the 85 F1.8. And my 'hidden gem': the original 80-200mm F2.8 L zoom for EF. Somehow everybody forgot about that lens. And it is a absolute steal!! A mint one can be had for below 500 dollars! It might not be USM or have IS, but it works on EOS digital and film cameras. But also works well on RF-mount cameras.
The magic drainpipe is one of my favorite lenses. I like to use it for landscape on a tripod (often doing panorama sequences) since IS is useless on a tripod. I'll be sad when it kicks the bucket because parts are hard to find and I can't find a maintenance manual for it either.
You two are not only helpful to educate and assist us amateur photographers, but are just fun to watch. Thanks.
For a family portrait, 35mm. For a full person, 50mm. Head and shoulders, 85mm. For the face 180mm. For the face with ludicrous bokeh, 300mm prime. No zooms for posed portraits, but fine for beach, wedding, etc. Same brand as camera or Sigma. Nothing wrong with breaking the rules either. Generally, around f1.4 but once in a while stop it down for a changeup in depth of field. For special cases I have a soft focus lens (you can smooth in post, but it's not quite the same).
I can't say I have a favorite lens. I like them all. I plan to experiment with wider (maybe down to 24 or even 20) but I did not try it yet. I saw an interesting demo of that by a Finnish photographer.
The 85 1.2 is my go to when shooting portraits, but now it’s more trending open shoots and here is when my 28-702.0 shines
I love my 135mm f/2 and 85 f/1.2 for portraits! 50mm will also get the job done quite nicely as long one does not get too close to the subject to avoid distortion.
Canon RF 85 1.2 DS - favorite lens ever, color, contrast, sharpness, image rendition even wide open are unparalleled.
I love my Sigma 85 1.4 for portrait work, but my 28-75 2.8 at 75 does decently as well for quick shots if I'm out and don't want to change lenses.
"Back in the day" when I was learning to shoot on film, 105 was the go-to portrait lens. Now the 85 seems to have weaseled its way into the top spot. I don't own an 85, because I don't do portrait work, but I have a 105 f/2.8 macro that I use occasionally for shooting live music, and I think it's a great focal length for portraits. But what do I know. I'm old. ;)
105 is also a great focal length lying between 70 and 135, the suitable range for portrait photography. The difference between 85 and 105 is not a big deal. If you already have 105, no need to buy the 85 one at all. Either you need around 150mm or 70mm if at all required.
105 is THE best focal length for a full frame camera due to the excellent compression and rendering. It makes portraits very flattering. I'm using the Nikon 105 f1.4 on my Z6II and it's absolutely unbelievable.
Love the chemistry and the helpful information. You guys rock!
My workhorse lens, which includes portraits, is my EF 70-20mm F2.8L IS II USM. Adapting it to my R5 and R6 after moving into the RF system, and I kept it instead of getting the RF model as the EF model has almost no focus breathing. I haven't got to trial the RF version, but I have heard it is not as good against focus breathing as the EF is, and for that reason I will keep that EF lens until Canon can get me and RF lens that outperforms it. I've done just an absurd amount of work with it.
I'd say a close second is my Sigma 50mm F1.4 Art HSM. But it's not my main portrait lens, its more for specific stuff that has more context in the shot.
RF f2.8 doesn't breath that bad. But your EF mk2 is so capable. I would say if you have opportunity, try the f4. The RF f4 version is so compact that you can easily take it out as daily lens.
@@zegzbrutal RF 24-105 F4 is high quality and also very light and less expensive.
I have always been a 50mm photographer. To me, it has always had the most visual appeal to me. But, having used a 110 Fuji camera for so many years in my youth, I also love what both the 35 mm and 85 mm brings to my composition. The three really complement each other.
The lenses you mentioned are known as holy trinity of lenses. Most of the shots you usually take have focal lengths in these ranges. Rarely we need extra wide or telescopic photos in portrait photography. Even for group shots in full frame, 35 mm is one of the best focal lengths. These focal lengths look very natural to our eyes. 35/50/85 also have approx 1.5 ratio between them, so no need to get any other focal lengths between them.
Fun video you two!! I gotta go with Tony on the big zoom! I'm a Canon shooter, and my first (and so far only) "L" lens is the RF 70-200mm f/2.8, and I use it exclusively for portraits. The clarity, color, and clean images I get with it just can't be matched by any of my non-"L" primes (tho the RF 85mm f/2 is also pretty fantastic!) And the variety of tight-to-SUPER-tight gives me some flexibility with my compositions without having to run all over creation! And since in the studio, I'm usually shooting above f/4 anyway, the slightly slower aperture isn't a factor.
I love your lens reviews when you do it "together" - it's good to hear both perspectives and a bit of pro-n-con conversation. Keep up the good work!
Many Canon shooters don't know about the real budget 100% portrait lens - *EF 135mm f/2.8 (with soft focus)* . It is so good for its price. Designed for shooting against the light and unique (no other Canon lenses have it) SF feature leaves something more to play with.
Its also way too long. Everyone knows about it. Its also used for product.. it was used in my studio classes many years ago.
Thx though 👍
Never heard of this
@@simonmaduxx6777 What do you mean by "too long"? It is actually very lightweight and compact. It is old, yes, but the AF is quick and precise enough. And the sharpness is very good even wide open.
I had the 135 ‘soft’ my experience, with any “soft” setting manual focussing is a nightmare, especially stopped down a bit, the degree of softness is aperture dependent and my personal preference was fully open was too much so f4-5.6 was the useable range. Full wide open, full softness seemed very?? Autofocus greatly improved my user experience. I wondered if the softness settings were by sitter’s age, 30-40 = softness 1 f4.5 , 50-60 softness 2 f4 , 60+ softness 2 @2.8. At f8 it’s a sharp lens, the other consideration is its very warm colour ( I’m British, we spell correctly) balance.
The focal length is too much very limited not that versatile. Still a nice lense
My favorite portrait lens: my 135F1.8GM. A bit on the heavy side for a prime, but boy is it good! :-)
I like zooms for events and primes for posed work
love and highly recommend the 35-150mm f2-2.8 for any Sony shooters … best of both worlds 35mm f2 + 50mm f2.2 + 70-150mm f2.8 all in one
I'm a 50mm fan but listening to Chelsea talk about the 85 prime has peaked my curiosity. The 70-200 is always in my bag as well.
Y'all are going to call me crazy but I have been using a Sony A6400 with the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 and a Sigma 30 F1.4 with good results. At a 16x20 the portraits look awesome! Knowing what you are trying to communicate with a portrait is 70% of the "gear". The equipment in the hands of a skilled person can then get the job done.
I love my tamron 105 f1,4 for The posed work. And I use both 24-70 and 70-200 f2,8 for eventlike ocations.
35 is my favorite portrait lens for non-traditional portrait work ie environmental portraits. Great especially for portraits at events where the scene is sometimes just as important as the main subjects.
35 is very near to normal view, just a little wide. An excellent choice for group shots.
I was taught to take portraits at a distance of around 1-1.5 meters and using the appropriate focal length to how much of the person I want in the frame. This gives me a compression that looks like what people see in the mirror.
Professional portrait lens #1 Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art
Or maybe 105mn f1.4
Until sony does a 85mm GM Version 2. Sigma is best
@@Alexanderboost agreed
My #1 portrait lens is the Sony 135mm f1.8 GM, I use the Sigma 85 1.4 as well for a lighter setup but I prefer the 135 look
@@sharpfocused5710 135 is brilliant for background compression
Thank you for another very useful perspective on photography. I provide session portrait photography and use a Nikon Z7ii with a Z85mm f1.8 for the studio (clean studio backdrops do not require wide-open apertures to blur the background. To provide some insurance that I do not miss focus, I typically shoot at f4.0 to f5.6). I use the Nikon Z 24-70mm f2.8 for outdoor shots. This pair of lenses are a great duo! They have helped me produce some amazing images and, most importantly, have met my customers' needs!
Right now, my favorite is the 50 f/1.8 because that's what I can afford. I'm saving up for a used 850 and 24-70 from KEH. Love those guys. And, you guys, too !
You guys share great fun and enthusiasm, alongside the knowlege and experience ! Your work is highly appreciated !!!
Would love an 85 f/1.2 but have an EF 1.8 adapted to my R6. Just picked up a used 135 f/2 and really love it. I still am used to the 85 length more....
Awesome, I've been thinking of getting the ef 135 f2 again. Such a nice and compact lens
Nikon 105mm f1.4 E is my favorite.
Yes, people still use DSLRs and get great results.
It is even better on Z bodies. You get stabilization and if you fit it on Z9, much better AF than on DSLRs.
I got into primes as an escape from the chromatic aberration and flare of my zooms. It would take a lot for me to switch back. Still I am excited to learn that zooms are improving too. The past few years have been wonderful for lens development.
Hi there, primes and bokeh create the magic of photography. Thank you for all so classy videos. Cheers.
Primes all the way! Lighter, more selection over character, and the consistent field of view. The Nikon F 105mm f/1.4G is amazing (the Nikon F 200mm f/2 is even better, when it makes sense to use). Still trying to decide my preferred 35mm option, it's currently manual focus.
For me it's either the Nifty Fifty F1.4 or the 85mm F1.4. are there better options? Yup, but not for the same price as some of these
At the introduction of the A7RV, Sony allowed me to use the 1.2, 50 mm in combination with the A7RV, what incredibly sharp photos I was able to take in a short time. I have an A7RIV with a 200-600 lens and a 24-105 lens. If possible, I will buy another wide-angle lens for my holiday to Italy next spring. After saving a lot I also want to buy a 1.2 50mm, used I think. I enjoy your videos every time and also the setting of my camera is a success thanks to you. Good luck in your life and I wish you a fantastic Christmas and a wonderful New Year. Fred van Schaagen from the Netherlands
As an "old school" portrait and wedding photographer I'll take my Nikkor 105mm all day long. Glad to see you promoting PPA.
I got the RF 50mm 1.2 about 6 months ago. I love that lens. It's just beautiful. It's all I want to shoot now.
YES!!! I love my G master 24-70. For both, stills and video.
I'm an amateur photographer so have no idea what my fav lens is. I do enjoy binge watching your channel.
you do shoot nikon yeah ?
@@sasskin1 Yes, a D700
It always depends on what you shoot. Portrait? 35mm 50mm 85mm primes. Don´t need that shallow DoF? 24-70 all day.
I'm an Amateur too, only been shooting for 18 months now, and to combat my confusion, my first two lenses (for my Canon 90D, which I sold for an R6 a year later) were a Tamron 24-70 G2, and a Sigma 70-200 2.8 Sports. Now I know for a fact I love the 135mm f/1.8 Focal length, an 85 (might honestly swap that out for a Sigma 105, because of how bossy that lens looks... xD), a 50, a 35 and a 24
My favourite is the Sony FE 90mm f2,8 OSS macro. It is so pin sharp in an beautiful and natural way. Pleny of boca
Great video as always. My dream lense by far has always been a 70-200 f2.8. Now that the kids have left home, maybe I'll be able to afford one! Might even get my number two which is a 50 f1.2.
Have you considered the Tamron 35-150mm f2.0-2.8? In my opinion the focal range is also far more useful than 70-200mm. For people photography I'd pick the Tamron any time over the Sony. For sports the GM2 is probably the better choice because the af of the GM2 is definitively faster.
For portraits, definitely the 35mm and 50mm prime lenses. For special events and hikes (landscape) a good 24-105mm or a 70-200mm.
The 35 even with its distortion produces some really really nice portraits as well. My 35 was originally bought to do backstage with 2.8 for its wideness. Since then I've used it many times over to get some portrait flexibility from using the 50.
My fave lens for portraits is the 50mm 1.4. Not crazy sharp but Bokeh is awesome and its relatively well priced. I also use the Tamron 70-200 G1 which is stunning on my Eos R but to heavy to carry around for long.
My current portrait lens is the 7Artisans 50mm f/0.95, which creates a perfect dreamy vintage look with a ton of bokeh. Also love to work manually with this lens...
I have 24mm GM , 90mm G OSS F2.8, and the 70-200mm G F4. I'm making good results with 90 and 70-200. as much as possible on my budget. 90mm is deadly sharper , you need just a nice light and magic is on . Of course none of them perform as well as 50mm f1.2 which seem to be awesome and also neither 70-200mm which is No1 on my purchasing list ! because ALL of its versatility. To end up here is my dream lens kit: 24mm for night street photo, 90mm for food and some portret details, 70-200GM OSSII for events, and 50mm F1.2 for special bokeh body parts portrets . Unfortunately you need at least 1 assistants to carry this with all the gear ...:)
I have been a PPA member for about 26 years.
Great group
Canon 28-70mm f2.8L is my workhorse... but if I know that I'm only shooting portraits, then the 70-200mm is better.
It depends on what I know when I pack my bag.
Canon 85 mm 1.4 L is my fav portrait lens. Plenty of bokeh. But the Canon 70-300 mm 4-5.6 L is also pretty amazing. Just have to be more careful with ISO speed to keep blur from slow shutter speed.
You both are great and truly I am learning both from u in different perspectives and it's really helpful, thanks
I really like the Canon EF100 f2. It is surprisingly good. It’s super sharp and light. Doesn’t draw attention and if you have the working space you can get good sniper candida.
35-150mm F/2-2.8 is a really cool range.
But what is that image for the "canon" 50mm f1.2 @ 7:31 :)
Other than that, a 35mm 1.4 or 50mm 1.2 in combination with an 70-180 f2.8 works really well.
I agree with Tony about the bokeh of prime lenses but I'm so glad Chelsea mentioned a wider angle like 24mm. The amazing work of cinematographers like Bradford Young or Emmanuel Lubezki or photographers like Deana Lawson (and I'm sure many I don't know) is just as influential as smartphones or first-person shooters.
I use the Nikon Z 70-200 F2.8 S Lens on my Z7 >> far better than any 85 f1.4 I used before >> Have you tried it >> If you had it would be No 1 on your list
I got a Leicaflex camera in 1967 at a Canadian PX in Germany. Kept till early 1980s. Had the 50 mm lens it came with it. Wish I kept it. Sometimes used a hand meter for lighting. It was a great lens for portrait. Just briefly did photos of people mainly in the 70s while going in college.
I enjoy using my 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8 lens for my portraits. Thank you for the nice video. Good morning from the Philippines. 🤩😍
I have been addicted to my EF 135mm f/2L USM for outdoor portraits.
That 85mm f/1.2 is roughly 3.5k dollars in Sweden. I saw that they also have a DS (defocus smoothing) version. The main thing with the DS is that it smoothes out the bokeh balls from light sources, looks rly cool. Oh and the DS version is roughly 4k.
The Lumix G Leica DG Vario-Summilux 25-50mm F1.7 is a crazy fantastic lens. With a 2x crop, it provides parody with FF 50-100mm @ f2.8 - 3.4 bokeh. I also have the M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 that is phenomenally sharp. Practically the only two lenses I need for portraiture…
Never realized that a Leica 50 - 100mm focal length would be so convenient and affective, especially capable of f1.7. If I need something for wide, the Leica 15mm/1.7 will suffice. However, the Leica 12mm/1.4 or the Leica 9mm/1.7 might be a bit better, but I do not yet own the later two…
Keep in mind, since the subject is portraiture, lighting is usually not a issue…
And before someone says a particular system is not professional; I would say, a camera does not make the results professional, but rather the talent that snaps the photo does…
🤔
My favorite lens is the 400/2.8 but also use the 135/2.0 or 85/1.2.
For travel portrait photography, 135/2.0 is my absolute favorite. The lens is relatively compact and you don't have to get too close to the subject. Shooting strangers with a big white lens can be intimidating sometimes. :)
Would you use the same on crop sensor like the r7 using 18 - 150 would like a little wider this is my first camera thanks you all are awesome
For an event, I prefer a wide to portrait zoom so I can do table shots and portraits quickly. In a more personal setting, for portraits of self conscious older women, I like to use an 85mm soft focus lens. I know you can do soft focus in post, but I find that I have to show the lady a few pics off of the back of the camera to convince her that her wrinkles won't show. I've always been an amateur and always recommended to people who asked for my (free) work to hire a pro. I found that the cheapest people are the most demanding so I'm actually happy that the cheapskates are these days relying on their friends with cellphones to get their free work and no longer bothering me - I get to shoot whatever I want for myself.
Happy owner of the RF 85 1.2, 50 1.2 and 70-200 2.8, but before I shot these amazing lenses, I was (and still am) a huge advocate for the older and cheaper EF 135mm f2L, simply stunning smooth bokeh, great colours and all round pop. 😃👍
what's a "70-200 2.8 1.2"
@@jvsn_4 oops, looks like I’m human after all..! 🤪👍
Thanks for the video! I prefer a 70-200 f/2.8 and 50 f/1.2 for full-frame. I used to only use a 24-70 f/2.8, but that was on a crop sensor camera.
I specially liked this video... and Tony, you can never win over Chelsea.😀 Mabuhay kayo!
the 50 1.2 and 85 1.2 both have this special characteristic to them that stands out
I have the Canon 24-70mm F 2.8 EF for my Canon R5. But when I do portrait shots I use my Sigma 50mm F 1.4 EF Art lens. I have had issues with the 24-70mm but not with the 50mm. Prime lenses are far better for portraits. I'm now looking for the Samyang 85mm 1.4 EF since Canon put a stop to the RF version
How about a 200mm f/2? Rarely hear people mentioning those.
I choose the Nikon 70-200 F2.8 all day, there's something special about that lens that no other has, but that's just me and I'm not proffessional by any means, I'm always learning from the pro's like you guys, thank you
85, f1.2: See me in a surreal way
70-200, f2.8: See me despite my location
24-70, f2.8: See me because of my location
My fave is 24-70
I have several prime lenses, some more expensive, some cheaper... but my inexpensive nifty fifty 1.8 always wins them over in the end... I just love that lens!
I myself use the sigma 70/200 because i got a terrific deal on it although it was not my first choice and at the end of the day, it's a great lens too, comparable to those three.
I’ve always found my 85 and 50 primes to be too short. I find myself way to close when taking headshots and even waist up.
Especially when working with children with special needs.
I’m general, too, though.
I find 135mm prime to be ideal for most circumstances (portrait)
Wow the lens setup you have here to record is really pretty, almost looks cinematic. Also great advice as usual!
Favorite portrait lens. NIKKOR 85mm F1.8G. Extremely sharp, great background blur, lighter to carry all day and lighter on the wallet than 85mm 1.4G.
may I ask at 7:26 where can I get the Canon 50mm f/1.2 G lens ?
I’ll be shooting wigs on models so true color and definition. I’m fairly new so I bought a Canon R8 and a 35, 50, and 85mm RF 1.8 lenses. Any recommendations is helpful, also I’m gonna check out that photography website. Thanks for the video!
Nice video, Northrups. Rich in useful information. My favorite portrait lens *would* be the 85mm f/1.2, BUT. It scares people. Models see this hugemongous eye and tense up. Even when I've had a bath. So, even though it's larger, the 70-200. It's not blobular, it's size doesn't seem so threatening.
My favorite portrait lens of all time is the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art ! Period !
But I never feel unconfortable using an 85mm f/1.4, a (very good) 70-200mm f/2.8 or even my 35mm f/1.2 which gives me stunning results !
The Sigma 105 mm 1.4 is my dream lens. Only because of its weight, am I leaning towards 85 mm 1.4. But I would love the 105....
I have the Canon 24-70mm 2.8 and it doesn't give me what I need in portraits..
Ive hung on to my Canon 5DIII is the old 135L because I dont think sharp is everything but the older sensors seem better for portraits. For sharp Im using a fuji
While I have primes, for most work where I don't need the reach of the 70-200, I use the RF 28-70. The F2.0 gives a little more bokeh, I don't have to zoom with my feet, and just works. The 2 drawbacks are price and weight. Not being petite, this lens works great for me.
Just bought myself am. 85 f1.4. WHAT a game changer!!
I’m going to go with Tony on this one. The 70-200 is so unique and sets me apart from all the people who avoid it because it’s too heavy. It also stands apart from phone cameras so much so that you can remain a pro where phones can’t go.
But the 85mm is sharper and handles highlight better. Also has much more depth of field
I was surprised that Chelsea didn’t choose the Nikkor 105 mm 1.4. Based on her review video. I love it.
Thanks for this video.
I have a 24-70 2.8 GM and I don't like it, despite it being a good lens. I can't use it. Do you have any other reviews like mine?
What would you recommend for an APS-C camera like the Nikon Z50? 50mm/f1.8 or 85mm/f1.8 Z-mount?
i've got a grip of primes, the 16-35 Zeiss f4 and the Sony 24-105g, and i never really thought i was gonna want a telephoto range much, but i think i'm gonna go w the Tamron 35-150 next, just bc it's a 2.0 up to 85, which is crazy, fastest zoom on Sony and fastest zoom outside the ubiquitous Sigma 18-35 1.8, and if i want extra range i can use clear img zoom...
Looking good Tony! The best team on UA-cam…
Dear Chelsea & Tony, i follow from Chile. I've bought your book 4 years ago. In South America, it's more commom DX camera. I love 35mm DX, 50mm DX and recently 24-70mm. I agree with Chelsea: quite versatile (dynamic opinion with time we live).
No love for the Sony 135mm F1.8?
I have all three of those lenses (except my 50mm is a 1.4). Now I'm completely confused! However, I will say my Canon RF24-70 f/2.8L IS stays on my camera most of the time. And, yes, I can add more bokah in PS if needed.Still a great video. Thanks.
85mm Zeiss batis, 100mm RF macro, 135mm Zeiss batis-I’m usually outdoors. Loved the 28-70 RF but it was way too heavy, actually just switched fully back to Sony for a few reasons (thanks keh!)
I have a 70-200 2.8 from Tamron, 100mm 2.8 macro from Tokina, 85mm and 50mm from Nikon and 17-70mm 2.8-4 from Sigma
85 f2, 105 2.5, 180 f2.8 on my Sony a1. Portraits need compression. Wider lenses just look like regular phone pics. with fake bokeh added. I often use the 180 to shoot 2 shot individual portraits and 2-3 shot family or group pano's with nice blurry, magnified backgrounds. The compression along with the bokeh leaving some almost-identifiable background features really pop. I found When I use zooms for portraits I often will drift away from my goals , become lazy and fixate primarily only on my subject, speed up too much , end up moving closer and next pay less attention my focal length compression, blur and composition. It's is easy to drift off. The manual and AF primes force you to maintain the composition, slow down, work with the subject more intimately, and pay more attention to the overall composition. 180mm multi shot group pano's look extra, extra sharp, even better than medium format with a wide angle look only with better bokeh. They display well on Social media with greater detail to zoom in on, even when the file size is reduced for posting. I do still use my zooms for the kids and family shots but 70mm is just never enough. That said, for pro portrait work it's still primes.
Hey Tony, could you please make a video about the difference between a normal sensor and a stacked sensor and how they work? I haven't found any video or website that described that enough for me to fully understand. Thank you!😃
haha... seing Chelsea batteling Tony about the Bohek at the end finally made my decission to hit that "subscribe" button 🙂
The 70-200 F2.8 is the premiere workhorse portrait lens coupled with a prime 85mm and you’re, “cooking with gas”. The thing is, with all lenses distorting the image to some extent, as a portrait photographer, you want a pleasing distortion, as well as great bokeh. These lenses can give you those characteristics. Cheers
I think too many photographers get hung-up on the amount of bokeh in an image. The last photograph in your video is an EXCELLENT example of that. Look at how BEAUTIFUL that background is, why blur it all out? Embrace the background! It's too easy to lose too much shooting away at f1.4 and forget what's behind everyone and everything. All that said, I use a Zeiss Milvus 50 f1.4. As always, great video!
hello , should i add 70-200 gm ii ( weddings, portraits and maybe street) or 135 1.8 gm. I already have 24 1.4 gm , 35 1.4 gm , 50 1.2gm and 85/1.8. Just your opinions .Thanks
My fav portrait lens is samyang’s new 135mm af f1.8. Tack sharp and amazing bokeh, especially being a 135mm.
My lenses are the cheap primes from the EF mount: 28mm F1.8, 35 F2, 50 F1.8, and the 85 F1.8. And my 'hidden gem': the original 80-200mm F2.8 L zoom for EF. Somehow everybody forgot about that lens. And it is a absolute steal!! A mint one can be had for below 500 dollars! It might not be USM or have IS, but it works on EOS digital and film cameras. But also works well on RF-mount cameras.
The magic drainpipe is one of my favorite lenses. I like to use it for landscape on a tripod (often doing panorama sequences) since IS is useless on a tripod. I'll be sad when it kicks the bucket because parts are hard to find and I can't find a maintenance manual for it either.
Is HasselBlad 📸 is useful for wildlife photography...???
when I travel, I only bring my 50GM and 24-70GM II with my a7r4, plus crop mode is cover more then everything I need it.
Where does Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 fit in? I think that should have made to the list