Pye, you are the absolute heavyweight on the Adorama channel (in every sense). Your videos have a "business seminar" vibe; So much to, that I dress up biz casual to watch and learn. Thanks for adding so much value to the industry.
Adorama’s Creative Director, Daniel Norton, recently did a much better, more thoughtful video on his own channel called “50mm vs 85mm for Portraits”: ua-cam.com/video/ief_M-_kLF8/v-deo.html
I was going to leave a comment about this. I purchased a used Sigma 50mm 1.4 for my Nikon DX. Would I get the same benefits shown in the video? Thanks this was great content
Thanks for the video. Back in 1968, the 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor was the 2nd lens I purchased for my Nikon F 35mm SLR. The 35mm f/2 Nikkor was my 1st lens. I used both for reportage. I also used the 85 for head & shoulder portraits. In 2016, I finally upgraded my manual focus 85 to the 85mm f1.4 D AF Nikkor. The 85mm autofocus and the manual focus 135mm f/2 Zeiss are my two favorite portrait lenses. Both lenses have a 77mm filter thread.
Manual focus lenses are not a pain at all if you are using the right focusing screen. I shoot with a Zeiss Otus 85 and I can nail the focus, every single time.
One of the best buys you can get is the old fashion first version 85mm, f/1.8 primes. They’re marked down but still terrific. One recommendation, there’s more to this lens then f/1.8. Compact as well.
Why are you shooting your portraits in Live View? Do you shoot ALL your portraits in Live View? I know LV has face recognition and might be slightly better at AF. But holding a heavy camera and lens out in front of me to shoot something as intimate as a portrait really changes the experience for me (I'm a portrait photographer also). Far less enjoyable. There is magic in looking through a lens and drawing closer to my subject that is totally lost when holding the camera out in front of me. It distances me from both my subject and the joy of looking through the lens and entering another world -- and a beauty beyond all distractions.
Brotherman im listening to you in head phones you sound tremendous wowwwww your voice is made for this and yes i have an 85 MM i slept with my lens the first night i bought it lol seriously
Hi Pye, just a note about an honest mistake in the video, in the image with the 24-70mm 2.8 it mistakenly says 24-70mm F/2.8 II L @24 1/250, F/1.4, ISO 800 If it's an F/ 2.8 so you cannot shoot it at F/1.4 :-) The mistake was made most likely because you made the video at 2am LOL
@@payamjirsa Writing f/1.4 resulted as typo result ? What a coincidence!!! I ABSOLUTALLY love this photo. But I 'hope' f/2.8 is a typo too. (for it too look 'that' technically good also in a larger fine art print. Certainly not a exemplary theoretical advice for such a scene
While I wouldn't use my 85 for fast motion or things like that, the Canon 85mm f1.8 actually focuses quite fast, much faster than the 85mm f1.2. It has a USM in it that helps. And I have taken some absolutely creamy shots with with. I have talked to a few photographers that wished they got the 1.8 instead of the 1.2 for the faster focus alone. And I talked to one that told me he sold his 1.2, bought two 1.8's (one for use and one for back up) and put the other thousand dollars in the bank. Lol. But the 85 is an absolute beast of a lens for image quality and sharpness. :)
Well said! I absolutely love the 85 1.4 as it’s my favorite lens. But yes it does have a couple draw backs which was also nice to see you noted but this lens is definitely a lens that’s great to have in your tool bag as a portrait or wedding photographer. Ok now you can take a nap 😴 haha
Nutella is OK but we found something even better. We make our own walnut butter. We use a variety of English Walnut that has little tannin and is perfect for our home made Walnut Butter. Add a touch of maple syrup and you are golden. Nutella move over.
What is a portrait? I’m legitimately asking… is a portrait supposed to focus on the face? I mean, not a passport photo, but I guess… what’s a portrait to you?
I typically use my XF 90(135mm equivalent) for tight corporate headshots. Not for the 'bokeh' or background compression, I'm almost always shooting on a plain background, but rather it is more forgiving of distance and angles with regard to distortion. I use my XF 56(85mm equivalent) mostly for environmental portraits of my corporate clients. It gives we a wider frame while still providing a similar leeway with regard to distortion. That said, for the handful of 'online dating' shoots I do or photos at grandma's birthday party, I mostly stick to a 50mm equivalent lens(XF 35 or TCL-X100 conversion lens). Yes you need to be more aware of your distance and angles to prevent distortion of someones face, but images captured at shorter focal lengths tend to be more representative of 'being there'. Personally, I find those images more compelling. For photos of the kids at family functions, particularly the very young ones, I actually tend to go wider FOR the distortion which make the images more lighthearted and fun. IMHO there is no 'perfect' lens for all portraits. There are 'better' lenses for different types of portraits but the only 'perfect' lens is the one that produces the image or tells the story the photographer sees in his/her mind. Caveat: 𝘐 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘯 𝘰𝘶𝘵. 𝘐 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘺. 𝘏𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳, 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘠𝘖𝘜 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘵𝘴.
I have a 50 mm and 85 mm prime .... I find it easier to get as good picture with the 50mm but giving in a little effort in the end the 85mm gives the most satisfying results looking back at my photos .....🧐😀
Nice video Pye but you forgot to mention that is on a full-frame camera! For me, a Full-frame camera is not for me, I need a lighter and smaller camera body and lenses for medical reasons! There are times that you need to shoot @ f1.2, f1.4, and f1.8 I prefer to shoot with more depth of field when I can if there is a good background to be found!
Regarding focusing fast 85/100/135mm primes manually, my suspicion is that they'd be more popular if more people had a dedicated body just for them ... _so long as the camera could be fitted with a proper manual focusing screen_ like in Days of Yore. This is particularly true compared to slow-focusing AF lenses. Also, some camera bodies cannot focus a fast lens as fast as they can slow lenses regardless of aperture being used, because AF points must be optimized for "expected / typical" apertures used. At least with manual focus, you're in control and not waiting/hoping for an AF lens to get it right, even with focus peaking/confirmation that newer cameras might offer.
Yes, slow AF is partly lens, partly camera body. For example, the Canon 1DX3 is incredibly fast to focus even with slow primes like the 85/105. But, price-wise it's out of reach for most people.
The Next Hobby I have a wedding photographer friend who shoots entirely in manual. It’s madness but it works for her and she has the same hit rate as me using AF 💁♂️
Great video! I have struggled to get comfortable with prime lenses but your examples definitely have shown me that they have a reason to be in my camera bag. Many thanks.
On the photo of the bride surrounded by a bunch of women, it’s noted that a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 II L lens was used @ 24mm, 1/250 sec, f/1.4, ISO 800. How do you get to f/1.4 on an f/2.8 lens?
Pye, asking for advice. With a limited budget, which lens would you choose for the canon 6d mark I: Canon EF 100 mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM or 85 f/1,8 USM. The main application is, of course, portrait, but with 100 mm, the spaces for macro photography open up.
Thanks as always. Questions please. 2:58 your graphics show F/2.8 lens being used but you state the photo was F/1.4. Apologies if I've missed something but could you please clarify? thanks Lee.
Okay, there's a difference between "loose" and "lose." I'm in the 100mm macro camp for portraits. I'd love a 90mm Thambar for my M10 but, um, yeah, cubic $$$. Maybe one day, when I grow up. My wife has a very round face: it looks fat at 50mm. I have to be careful with my angles when using anything under 100mm if I don't want her to throw hard objects at me. 135mm treats her well.
Very good pye. If you have100mm 2.8 Do yoy also require the 85mm 1.8 As they do mostly the same job. I like the 50mm 1.8 very versitile light weight and a great lens too
Newbie question, I see you’re using a higher shutter speed on a lot of your photos and it seems like your models are standing still. Why is that? Thank you in advance!
You used the 100mm macro. But this one won't give a defocus background as a 85mm 1.8 or so. I have 24-70 f2.8 n planning for a portrait lens of either 85mm 1.8 or d macro lens as d macro will serve dual purpose .
At 2:52 you claim you've shot a wide portrait of the bride's group at f1.4 with a 70-200mm f2.8. I'm curious how you pulled that off and found a workaround to achieve that ignoring laws of physics.
Hi, Pye! I have 70-200 f2.8, but i am thinking of buying 85mm 1.8mm. Is it worth if we dont count weight? Its heavy dilema for me couse I need other lenses too. My lenses are 11-20 in dx mode on z7. So there i get only 20mpx. 24-70mm f4 and 70-200mm f2.8. So i could use full frame wide for landscapes, mb 50mm lens with f1.8.
I have a problem. I don't like my photos taken with 85mm, I always feel like it makes my face looks wider than it is. It's probably just me as everyone says is the most flattering focal length for portraits.
Perspective compression. If you have taken perspective drawing class and went to photography school, then the former has taught you some rules of thumb how to draw perspective going in the distance, but you may have missed the formality (aka math). In photography school you will have learnt about the inverse square law (for artificial lighting, like flash). To start with the latter - this simply says that the AREA you shoot gets bigger when you step away farther. But when you double the distance, the area in your shot does not get 2x as large, but 2 squared, i.e. 4 times bigger. Or at 3 times the distance you get 3 squared, is 9 times, more in the picture. In lighting, this means the light (energy) out of your speedlight must illuminate 9 times the area when you increase the distance to the subject by 3 times. With increasing distance, we get exponentially more in the picture. And the intensity of light diminishes by the inverse of that: 9 times bigger area becomes 1/9 intensity of light. Perspective compression is that same (inverse) square law. With things in your picture at different distances, you will feel that it seems as if things farther away are closer to each other than they really are. That inverse square law also works the other way around. Get nearer and the effect seems to be dramatic. In lighting we use that to get more dramatic light-dark, differences between foreground and background. In perspective we use this inverse square law to raise the attention of the viewer later to elements in the foreground. By the way, with some asymmetry in faces, we can use perspective to make the asymmetry invisible. A portrait with a 35mm (full frame) could help here.
Slow focusing? Not a problem on crop bodies! 50mm focuses quick and is equivalent to an 85 (give or take). Though my favourite focal length is 135, it’s just magic to me.
Canon costs too much, they are way over priced so I use my Tamron 85mm 1.8 with vibration control :) Better than Canon at a much more affordable price.
I have a Canon R6. I want to add a 85 mm and I'm considering the usm85 which is more budget friendly. what are your thoughts on this lens? Even a comparison? Thanks for your great videos and I use your dark mode preset all the time ☺️
I am about to go for a photo shoot one of my friend and i was doubting using my 85 and or 24-70. So like you sid for indoor it was scary thing to use my 85 so I most probably use my 24-70... Many thanks for advice
The 85mm focal length is probably my favorite of all focal lengths for what i primarily do. I do love 105mm as well. The new Nikkor 85mm 1.2S looks stunning. However, that lens is almost $3k. I hope Nikon lets Tamron make an equivalent lens for cheaper.
Everything is fine, but I often use 35 & 50 for portraits if I don't get enough space. I really enjoy the blur of those focal lengths & minimal distortion ( Good lenses don't give you that much distortions). 85 is my favorite when it comes to location shoot or if I have stable conditions to compose portrait. I don't use 70-200 anymore because its huge & bulky. 85 f1.4 is the best. I tried 135,105 both.
I have been a pro for 35 yrs or more - in a studio 85 is perfect - or in my case the MF equiv - but outside a 90, 100, 105, 135, is better. When I had an RZ the 500 APO was by far the best. I shot over seven complete catalogues with that!!
Been using 50mm 4/3, have since jumped to m4/3 learning the trade off to a 42.5mm (85mm equivalent) and with adapter 50mm 4/3 on the m4/3 is now 100mm equivalent.
Pye, you are the absolute heavyweight on the Adorama channel (in every sense). Your videos have a "business seminar" vibe; So much to, that I dress up biz casual to watch and learn. Thanks for adding so much value to the industry.
Nice!
I wish I could shoot my 24-70 f2.8 at 1.4. Lol
everybody does! but would be super heavy...
Exactly the reason why I switched to prime lenses because 2.8 don't cut in some of my use case.
Thank you for calling it Nut-tella and not Noo-tella because it’s made from hazelnuts not hazelnoots.
We call them Hazelnoot in Dutch btw ;-)
How did you have a 24 mm f1.4 on the wedding shot on a 24-70?? 🤔
Apologies, that was a typo. f/2.8 is correct.
That was a typo - good catch and sorry about that!
Should have been called "4 reasons the 105 is perfect for portraits" felt like more examples were taken with the 105
I'm looking at that 105 right now! Lol
if you can affor a 105 1.4 then you are going to use it
Adorama’s Creative Director, Daniel Norton, recently did a much better, more thoughtful video on his own channel called “50mm vs 85mm for Portraits”: ua-cam.com/video/ief_M-_kLF8/v-deo.html
i have qhestion :
50mm on crop sensor its equal to 85mm on full frame sensor??
no its 80mm in a 1.6 crop aps-c mode
85mm for a full-frame.
Started to fall in love more and more with the 85 mm - especially when it comes to going wide open.
I photograph almost exclusively with my 85mm, I love this lens.
I definitely support the Nutella statement! :)
I love 85 for portraits just like I loved my 50 when I shot with a crop sensor.
I was going to leave a comment about this. I purchased a used Sigma 50mm 1.4 for my Nikon DX. Would I get the same benefits shown in the video? Thanks this was great content
Thanks for the video.
Back in 1968, the 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor was the 2nd lens I purchased for my Nikon F 35mm SLR. The 35mm f/2 Nikkor was my 1st lens. I used both for reportage. I also used the 85 for head & shoulder portraits.
In 2016, I finally upgraded my manual focus 85 to the 85mm f1.4 D AF Nikkor. The 85mm autofocus and the manual focus 135mm f/2 Zeiss are my two favorite portrait lenses. Both lenses have a 77mm filter thread.
Manual focus lenses are not a pain at all if you are using the right focusing screen. I shoot with a Zeiss Otus 85 and I can nail the focus, every single time.
Pain doesn't mean you can't do it; it means it's inconvenient. To most people, "using the right focusing screen" = a pain.
One of the best buys you can get is the old fashion first version 85mm, f/1.8 primes. They’re marked down but still terrific. One recommendation, there’s more to this lens then f/1.8. Compact as well.
@3:02 How did you get f1/.4 on the 24-70 f2.8 II L?
I was going to ask the same thing.
I had the same question.
When the comment gets pinned but not responded to: "D:"
Apologies, was a typo, we responded above. Should have been 2.8
Why are you shooting your portraits in Live View? Do you shoot ALL your portraits in Live View? I know LV has face recognition and might be slightly better at AF. But holding a heavy camera and lens out in front of me to shoot something as intimate as a portrait really changes the experience for me (I'm a portrait photographer also). Far less enjoyable. There is magic in looking through a lens and drawing closer to my subject that is totally lost when holding the camera out in front of me. It distances me from both my subject and the joy of looking through the lens and entering another world -- and a beauty beyond all distractions.
Very interesting points, thanks for sharing.
Brotherman im listening to you in head phones you sound tremendous wowwwww your voice is made for this and yes i have an 85 MM i slept with my lens the first night i bought it lol seriously
Hi Pye, just a note about an honest mistake in the video, in the image with the 24-70mm 2.8 it mistakenly says 24-70mm F/2.8 II L @24 1/250, F/1.4, ISO 800 If it's an F/ 2.8 so you cannot shoot it at F/1.4 :-) The mistake was made most likely because you made the video at 2am LOL
Haha yeah, we made a typo, apologies. F2.8
@@payamjirsa Writing f/1.4 resulted as typo result ? What a coincidence!!!
I ABSOLUTALLY love this photo. But I 'hope' f/2.8 is a typo too. (for it too look 'that' technically good also in a larger fine art print. Certainly not a exemplary theoretical advice for such a scene
I love Canon 85mm/1.2 for all the reasons that you've mentioned despite the fact that I'm not a Nutella fan. I'm from PBJ sandwich camp. 😁
Oh man, PBJ over Nutella? I mean, I love both... but I don't know if I can accept this ;)
@@payamjirsa PBJ is the bomb
50mm is for portraits.
85mm is for tight headshots.
While I wouldn't use my 85 for fast motion or things like that, the Canon 85mm f1.8 actually focuses quite fast, much faster than the 85mm f1.2. It has a USM in it that helps. And I have taken some absolutely creamy shots with with. I have talked to a few photographers that wished they got the 1.8 instead of the 1.2 for the faster focus alone. And I talked to one that told me he sold his 1.2, bought two 1.8's (one for use and one for back up) and put the other thousand dollars in the bank. Lol. But the 85 is an absolute beast of a lens for image quality and sharpness. :)
Well said! I absolutely love the 85 1.4 as it’s my favorite lens. But yes it does have a couple draw backs which was also nice to see you noted but this lens is definitely a lens that’s great to have in your tool bag as a portrait or wedding photographer. Ok now you can take a nap 😴 haha
With COVID-19 in mind, a 135mm to 200mm focal length primes and zooms allow more distance from your subject.
🤐🤢no nutella! Hazelnut tastes like perfume! Peanut butter on toast yes!
Nutella is OK but we found something even better. We make our own walnut butter. We use a variety of English Walnut that has little tannin and is perfect for our home made Walnut Butter. Add a touch of maple syrup and you are golden. Nutella move over.
how about 135mm? same focal length for portraits, is the 85mm better and more versatile than the 135mm?
What is a portrait? I’m legitimately asking… is a portrait supposed to focus on the face? I mean, not a passport photo, but I guess… what’s a portrait to you?
Really sad to see the industry cropping to cell phone mode. Sad to see cell phones controlling photography trends. I will never crop to cell mode.
Sorry, I find that people don't know how to act or get nervous with a camera in their face, my 28-200 works great
This is not about 85mm 1.8 as the title says. It is about different lenses. NO LIKE
The Nikon 105 2.8 gives almost the same background defocus as a 85 1.8. between both, I would opt for the 105 because of the macro capabilities
I typically use my XF 90(135mm equivalent) for tight corporate headshots. Not for the 'bokeh' or background compression, I'm almost always shooting on a plain background, but rather it is more forgiving of distance and angles with regard to distortion. I use my XF 56(85mm equivalent) mostly for environmental portraits of my corporate clients. It gives we a wider frame while still providing a similar leeway with regard to distortion.
That said, for the handful of 'online dating' shoots I do or photos at grandma's birthday party, I mostly stick to a 50mm equivalent lens(XF 35 or TCL-X100 conversion lens). Yes you need to be more aware of your distance and angles to prevent distortion of someones face, but images captured at shorter focal lengths tend to be more representative of 'being there'. Personally, I find those images more compelling. For photos of the kids at family functions, particularly the very young ones, I actually tend to go wider FOR the distortion which make the images more lighthearted and fun.
IMHO there is no 'perfect' lens for all portraits. There are 'better' lenses for different types of portraits but the only 'perfect' lens is the one that produces the image or tells the story the photographer sees in his/her mind.
Caveat: 𝘐 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘯 𝘰𝘶𝘵. 𝘐 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘺. 𝘏𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳, 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘠𝘖𝘜 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘵𝘴.
greatly explained. thank you
I have a 50 mm and 85 mm prime .... I find it easier to get as good picture with the 50mm but giving in a little effort in the end the 85mm gives the most satisfying results looking back at my photos .....🧐😀
never use f 1.4, cuz you wouldnt get the sharpest image. try 2 stops above or search for the sweet spot
I love my sigma 105. My gf thinks I’ve been working out since using it
help me understand, when he says 85mm he mean focal length or sensor size or somehow both?
Click bate
Nice video Pye but you forgot to mention that is on a full-frame camera!
For me, a Full-frame camera is not for me, I need a lighter and smaller camera body and lenses for medical reasons!
There are times that you need to shoot @ f1.2, f1.4, and f1.8
I prefer to shoot with more depth of field when I can if there is a good background to be found!
i love the intro that anyone not using the 85 is sub human......
Love my 85 f1.8 and 135 f2! Nutella, not so much. Peanut butter toast and whole milk, yea!
I love my 85mm f1.8 and I hate Nutella. You lost me and I've left your vlog.
Great video Pye. I have an 85mm Sigma on my NIkon D610 and I adore it. The pictures are just stunning and the bokeh, as you say, is just creamy.
Regarding focusing fast 85/100/135mm primes manually, my suspicion is that they'd be more popular if more people had a dedicated body just for them ... _so long as the camera could be fitted with a proper manual focusing screen_ like in Days of Yore.
This is particularly true compared to slow-focusing AF lenses. Also, some camera bodies cannot focus a fast lens as fast as they can slow lenses regardless of aperture being used, because AF points must be optimized for "expected / typical" apertures used.
At least with manual focus, you're in control and not waiting/hoping for an AF lens to get it right, even with focus peaking/confirmation that newer cameras might offer.
Yes, slow AF is partly lens, partly camera body. For example, the Canon 1DX3 is incredibly fast to focus even with slow primes like the 85/105. But, price-wise it's out of reach for most people.
The Next Hobby I have a wedding photographer friend who shoots entirely in manual. It’s madness but it works for her and she has the same hit rate as me using AF 💁♂️
Laura Jade says 85. Whatever she says is good enough for me.
A video about the 85mm with examples 100mm?
Nice video, can't stand nutella though.
Just don't put your Nutella in the fridge
What best lens for portrait in tighter spaces ?
Thanks for the good info Pye. I'm considering an 85 since I've begun doing portrait photography. I'm currently using my 70-200 with decent results.
You’re amazing and I’ve been learning a lot! Thank you!
Yes about 135 mm Portraits 😡🙏😤
I love my 85mm Sigma Art 1.4😍😍😍
Great video! I have struggled to get comfortable with prime lenses but your examples definitely have shown me that they have a reason to be in my camera bag. Many thanks.
Hey Pye, great video. Thank you for your time and work.
Appreciate your comment Gilbert!
Give me the 85, you can keep the Nutella.
So the 85 mm, forgetaboutit
Always like your videos. Im using my Sony 100mm STF GM lens. I ditched my 85mm GM. If I need an 85mm I have a manual 85mm 1.4.
What about the 135?
On the photo of the bride surrounded by a bunch of women, it’s noted that a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 II L lens was used @ 24mm, 1/250 sec, f/1.4, ISO 800. How do you get to f/1.4 on an f/2.8 lens?
Pye, asking for advice. With a limited budget, which lens would you choose for the canon 6d mark I: Canon EF 100 mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM or 85 f/1,8 USM. The main application is, of course, portrait, but with 100 mm, the spaces for macro photography open up.
how 'bout you make yourself a nutella sanwich man?hahaha
Deal!
Thanks as always. Questions please. 2:58 your graphics show F/2.8 lens being used but you state the photo was F/1.4. Apologies if I've missed something but could you please clarify? thanks Lee.
Okay, there's a difference between "loose" and "lose."
I'm in the 100mm macro camp for portraits. I'd love a 90mm Thambar for my M10 but, um, yeah, cubic $$$. Maybe one day, when I grow up.
My wife has a very round face: it looks fat at 50mm. I have to be careful with my angles when using anything under 100mm if I don't want her to throw hard objects at me. 135mm treats her well.
Very good pye.
If you have100mm 2.8
Do yoy also require the 85mm 1.8
As they do mostly the same job.
I like the 50mm 1.8 very versitile light weight and a great lens too
With 85 when I took couples portrait , one subject was blurry , this doesn’t happen with 70-200 ? How to correct this ?
Newbie question, I see you’re using a higher shutter speed on a lot of your photos and it seems like your models are standing still. Why is that? Thank you in advance!
You used the 100mm macro. But this one won't give a defocus background as a 85mm 1.8 or so. I have 24-70 f2.8 n planning for a portrait lens of either 85mm 1.8 or d macro lens as d macro will serve dual purpose .
At 2:52 you claim you've shot a wide portrait of the bride's group at f1.4 with a 70-200mm f2.8. I'm curious how you pulled that off and found a workaround to achieve that ignoring laws of physics.
Haha watching this at 2 am
Very interesting pye. How about doing this for a 100mm macro lens and 19mm wide lens. For these who dont do digital still and like film better.
What do you recommend for shooting photos where people are moving but still keeping the same image quality
Hello, I was wondering whether it is possible to get similar perspective compression with a 56mm APSC lens (which has a 85mm fov). Thanks!
Hi, Pye! I have 70-200 f2.8, but i am thinking of buying 85mm 1.8mm. Is it worth if we dont count weight? Its heavy dilema for me couse I need other lenses too. My lenses are 11-20 in dx mode on z7. So there i get only 20mpx. 24-70mm f4 and 70-200mm f2.8. So i could use full frame wide for landscapes, mb 50mm lens with f1.8.
This was vary helpful I have the 85mm f/1.8 I really don’t use it I shoot more with my 35mm f/2 I plan on using my 85mm more this year
I have a problem. I don't like my photos taken with 85mm, I always feel like it makes my face looks wider than it is. It's probably just me as everyone says is the most flattering focal length for portraits.
nutella no 85mm yes
Perspective compression. If you have taken perspective drawing class and went to photography school, then the former has taught you some rules of thumb how to draw perspective going in the distance, but you may have missed the formality (aka math). In photography school you will have learnt about the inverse square law (for artificial lighting, like flash).
To start with the latter - this simply says that the AREA you shoot gets bigger when you step away farther. But when you double the distance, the area in your shot does not get 2x as large, but 2 squared, i.e. 4 times bigger. Or at 3 times the distance you get 3 squared, is 9 times, more in the picture. In lighting, this means the light (energy) out of your speedlight must illuminate 9 times the area when you increase the distance to the subject by 3 times.
With increasing distance, we get exponentially more in the picture. And the intensity of light diminishes by the inverse of that: 9 times bigger area becomes 1/9 intensity of light.
Perspective compression is that same (inverse) square law. With things in your picture at different distances, you will feel that it seems as if things farther away are closer to each other than they really are.
That inverse square law also works the other way around. Get nearer and the effect seems to be dramatic. In lighting we use that to get more dramatic light-dark, differences between foreground and background. In perspective we use this inverse square law to raise the attention of the viewer later to elements in the foreground.
By the way, with some asymmetry in faces, we can use perspective to make the asymmetry invisible. A portrait with a 35mm (full frame) could help here.
135mm is even better LOL
I have been looking everywhere to try to understand why photographers like the 85mm over others. But once you said Nutella... I understood.
Slow focusing? Not a problem on crop bodies! 50mm focuses quick and is equivalent to an 85 (give or take).
Though my favourite focal length is 135, it’s just magic to me.
Advertising for Nestlé and their Nutella is not the wisest thing to do ... That being said, your videos are great!
Me watching this: he's giving good info
Also me looking up the price: ight I'm out 🚶🏿♂️......
I love the manual Zeiss Planar f/1,4..... very creamy and it pops especially for black and white....
Canon costs too much, they are way over priced so I use my Tamron 85mm 1.8 with vibration control :) Better than Canon at a much more affordable price.
Would you prefer or can you do a comparison of the Sigma Art 105mm and the 135mm. Cons and Pros
I prefer 100.
Holy shit! I had insomnia and figured l would watch UA-cam at 2am!
I have a Canon R6. I want to add a 85 mm and I'm considering the usm85 which is more budget friendly. what are your thoughts on this lens? Even a comparison? Thanks for your great videos and I use your dark mode preset all the time ☺️
I really enjoy the Canon 70-200 f2.8 for portraits and Peanut Butter, sorry Nutella
I am about to go for a photo shoot one of my friend and i was doubting using my 85 and or 24-70. So like you sid for indoor it was scary thing to use my 85 so I most probably use my 24-70... Many thanks for advice
The 85mm focal length is probably my favorite of all focal lengths for what i primarily do. I do love 105mm as well.
The new Nikkor 85mm 1.2S looks stunning. However, that lens is almost $3k. I hope Nikon lets Tamron make an equivalent lens for cheaper.
Everything is fine, but I often use 35 & 50 for portraits if I don't get enough space.
I really enjoy the blur of those focal lengths & minimal distortion ( Good lenses don't give you that much distortions).
85 is my favorite when it comes to location shoot or if I have stable conditions to compose portrait.
I don't use 70-200 anymore because its huge & bulky.
85 f1.4 is the best. I tried 135,105 both.
Nice presentation. I have Sigma 85mm f1.4, now will follow your guidance. Thanks for sharing.
Using a crop sensor camera what would be your choice of lens for doing portraits ?, I'm currently using a 85 f1.8 on my Nikon 7200
Not surprising. The 85 and 100/105 have been popular since film days.
I have been a pro for 35 yrs or more - in a studio 85 is perfect - or in my case the MF equiv - but outside a 90, 100, 105, 135, is better. When I had an RZ the 500 APO was by far the best. I shot over seven complete catalogues with that!!
If you could only pick one lens for portraits, would you pick the 85mm 1.4 or the 24-70mm 2.8?
Wow! So many ideas !
I have a semi new Rokinon 85mm sitting collecting dust.
Take out this weekend and use it.
Question does it matter the crop sensor size because if you don’t have a a full frame camera 85mn isn’t 85mm.
Are there any budget 85 mm lenses that go 2.8 or wider for under $1000?
Been using 50mm 4/3, have since jumped to m4/3 learning the trade off to a 42.5mm (85mm equivalent) and with adapter 50mm 4/3 on the m4/3 is now 100mm equivalent.