Canon 100mm F2.8 Macro used for Potrait?

[JediForce4ever]

errr so comparing 50 f1.8, f1.4 ], 100 f2.8 or 85 f1.2 is most suitable and more recently used and better results ?!

i dont get your question....
maybe proper sentence structuring will enable me to get what you are trying to say

 

[_espn_]

errr so comparing 50 f1.8, f1.4 ], 100 f2.8 or 85 f1.2 is most suitable and more recently used and better results ?!

That one very simple.

The person behind the camera will get the best picture.

 

[smokeput]

paiseh...phrase wrongly...its corrected..
shud be --
errr so comparing 50 f1.8, f1.4, 100 f2.8 & 85 f1.2 which is considered most suitable and more recently used and better results ?!

 

[smokeput]

That one very simple.

The person behind the camera will get the best picture.

agreeable..hmm and dat i suppose will ans to all questions..hahah

 

[JediForce4ever]

paiseh...phrase wrongly...its corrected..
shud be --
errr so comparing 50 f1.8, f1.4, 100 f2.8 & 85 f1.2 which is considered most suitable and more recently used and better results ?!

no most suitable.
But my choice wld be a 24-70 on a 1.6x

 

[spartacus.ret]

paiseh...phrase wrongly...its corrected..
shud be --
errr so comparing 50 f1.8, f1.4, 100 f2.8 & 85 f1.2 which is considered most suitable and more recently used and better results ?!

more recently used? depends on whether i have the lenses right?

and suitability? it depends on the photographer's style and preference. professional portrait photographers love the ef 85mm f/1.2 for the great results.

 

[biggulp]

errr so comparing 50 f1.8, f1.4, 100 f2.8 & 85 f1.2 which is most suitable and more recently used and better results ?!

That depends on your needs. Do you prefer to go up closer to your subject or maintain a distance? Do you have the working space if you are using a zoom in the studio?

 

[doug3fflux]

is that a question?

LOL. :bsmilie:

personally i think the USM on the 100/2.8 is damn fast, but iv been irritated when it hunts during macro...i.e when im playing around with different focussing areas. hunts when you focus on diff areas that are several mms apart.

 

[kiwi2]

The 100mm macro is indeed suitable for portraits. But how come some say it's so sharp not suitable for portraits? U can always soften it post-processed or with filters.

 

[Canonized]

One issue which was not mentioned earlier is that the colour on the 85L or any L lenses are richer than the 100mm f2.8 - if you are measuring the two lenses. Otherwise comparing two non L would be focussed only on sharpness. I believe there are no other sharper lens in the EF range than the 100mm. The colour is great but the L is even better and smoother.

I recently acquired the 50mm f1.4 and it has since taken over my 100mm as the preferred lens for portraits. 100mm is too long and have to stand quite far away. The 50mm at 1.6 crop is great. The 1.4 give great bokeh but a bit soft. Sharpness starts at 1.8 and bokeh still there.

 

[Rangie]

LOL. :bsmilie:

personally i think the USM on the 100/2.8 is damn fast, but iv been irritated when it hunts during macro...i.e when im playing around with different focussing areas. hunts when you focus on diff areas that are several mms apart.

I find it so irritating, that I have to resort to Manual focus and move the camera back or forth to achieve optimal focus. But, its worth it.

As for color saturation as mentioned by some ppl, if you shoot mainly in RAW, than I see no real problem in getting the saturation back, or perhaps use the programmed thingy in your camera to auto adjust for saturation, when you use this lens.

I will be taking some wedding pictures this weekend of a friend with this and my 10-22. 100mm Macro for portrait shots, maybe only head and shoulders.

 

[kencfk]

Hi, I have used my 100mm Macro for portriat shots recently at the Sony Alpha Launch. Check out these images, straight from the camera.

 

[tOGGY]

Hi, I have used my 100mm Macro for portriat shots recently at the Sony Alpha Launch. Check out these images, straight from the camera.

For shots like this, sometimes it is why a 1.4 dof is preferred. The Lens is very sharp, sharp, sharp indeed. But it is a Clear case where sharpness is not everything esp in portrait photography where isolation matters.

Colour is very acceptable - splitting hair, 135mm is slightly better. But imho, cannot be compared to the 85 1.2.

 

[kencfk]

Well, one have to compare apploes to apples. A portrait lens is engineered for its usage and it thus will out perform a macro lens in some cases in terms of bokeh, colours, contrast, details, etc....

 

[jianghai_ho]

Just get a 200/1.8. Can't be beat. Great for everything from portrait, landscape, sports and stage as long as you've got the guns.... haha

but more seriously it's not the sharpness alone, but the lack-thereof because of the small DOF. I'm getting the 85/1.2 the first chance i get (save my back from the 200/1.8)