My guess you are trying to say smaller as in number smaller, but the opeing size of aperture is bigger.erm if u toking abt lens dedicated to portrait, imho, i think 50mm or 35mm wld be fine. but personally i wld very much prefer the 35mm. as for nice bokeh, of coz f-stop smaller the better la, but it often means more expensive oso.
My guess you are trying to say smaller as in number smaller, but the opeing size of aperture is bigger.
it is suitable, be it on APS size sensor or full frame sensor.Dear all,
Can anyone advice what is considered a suitable lense for portrait?
I am currently using 24 - 70L f2.8.
Not sure if it is suitable for portrait?
Kindly give me a pointer or two please.
Thanks
suggest you go to any nearest National Library, pick up any books explain about photographing people or portrait photography, it will give you a better idea on how to photographing people.Personally, i feel that the 24-70 DOF is nice but not good enough for portrait. Or maybe i should say, my skills sucks. HAhahahahaha.
But then again, if you are using 24-70, what Aperture or Shutter speed do you normally shoot at presuming it is a normal sunny day?
As i have seen and viewed thousands of pictures taken by good photographers, i am also keen to have that kind of picture taken given the limitation of my current knowledge on the digital world and imaging. Anyone care to tell?
The 24-70mm is more than enough for portraits.If you want a dedicated portrait lens,get the 35mm f1.4 if you using crop or the 50mm f1.2 if you are using FF.If feeling rich,get the monster 85mm f1.2Personally, i feel that the 24-70 DOF is nice but not good enough for portrait. Or maybe i should say, my skills sucks. HAhahahahaha.
But then again, if you are using 24-70, what Aperture or Shutter speed do you normally shoot at presuming it is a normal sunny day?
As i have seen and viewed thousands of pictures taken by good photographers, i am also keen to have that kind of picture taken given the limitation of my current knowledge on the digital world and imaging. Anyone care to tell?
I guess what you meant to say here is bokeh rather then DOF? It doesn't make sense to say DOF of one lens is better then the other, as DOF is controlled by your aperture setting. Just stop down (increase the aperture f number) if you want deeper DOF. If you're talking about bokeh, 24-70L/2.8 does have very pleasant bokeh as well. See this example.Personally, i feel that the 24-70 DOF is nice but not good enough for portrait.
The most common setting for portraiture is aperture priority mode as your subject is mostly stationary and you would want to control the DOF. For example, for half body shots you would probably want to use a wider aperture to have a shallower DOF in order to blur out the background. On the other hand, if you're shooting head-and-shoulder, you might want to stop down 1 or 2 stops to increase the DOF so that the eyes and nose are all in focus. As you can see, there isn't one "best aperture" as it varies according to your needs.But then again, if you are using 24-70, what Aperture or Shutter speed do you normally shoot at presuming it is a normal sunny day?
Cool. Maybe the 50mm 1.8 for a start. No money for the 50 f1.2. I will have to eat grass then know that Singapore is a green city and never short of green. Hahahahaha. Thank you for all your comments. Do keep them flowing and hopefully more people like benefit from the short notes provided. CHeers
personally i find the EF24-70 to be an extremely versatile lens. i have used it almost exclusively for almost all my shooting needs.
It's a great compromise lens, absolutely not good for portrait. I sold mine.
The curvatures/designs of the lens to accomodate the 24mm end created a problem for the 70mm lens. DISTORTION. This is especially true when you shoot close up.
The 28-70 2.8L, was far superior. Why?
When compare to the 28-70, the 24-74 shows much higher degree of distortion. At the 50mm range, to a point that the local length for closer up shots/image will not be usable. At the 70mm end, the distortion is still higher with teh 24-70, and the degree of distortion is less than at the 500mm focal length, but still not acceptable.
When and if I compare the 24-70 to a prime, it's not even fair.
At the end of the day, if you want an all around lens to shoot a wide variety of genre, then the 24-70 is probably a good compromise. If you can find a mint copy of the 28-70, get that instead. Other than less distortion, I also found the 28-70 glass quality much better, especially how it handles contrast and color.
If you are looking for a lens to shoot portrait, get one of the 85's.
Can afford 24-70 cannot afford anything better than the 50mm f1.8?You gotta be kidding...Cool. Maybe the 50mm 1.8 for a start. No money for the 50 f1.2. I will have to eat grass then know that Singapore is a green city and never short of green. Hahahahaha. Thank you for all your comments. Do keep them flowing and hopefully more people like benefit from the short notes provided. CHeers
Can afford 24-70 cannot afford anything better than the 50mm f1.8?You gotta be kidding...
i am a lazy shooter.
as much as i want to, the 85 on my current camera is simply impractical. i am waiting to get the 5d mk2 end of the yr to use it with a 85 for portraiture. will pop on the 135 on it too.
i have heard of how the 28-70 is better in terms of sharpness compared to the 24-70. but at the end of the day, its tough to beat primes for any zooms.
i am thinking of selling off a few lenses to make way for the 85. :embrass: