Canon portrait lens

[modafoto]

Hi

I have been looking for a portrait lens for my Canon EOS camera for some time now. I have found three lenses what I would like your comments on.
they cost about the same. If you have recommendations on other lenses I am open to them, but I primarily want comments on the lenses I mention below.

• EF85mm f/1.8 USM
• EF100mm f/2 USM
• EF135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus

I am very keen on the first two, but thinks number 3 is too slow for my use.

Morten

 

[TPPhotog]

Morten I'm not familiar with Canon gear but I'd look at the fist one. The F.8 will give you an amazing amount of room over the F2 and as you know the best portrait lenses aren't always the sharpest

 

[Nicole]

Hi Morten, I use Nikon and I looooove my 85mm f/1.8.
Cheryl (Jacobs) uses Canon and has the 85mm 1.8. I think, she could possibly give you some helpful info...

 

[g0tr00t]

Hi

I have been looking for a portrait lens for my Canon EOS camera for some time now. I have found three lenses what I would like your comments on.
they cost about the same. If you have recommendations on other lenses I am open to them, but I primarily want comments on the lenses I mention below.

• EF85mm f/1.8 USM
• EF100mm f/2 USM
• EF135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus

I am very keen on the first two, but thinks number 3 is too slow for my use.

Morten

Hmmm, tough choice. I would immediately jump on the 85 1.8, but the 100 will give you more of a distance to your subject and put them more at ease...

MMmmmm....I say the 100 f2. Forget the 2.8 (I use one for portraits and would love the 2.0)

Actually, I use the 80-200 2.8 L for portraits....So the 100 would be great IMO.

 

[Dave Parker]

I have an 85mm f/1.4 that I just love for portraits, great focal Length and faster glass really helps with natural light.

Dave Parker
Ground Glass Specialties

 

[unohuu]

...and i don't shoot Canon, but use a Minolta 85mm f/1,7 that i think is awesome. it is nice that it is fast enough to use in low light situations. i also have a 100mm f/2.5 and a 135mm f/2.8.

 

[Lee Shively]

I do shoot with Canons but I don't own any of the lenses you mention. I did own an 85/1.8 when I shot Nikons and it was a great focal length.

To really mix up the pot, have you considered the 135/2L? It's more expensive than the others but I've always wanted to try that lens.

 

[bjorke]

I had the Canon 85/1.8 and the 135/2. Both are terrific. I am busy saving for a Contax 85/1.4 now that I've switched, and while it's rarely used I'm quite fond of my Zeiss 90mm for the G.

For my total use, I got more mileage out of the 85mm.

 

[mikeb_z5]

I recently tried out the 135 f2 and really liked it as well. If I were to buy one though I think it would be the 100mm. Just a little more versatile.

Mike

 

[eagleowl]

my main portrait lens...

...is the canon ef 50mm f1.8.
Sharp,short minimum focal distance,and cheap(when I bought it 18months ago it cost me £80)!

 

[Cheryl Jacobs]

The Canon 85mm 1.8 is my prime lens. I use it at every session and love it. The 50mm 1.8 is a great lens for the money, but you have to be careful not to get too close to your subjects, as you can get that dog-nose effect from the distortion.

 

[Tom Duffy]

When my Leicaflex SL gave up the ghost, I had to decide what would take the place of the 90 f2 and 180 f 2.8 I had been using since the dawn of time.

After trying out the Canon 85 f1.2 and 85 f 1.8, I settled on the Canon 135 f2 as a mid distance compromise between my old 90 and 180 focal lengths. In general, I'm very pleased by my choice, though I'm finding the 135 a bit long for strict portraiture.

The 135mm is very, very sharp, with excellent out of focus areas (and lots of them at f2!) and it has phenomally fast autofocus (unlike the 85mm f 1.2, which couldn't autofocus its way out of a wet paper bag. I'd agree though, for strict portraiture, I'd probably pick the 85 f1.8 instead, even though the build quality isn't up to the standards of the 135.