Printable View
Heya
Im looking for a lens that allows me to get close(around 2-3meters and get a full body portrait of people and dogs. It might be a silly question and you might head me towards the lens recomandations but Ive read several reviews with no luck for me, Im just a beginner so please forgive me :) I have a full fram body if it helps to guide me in the right direction. I will also have a umbrella and softbox at my disposal and I already have a 580ex II speedlite.
Cheers
Ragnar
What camera do you have? FF vs. 1.3x vs. 1.6x will make a difference in your framing with a given focal length.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar
I think he has aFF body[:P] And If I remeber corectly it'sthe 5D II he was angonising over for in the 1D III thread.
Cheers,
John.
Unless my math is very off, you
My bad,
I have a 5d Mark II,70-200mm f4 IS,speedlite 580ex II for equipment. The 24mm f1/4L maybe is a good choice? Or should I opt for the mark II ? Do I really need an L lens ? Would it be okay with a Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 ?
The dogs will vary in size as it is around 200 dogs participating
24mm F1.4L II is an excelent lens, I would get the II version over the I version if you could afford it. BUT.... I think on the 5D Mark II you would find it to wide unless you are wanting to do groups or very close.
The 35mm F1.4 might be a better choice.
24-70mm F2.8L Maybe?
I moved from home theater(very expensive hobby) to the camera world and my gosh a lens costs an arm and a leg haha!
The 24-70mm Ive been peeking on too, same with the 35mm. Its hard to explain maybe but would I suffice with a 35mm f2.0 instead of the L series? My headache is the following: I will do this event one time a year and on the first time to cash out 1500usd and not sure to get profit by the event to cover the costs, well you get my point. But then again, I do know in the future I have to get a low mm lens and that I probably end up with a cheaper and a L lens, maybe thats a good thing(maybe you dont always want to grab the expensive lens for a stroll on the streets of mlam
For a full body portrait of a person, say 1.8m tall, using a full frame camera, you would need the following focal lengths:
Subject Distance 2m 3m Landscape focal length 26mm 40mm Portrait focal length 40mm 60mm
For its versatility, I support Rick's suggestion of the 24-70mm f/2.8L USM. It also suits your current kit very well.
I would not recommend a 24mm prime lens for portraits. You have to get quite close to people and this can make their noses look big. Apart from that, you might struggle to get a well lit subject from an on-camera flash at such short range (but that's another topic and I'm not an expert on lighting. I just know that I would want the flash off camera and/or shoot from further away). Another reason to avoid a short focal length is bokeh. At 24mm, f/1.4, the depth of field will be around 40cm in front and 50cm behind a subject 3m away. It's easier to blur the background with longer focal lengths. Maybe you have a plain background and that won't matter so much.
I have no experience with the original 24mm f/1.4L USM, but I have read of one professional landscape photographer who thinks that it does not resolve enough detail for the 5D Mark II's sensor. The current 24mm f/1.4L II USM is a much better choice for the latest full frame DSLRs if you are choosing between the two versions, especially if you will be making large prints. I'm very pleased with mine, but I don't use it for portraits.
Great information and clarification.
24-70mm combined with my 70-200mm seems like an ideal match for a beginner.
I would agree about the 24mm being too short, I have a couple of whippets and their long noses and very short hair can look a bit odd with the shorter lenses, (wide angles can make for some hilarious shots but i guess thats not what you want), I use the 100mm f2.8L IS but it sounds like you dont have enough space for that, so i would go with the 24-70 f2.8, or the 24-105 f4, (you will be using it for other things, so need to think about that too and wouldnt need the wider 2.8 for the dogs i dont think)
I think the 24-105 maybe suits a better allround lens for me. I think I will shoot around f5.6 on the portraits.
The 24-105mm is also a good choice, giving more versatility, smaller size and weight than the 24-70mm and image stabilisation. It's a great general purpose lens that you can use without having to carry a tripod everywhere with you. It's also more widely available (second hand perhaps, if you're trying to keep cost down). If you don't really need the wide aperture, I think you'll be happy with it. I didn't suggest it earlier since I thought wide aperture was important to you. You were, after all, considering a couple of f/1.4 primes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar
I used the 5D2 with 24-105 in Copenhagen on summersnight last june, and I felt more safe then I would in my hometown in the towncentre... (only 25000 residents)[;)] I don't know about Malmo though, but in general: Swedish people were very friendly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar
If you don't really know what you want exactly, I'd suggest you consider renting.
I also have a few once-in-a-year shoots/events. And that's where I rent specific lenses if I need them. It's well worth the money (like 15 euro a day or so).
Jan
For portraits the 24-70mm is a better choice, the wider apeture is very usefule. You would want to shoot for the most part wide open. For a general purpose lens the 24-105mm is more conveniet, you don
Ill be having a backdrop so a nice background blur is sought after I think. on wide open, do I get good focus on the whole body of the dogs? Tomorrow we mget our new puppy, Im gonna take som pics then.
Renting in sweden is very expensive, 65eur a day for the 24.70mm. But I'll see if I can get my old camera sold then I have the funds.
Oh Im not afraid of getting robbed, I just meaned if I drop it or bump innto someone hehe :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar
How close is the backdrop? If it's close the difference in f2.8 or f4 isn't that big of a deal I think. With f2.8 max you probably won't get the entire body in focus, so the 24-70 isn't a better portrait lens for you per se.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar
Ouch that's really expensive! I just looked it up, here in the Netherlands it's 16 Euro a day. Better yet for 65 euro I could rent either the 24-70 or the 24-105 for 7 days. Talking about price differences. (Obviously you need to pay a security fee, which is returned after the rent)
Anyway, 65 euro a day is pretty much and you might be even wondering if it's worth it. If you're buying a second hand 24-something and you don't like it after all. You probably don't lose 65 euro on that deal... If you're buying new, you might lose a lot more than 65 euro though...unless you keep it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar
Haha ok. Well that can happen at any moment I guess. And bumping probably doesn't damage such a fine camera and lens combo that much. The lenses we talk about are very strong.
I personally like the 24-105 for it's versatility and IS over the 24-70 plus the 5D can handle a little higher ISO, but that's really a personal thing.