Need lens information

[RWP]

I am shooting a canon 20d and trying to learn glamour photography. I know a lot of you use canon so who better to ask for help. I see from a lot of equipment lists that the 70-200 is very popular for shooting glamour. Is it better than the 85 or 135 soft focus (with the 0 setting for no softening) and if so why. For the most part I want this for shooting outdoors and I don't want to make the wrong choice. Also any other suggestions are welcomed.

[Rumpole]

For glamour and fashion photography, on a 1.6 crop DSLR, I have used lenses as wide as 10-22mm EF-S to 70-200mm f2.8L. Most commonly used outdoors would be between 50mm to 85mm.

A few factors you may consider when making your choice(s):-
1. Weight: the 70-200mm f2.8L is quite heavy on its own;
2. Focal length: although you can always keep a longer distance between yourself and the subject if you want to capture a full-body shot with the 70-200mm, most of the times I prefer working at a distance where I can have constant interaction with the subject.
3. Aperture: even with the 85mm f1.8, you still have over an one-stop advantage over the 70-200mm f2.8 - not so much in terms of exposure gain but may be significant for blurring the background (bokeh);
4. Perspective: obviously, especially at the longer end of 70-200mm, the perspective can be quite different from using a 85mm or 50mm. It will give you a more "compressed" look.
5. Cost: For half the cost of 70-200mm f2.8L, you can have 85mm f1.8 + 50mm f1.4. However, you may not want to carry two lenses or changing lenses, say, at the beach where dust/sand may be an issue.

Hope it helps.

Cheers
KH

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by RWP

I am shooting a canon 20d and trying to learn glamour photography. I know a lot of you use canon so who better to ask for help. I see from a lot of equipment lists that the 70-200 is very popular for shooting glamour. Is it better than the 85 or 135 soft focus (with the 0 setting for no softening) and if so why. For the most part I want this for shooting outdoors and I don't want to make the wrong choice. Also any other suggestions are welcomed.

Hi RWP,

First, I agree with Rumpole, depending on the situation and shot, you *could* use *any* focal lenght for fashion and glamour, but I do not wholly agree with the rest: the 50 and 85 focal lenghts are used mainly indoors, outdoors, where you have a little more 'room' the 85/135 focal lenghts seems to be a little more favourite.

The 70-200(F2.8 or F2.8 IS) is not necessarily better or worse than the 50, 85 or 135, but it is more convenient, as it contains both 85 and 135 focal lenghts, and has some extra 'lenght' that can be used to isolate your subject by compressing and blurring the background.

The 5 other factors to consider that Rumpole brings in I wholeheartedly underwrite:

1. The 70-200 is quite heavy (and maybe a bit intimidating by it's sheer size? ), although it balances beautiful, especially if you use the batterygrip on your 20D.

2. Keep in mind your 'working distance' and 'ability to communicate' to/with your model(s).

3. Primes are usually a tad faster... nice for shallower DoF, if that is what you are looking for....

4. as I wrote above: the extra lenght at the 200mm end can be an advantage to have, but some 'hate' the compressed/blurred look...

5. for the cost of the 70-200F2.8L you could have the 50F1.4 and 85F1.8 AND the 135F2.8SF, if you do some careful shopping and buy 'Demo'.

6. for the cost of the 70-200F2.8 IS you could have the 50F1.4, the 85F1.8 AND the 135F2L, again if do some careful shopping and buy 'Demo'.

And Rumpole's final issue: changing lenses outside (more chance at dust) or use a zoom, could also be important to you?...

'In the end' you will probably find yourself with *both*: the fast primes at your preferred lenght *and* a -decent- zoom...

And, although I personally prefer 'Canon', you might want to give the Sigma 70-200F2.8 a serious workover, to see if that 'fits your bills' at a more affordable price? One advantage: because it is black you will stand out less in the crowd )

...as always, *my* €0.02 worth..., hope they do you some good )

Kindest regards,

Max@Home

[Paul Shields]

I'm currently preferring the 135L to the 85L for portraits on a 5D, mainly because the 135L just nails exactly the right amount of out of focus even wide open whereas the 85L is cigarette paper thin... I would probably find the 135L to be a bit long on a 1.6x but if you're thinking of moving to FF in the future then either lens should suit you well and will still be very usable in any future format change.

[trentchau]

I've shot most of my people photography on a 24-70 on FF and people have loved the results.

50MM is what the eyes see, or so it's argued, so maybe they've been pretty people in general.

70-200 isn't bad, but when paired with a body/grip/lens and so on..it could be tedious. Holding it isn't a problem, but having to zoom with it and so on gets tiring. Towards the end and your tired, and you're composing a 200mm shot..not so fun.