Portrait lens with IS

[pearlyred]

What are peoples opinion on the best portrait lens, crop Canon, that has IS/OS/VC etc built in?

Looking at the Canon line up, many of the typical 'primes' or L's don't have IS. Maybe it's not needed at short focal lengths, but I have trembly hands, so figure it may be worth ensuring I have it. There's a 28mm and a 100mm with IS, but neither seem like the best FL for a crop camera?

Currently saving up for a wide angle walk about, likely the 17-55 or sigma 17-50. I'm leaning towards the Sigma at the moment, assuming I can get a good one. Anyone used the 17-5x lenses for portraits at the long end? How do they stack up against a prime? Would it make an adequate portrait lens compared to the other offerings..?

Your thoughts and opinions are welcome

~p

[Adam]

17-55 on a crop is a great portrait lens.

[Adam]

Failing that, you next best IS offering (assuming you want f2.8) is the 70-200 which would work well for head shots if you are not stuck for working space.

If f4 is ok, then you'd be hard pressed to find a better option than the 24-105L (again assuming IS is required.

[rjd]

17-55 makes an OK portrait lens, f2.8 , 55mm and 2 stop IS. IMO 55mm is still a little too short.

I'd look at a 70-200 IS, f2.8 if possible, or the 100mm f2.8L IS macro which is a superb portrait lens with a good 4 stop IS.

Remember you can have pretty fast shutter speeds sometimes and not need the IS help, that only helps somewhere in between plenty of light and must use a tripod - also remember people moveso shooting at 1/20th or slower may cause issues anyhow!

[mesodan]

How about a (make believe) 135L IS?
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=8388.0

[pearlyred]

Thanks for the input. I was a little dubious how the 17-55 might perform for portraits, especially compared to the 50 1.8 I have. F2.8 would certainly be nice, but I don't think the 70-200 2.8 is realistic for me at the moment, though maybe the Sigma could be,.,. ? I know a fast shutter (good light) can make up for no IS, but I guess I just want to give myself the best chance I can at a sharp image.

The F4 version of the 70-200 is within my budget, but would leave me with no walkaround. I'm not sure at the moment which one I want more The portrait shooting would be mainly outdoors, street style.

I think I may wait until photokina before diving into something, just to see what else is on the horizon.

[sooshee]

Most of these were taken on the 17-55mm https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...5099042&type=3
and all these ones: http://www.clarenceu.co.nz/p583523969
I think it's a great portrait lens on the crop.
If you are going to be shooting indoors, the 70-200 will be too long I reckon.

*Edit* Just read your last post, as it is going to be "street style" shooting, then I'd definitely recommend the 17-55 over the 70-200mm.

[peedee]

the 17-55 has only very average IS, but everything else about it is very good. Pity Canon did not see fit to add IS to the mk2 24-70, although its prohibitively expensive already. The 24-105 is a great lens, and at above 70mm it makes a good to great portrait lens/walk about lens/general lens. But, its only F4, so low light challenges it. Its my main lens but I augment it with fast primes for low light ( which I would like to see IS on but they simply don't come in that flavour ). I do have a 24-70 but don't like it as much as the 24-105, and now I use a full frame camera, I have sold my 17-55. I did not use the 17-55 overly often, preferring a 10-22 and the 24-105 even on a crop sensor.

Of course, If I am wanting a great portrait lens, on the FF camera, I either grab my 70-200 2.8 or my 100 L IS. I would love the 135mm F2, and its the next lens I suspect I will be buying, although the 14mm L is very appealing too.

[Jdr-Photo]

If you'll stay with Crop Body then go with 17-55.

if you'll upgrade sometime in future for Full frame body ill go with 24-105/70-200.

as this also the lenses I have compared.

[rjd]

Heres some portraits I shot with the 17-55.

[Jdr-Photo]

those are awesome shot rjd. loved the 2nd and 3rd photos.

@pearlyred

also here are some estimated cost for the lenses as I've already searched for this.

canon 24-105 f4L
-p. import = $1200-$1500
-nz new = $2300-$2500
-2nd hand tm = $1000-$1100

canon 17-55 f2.8
-$1200-$1300

tamron 17-50 f2.8 non-vc
-$550 - $600

tamron 17-50 f2.8 vc
-$500-$550

*note: all prices are estimate.

[pearlyred]

those are awesome shot rjd. loved the 2nd and 3rd photos.

canon 17-55 f2.8
-$1200-$1300

Is this used price?

On a related note, has anyone purchase from B&H and had it shipped? Seems to be a cheap way to do it too, without using dodgy parallel importers.

[mrfinster]

Is this used price?

On a related note, has anyone purchase from B&H and had it shipped? Seems to be a cheap way to do it too, without using dodgy parallel importers.

I have, you're likely to get clipped for GST so you need to factor that in. They're fine.

[mesodan]

I have, you're likely to get clipped for GST so you need to factor that in. They're fine.

+1, got my 5D3 and 50L through B&H. I didn't have to deal with NZ customs though fortunately.

[pearlyred]

Bugger, that could be expensive. So it's pot luck if you get hit for customs duty by the sounds of it?

[mesodan]

Bugger, that could be expensive. So it's pot luck if you get hit for customs duty by the sounds of it?

Got mine while I was in Dubai, so just had to pay the 5% import tax here. NZ will probably want their 15% though.

[Adam]

Bugger, that could be expensive. So it's pot luck if you get hit for customs duty by the sounds of it?

It shouldn't be pot luck. If its over $500 (I think) then you pay. Oh, any buying from B&H is basically a Parallel import. Nothing dodgy about it, but it s exactly the same as buying from Asia.

[mrfinster]

It shouldn't be pot luck. If its over $500 (I think) then you pay. Oh, any buying from B&H is basically a Parallel import. Nothing dodgy about it, but it s exactly the same as buying from Asia.

You can have a go at beating the rules by getting whoever sends it to you to mark the package as a repair return or gift, and put a different value on it, but that's obviously a bit dodgy and I doubt B & H would want to do that.

[Jdr-Photo]

Is this used price?

thats new.

[pearlyred]

Ah parallel imports yeah, I guess. I've heard some dodgy things about some of those companies.

If you buy from b&h do you still get canons international warranty that covers NZ (lenses not body). I know it used to in the past.