Repliies to Portrait Lens for the 20D

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Terry - 28 Feb 2006 00:44 GMT

Thanks to those who replied. Should I consider the Sigma 30 MM F/1.4 or the
new Canon 18-55 F/2.8 IS? Both are designed for the digital sensor size. I
have not seen reviews on these yet. The 18-55 has not been released in the
USA yet.

Signature

Terry
Remove the rodent from my email address to reply directly.

Reply to this Message

G.T. - 28 Feb 2006 03:10 GMT

> Thanks to those who replied. Should I consider the Sigma 30 MM F/1.4 or the
> new Canon 18-55 F/2.8 IS? Both are designed for the digital sensor size. I
> have not seen reviews on these yet. The 18-55 has not been released in the
> USA yet.

You should get up to at least 70mm so I'd say neither of those. Plus I'd
avoid anything Canon EF-S, why limit yourself?

Greg

Reply to this Message

C J Southern - 28 Feb 2006 04:47 GMT

> > Thanks to those who replied. Should I consider the Sigma 30 MM F/1.4 or
> the
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> You should get up to at least 70mm so I'd say neither of those. Plus I'd
> avoid anything Canon EF-S, why limit yourself?

Additionally, if one wishes to avoid limitations, I'd personally also avoid
anything from Stigma, oops, I mean Sigma.

Reply to this Message

Randall Ainsworth - 28 Feb 2006 13:54 GMT

> Additionally, if one wishes to avoid limitations, I'd personally also avoid
> anything from Stigma, oops, I mean Sigma.

It's hopeless. Sigma has always catered to "cost-conscious" shoppers.
Let the cheapskates buy their junk and we'll listen to them complain
later.

Reply to this Message

David Dyer-Bennet - 28 Feb 2006 16:55 GMT

> > Additionally, if one wishes to avoid limitations, I'd personally also avoid
> > anything from Stigma, oops, I mean Sigma.
>
> It's hopeless. Sigma has always catered to "cost-conscious" shoppers.
> Let the cheapskates buy their junk and we'll listen to them complain
> later.

I'm quite pleased with my Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro. Had it about 7
years so far now.

Signature

David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>

Reply to this Message

David Dyer-Bennet - 28 Feb 2006 16:55 GMT

You're ignoring the crop factor; for a portrait lens I'd say you want
at least 75mm *35mm equivalent*. So a 50mm is a great place to
start.

Signature

Reply to this Message

w.beckley@gmail.com - 28 Feb 2006 06:54 GMT

Well, do you want a lens specifically for portraits, or a lens that
*can* do portraits? Do you also shoot film? Do you plan on buying a
full frame DSLR in the next five years?

Regardless of your answers to these questions, avoid that Sigma lens.
Not even because it is Sigma (which in my two-lens experience is reason
enough), but because 30mm isn't really a good portrait length.

Do you want a lens that does portraits but does other things too? Then
go for the new Canon when it ships, but know that you'll have to wait
even longer if you want to wait until reports come in that it is a
"good" lens.

Shoot film or expect a full frame body? Why limit yourself to a cropped
sensor? Grab the 24-70 2.8L if you want a multipurpose lens. If you
want a dedicated portrait lens, the 50mm 1.8 is reportedly a great
performer, but cheaply made (also inexpensive). I take portraits on my
20d with a 50 1.4 and I love it. It is also a terrific normal on
film/full frame. If you want a portrait lens that can be a portrait
lens in both formats, look into the 85 1.8 or (with deep pockets) the
85 1.2L. Both are reportedly great lenses.

Bottom line though: for identical framing (which portraits are), focal
length doesn't matter for depth of field, so get the lens with the
widest aperture you can afford if you want silky backgrounds, and get
any lens I've mentioned other than the 50 1.8 if you want nice bokeh in
those backgrounds.

Reply to this Message