Prime Decision 85/60/50

[PhotoB]

I am looking for a portrait and nature prime lens to go on an XSi. I have it narrowed down to the 85 f/1.8 and the ef-s 60 2.8 macro...and why not throw in the 50 1.4 for discussion.


Thanks for the thoughts...

[Garrett-Grimsley]

I own both the 50mm and the 85mm f/1.8 primes, and I find myself using the 85mm about 95% of the time. It's an amazing lens, and the FoV seems to be perfect for portiats on a x1.6 body.





It can be tack sharp wide open if you manual focus, but after f/2.8 you can do whatever because it's razor sharp after that.


Here's two examples of mine; one stopped down a bit, and the other wide-open.





Canon Rebel XT 350D, 85mm, F/3.2, ISO200, 1/800sec








Canon Rebel XT 350D, 85mm, F/1.8, ISO1600, 1/1250sec








All in all, I highly reccomend the 85mm over both the 50 and the 60.

[PhotoB]

Great pictures...I like the 85 because I think it would fit me better...but am entertaining the 60 for the macro


Thanks for the input!

[Sean Setters]

I'll throw in a second opinion here. I owned the 85 f/1.8 for a brief time, but ended up selling it on ebay. It was a great lens, very sharp. So why did I sell it? It didn't fit my shooting style. I wanted to use the lens indoors and utilize it's wide aperture, but it was simply too long on my 1.6x crop sensor. After the sale I bought the 17-55 f/2.8 IS and came to appreciate the wonderful versatility of a zoom. I later purchased a 70-200 f/2.8 L IS for use outdoors and at weddings. Again, the versatility of the zoom was key.


Only recently have I purchased another prime lens--the 50 f/1.4. Is it a better lens than the 85 f/1.8? Nope. But it fits my needs better. A couple of years ago I wanted a lens that I could take indoor photojournalistic-type portraits. The shorter focal length makes it much more useful to me than the 85mm lens.


The 85 f/1.8 may be a perfect nature lens, but most of the time people want even longer focal lengths for that purpose. It's a great portrait lens, but you need substantial distance for any full-length body shots. Just make sure you know exactly how you want to use the lens so that you make the right choice the first time (unlike me).


As I said, the 85 f/1.8 is a fantastic lens (especially for the money), but it didn't fit me as well as the 50 f/1.4.

[PhotoB]

You make a good point about indoor shots. That, in part, is where the 60 came into play for me. I am looking for it to be a part portrait plus the capability to snap some action shots of kids...both indoor and out. I have entertained a fast zoom but started to explore primes and think they may be the way to go right now.

[Jarhead5811]

I've got a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens and 50mm seems awful tight to me indoors. It could be that my house just isn't big enough but I'd like to check out a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSMfor that use.


I've got a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II Lensthat I love and it stays on my XSi 99% of the time.


I will say that without a flash, even at ISO 1600,it is unlikely you'll get any real good action shots on a consistant basis indoors with any f/2.8.

[Jorundr-Jorgensen]

Tell you what, a few months ago I made a very similair post on here with the question what a good lens would be for portraits, and through the many useful tips and recommendations I got from it I bought the 85mm 1.8. And I didn't regret it a single time. But I shoot 99% outdoors with this lens so I've got more then enough space to walk around the object im photographing, but of course sometimes the 136mm (on 1.6 body) gives me a bit trouble since it's really the recommended max distance you should have for portraits.


It makes superbe head/shoulder shots, amazingly sharp and a near perfect bokeh in the background.


But if you are planning to go indoors you should indeed take a look at the 50mm 1.4 (which might still be too long) or perhaps a zoom lens. Beside the 85mm I also own the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 which I use when it's getting to tight indoors or if I want to throw in some wider angels.



Good luck with your decision,
Jørundr.

[PhotoB]

Jayson...that is exactly what I thought about last night...


Jorundr...I was going along those lines with getting the 85 as I would like the range outside. From there I would see if it would be too tight indoors and what setups I could do with it. If that doesn't work, I would then go with the 50 for an indoor portrait and even a 35mm...


Thanks for the ideas...

[bradlove]

You should strongly consider the Sigma 30 1.4 if you want to do low light indoor shots. It's a fantastic lens. Center sharpness is on par with the 35L. It's small and light. It's a very enjoyable lens to use and is available for a reasonable price as well. Give it a look!

[PhotoB]

I will take a look at that Sigma...it seems to have great reviews. I think I am going to go with the 85mm to start for more of an outdoor, active lens. If I can't get it inside, the Canon 50 (f/1.4) or 35 (f/2) will be my option along with the Sigma...