Next portrait lens after nifty-fifty on T2i

[fstr]

I need a recommendation for a new portrait lens for a T2i.
I initially bought the 50mm 1.8 about a year ago and initially loved it (with some limitations) for taking pictures of my kids and family. But now with my little guy becoming more mobile and starting to walk/run the focus on the lens is just not able to keep up with him. I'm finding the lens amost useless to me now.
I am a beginner in the field of digital photography and don't find the time to become better. I'm hoping in a few years when the kids are bigger I will have more time to improve my skills but for now I just need gear that is easy to use.

So I need a lens that is quicker to focus and I'm not sure if the 50mm 1.4 is it. The 85mm sounds like a good lens but on a crop-sensor it will probably not work for me. Then there are some 35mm options, but then price becomes an issue...
Even though $300-400 is considered cheap, it makes me flinch. What options do you recommend? Will the 50mm 1.4 work for me or do I need to look at something else?

Thanks!

[ham]

I'd go for the new 40mm STM f/2.8 pancake.

In fact I have the 35mm f/2 and I want to sell it and buy the 40mm.

Although if by portraits you mean head-shots, you should really go longer, 85mm-135mm.

[Kombi]

I need a recommendation for a new portrait lens for a T2i.
I initially bought the 50mm 1.8 about a year ago and initially loved it (with some limitations) for taking pictures of my kids and family. But now with my little guy becoming more mobile and starting to walk/run the focus on the lens is just not able to keep up with him. I'm finding the lens amost useless to me now.
I am a beginner in the field of digital photography and don't find the time to become better. I'm hoping in a few years when the kids are bigger I will have more time to improve my skills but for now I just need gear that is easy to use.

So I need a lens that is quicker to focus and I'm not sure if the 50mm 1.4 is it. The 85mm sounds like a good lens but on a crop-sensor it will probably not work for me. Then there are some 35mm options, but then price becomes an issue...
Even though $300-400 is considered cheap, it makes me flinch. What options do you recommend? Will the 50mm 1.4 work for me or do I need to look at something else?

Thanks!

I'm curious what other lenses you have. I don't have kids, but have pets that I try and capture.Setting your camera to AI servo may help with your moving targets, also try and match the speed of your child, ie pan your camera at roughly same speed.

You mention 50mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 - -- I did not review the reviews on either but I do not believe it will focus faster, 1.4 vs 1.8 will allow more light in for the same period of time, so can stop action more... but it also has a shallower depth of field.


I do not have any fixed lenses but have the same model camera as you, and only started learning when I joined these forums in February.

What settings are you using to capture images of your family, that it is no longer working for you.
Perhaps someone can suggest a couple camera settings to restore use to your lens.

[fstr]

I'd go for the new 40mm STM f/2.8 pancake.

In fact I have the 35mm f/2 and I want to sell it and buy the 40mm.

Although if by portraits you mean head-shots, you should really go longer, 85mm-135mm.

I get that people are excited about the new 40mm, but I'm not sure it fits the bill for what I'm looking for - portraits with DOF & Bokeh. That said though I may pick one up from the bestBuy across the street from work and give it a spin this weekend.
Also - 85-135mm on a crop sensor - I would need some serious elbow room! I would love for somebody to tell me 85mm will work as I think it is exactly what I'm looking for, just the wrong focal length. The 50 give me the ability to move closer for headshots and further for full body or group shots

[fstr]

I'm curious what other lenses you have. I don't have kids, but have pets that I try and capture.Setting your camera to AI servo may help with your moving targets, also try and match the speed of your child, ie pan your camera at roughly same speed.

You mention 50mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 - -- I did not review the reviews on either but I do not believe it will focus faster, 1.4 vs 1.8 will allow more light in for the same period of time, so can stop action more... but it also has a shallower depth of field.


I do not have any fixed lenses but have the same model camera as you, and only started learning when I joined these forums in February.

What settings are you using to capture images of your family, that it is no longer working for you.
Perhaps someone can suggest a couple camera settings to restore use to your lens.

Good tip - I'll try playing with the focus settings.
Panning - not so much! He's always running towards me when I get the camera out.

Ultimately this is why I created this seemingly duplicate thread to every other thread out there - I am unable to determine if the 1.4 focuses quicker than the 1.8

I normally use aperture priority with the 50mm, set it at around 2.8, unless light is really low, focus on the eyes or as close as possible, pray and shoot. Any recommedations?

[Dr Croubie]

I would love for somebody to tell me 85mm will work as I think it is exactly what I'm looking for, just the wrong focal length.

"The 85mm is exactly what you're looking for"

Better?

Seriously, it's a good lens. I've got the 40/2.8, 50/1.8 II, the 85/1.8, the 100/2.0. (and a lot of others, but they're my only 'autofocus primes').

Out of them I'd rate the 50 as the worst. Soft wide open, slow AF, crappy build (it's actually not that bad a lens, especially considering the price, but the other 3 are just way better).

The 85 and 100 are both twins, nothing different between them except the length. Focus is quick enough (i got the Canon 85 specifically for kids running around instead of getting the samyang or zeiss 85/1.4, then got the 100 a bit later because it was a bargain). Great IQ, you can shoot wide-open all day, stopping-down doesn't make it much sharper (you can't get much sharper), only increases the DOF (and wide open they have nice circular bokeh, stop down and it gets pointy).

The 40 i picked up on a whim when I went to buy film and I saw one on a shelf (the day after it was announced), I just bought it because I was happy Australia got it before the rest of the world. The focussing is fast enough, i'd rate it faster than the 50, and almost as fast as the 85/100. The IQ and Bokeh are both stunning, as good as the 85/100 (the bokeh of the 40 stays good when you stop down, although it's harder to get any because it's a wider lens). Only problem is that it's only f/2.8 (if you call that a problem). So you won't get that nice 'thin dof' look as easily as with a longer/faster lens, but that can work in your favour if things are running towards you too fast, there's more chance they'll be in focus at all.

So, what to get? The 85 (and moreso the 100), you're getting more and more into head-shot only territory. I've shot full-body (frame size maybe 1.5x2.5m) portraits, from across a medium-sized (50-100 people, maybe 10m away) room at a mate's engagement party. I've shot head-only shots from 2-4m away. I've shot full-body portraits of kids with them from closer, but then that's a 3-year old kid (frame size 0.4*0.6m or so).
I've taken group shots at a party with the 40mm on FF, I haven't played around with it too much but i've taken my 35mm Samyang (almost the same framing) to that engagement party and shot anything from single full-body from close, to small-group shots (just), on Crop.

It will all depend on what you want, really (and I know you'd rather have both, but you have to pick one). You won't be disappointed with any of the 3, choose more based on usage. The 85/100s are both available 2nd hand for $300-400ish, if you don't like it and it's in decent nick you could try re-sell and you'd probably get most of your money back. The 40mm is too new to find 2nd hand, but you can get it new for half the price of the 85/100s ($200 or so)

[fstr]

@ Dr Croubie - thanks for the detailed post.

I decided to take the plunge and see for myself which lens I like most. I picked up the 40mm locally and placed an order for the 85mm (should show up next week). Whichever I like least will go back.

I do have one additional pondering: 40mm versus Tamron 17-50mm. The Tamron runs about twice the price of the 40mm currently with rebate. That to me spells good value. Both are 2.8. So in theory if IQ is the same the Tamron should be a better option with the only negative the fact that it is bigger.
If I like the 40mm I may just order the Tamron to see how the two compare

[Sheiky]

I decided to take the plunge and see for myself which lens I like most. I picked up the 40mm locally and placed an order for the 85mm (should show up next week). Whichever I like least will go back.

I do have one additional pondering: 40mm versus Tamron 17-50mm. The Tamron runs about twice the price of the 40mm currently with rebate. That to me spells good value. Both are 2.8. So in theory if IQ is the same the Tamron should be a better option with the only negative the fact that it is bigger.
If I like the 40mm I may just order the Tamron to see how the two compare

For what it's worth, my girlfriend has only one lens and it's the 85mm f1.8 on a 40D. She thinks it's better than the 18-55 kit-lens for general-purpose uses. You do get challenged a little more, but I definitely agree with her. Albeit for some shots you simply need a wider lens.

The Tamron is a great value lens. It will most probably be a little softer than the 40mm lens, but overal it has great image quality for a zoom lens at f2.8. And it has the added benefit of being a wide to normal lens at f2.8.

[Scott Stephen]

I have kids. Learn to appreciate the aesthetic of "sleeping" shots. They look sweet, and it is the only time they hold still.

[thekingb]

I decided to take the plunge and see for myself which lens I like most. I picked up the 40mm locally and placed an order for the 85mm (should show up next week). Whichever I like least will go back.

I do have one additional pondering: 40mm versus Tamron 17-50mm. The Tamron runs about twice the price of the 40mm currently with rebate. That to me spells good value. Both are 2.8. So in theory if IQ is the same the Tamron should be a better option with the only negative the fact that it is bigger.
If I like the 40mm I may just order the Tamron to see how the two compare

I once did something similar and ended up with two lenses. Be ready to like both of them for different reasons!

I have had two copies of the Tamron 17-50 (non VC). The first (which is actually property of the school I run) is a fantastic lens. Sharp wide open with IQ that rivals my L lenses. Focuses fast (albeit noisily) except in very low light. When I had to give it up to the school, however, I decided to buy my own and got a TERRIBLE copy that I returned. Quality control tends to be an issue for Tamron and Sigma. So if you get a good copy, and you don't mind that it's not that cute, tiny little pancake lens, IMO the 17-50 is fully worth the extra $. But those could be big ifs.

FWIW, I wouldn't replace the 50 f/1.8 with the f/1.4 solely for AF speed. The bokeh on the f/1.4 is significantly better though.

I love the 85 f/1.8 for head and shoulder portraits. Even though it's less useful indoors, I like it MUCH more than the 50 f/1.4. And even though it's my least used lens, it's the lens that has taken the most shots that I have actually printed in larger format.

Finally, if you are getting OOF shots of kids running towards you, and you're not using AI Servo, that might be the explanation.