50mm 1.8 for Portraits

cmkultradome

I know a lot of people use the Canon 50mm 1.8 lens for portaits. When you use this lens for portraits are you shooting at the 1.8 aperature? I have a kind of a barter system set up with my son's hockey coach - I take pictures of his collegiate team (my son skate's on one of his youth teams) and my son attends his hockey clinics for free. Works for both of us. Anyway, he needs simple head shots taken at the rink (just a white cement wall for the background - with lighting like a dungeon) for their media guide (media guide is really nothing fancy). I shoot with a 40D and don't own any external flashes. Since I don't really like the on-camera flash last year I used my 70-200mm 2.8 (at 70mm f2.8) with no flash for the headshots & the coach was fine with them. This year I was considering purchasing the 50mm 1.8 lens for these headshots, since it is a relatively inexpensive lens and I have heard good reviews. Hoping that the 1.8 would allow even more light into the camera, but I don't know if the more shallow depth of field is used for portraits. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

Stephanie

P.S. Moderator - if you want to move this to the "People" forum, feel free. I wasn't sure which forum to post in.

divamum

Yes and no.

The 50mm 1.8 can be a wonderful portrait lens, although I think you'd find 1.8 wouldn't give you enough depth of field for the kind of "ultrasharp" typical sports portrait. Unless I'm specifically going for a very shallow DOF, only-the-eyes-sharp kind of portrait, I usually use my 50mm lenses at F4 and up. I personally LOVE shallow DOF portraits, but I'm not sure it's the "look" you'd necessarily want for what you're doing. ETA: According to depth of field master, 1.8 at 5ft = ~ 1" of depth of field, and only~5" at 10ft. You'd have trouble getting a whole head sharply focused in that area, much less an entire posed body.

As far as the lens itself, it's incredibly sharp and the best bargain in Canon's lineup, but it has slow and sometimes inconsistent autofocus, especially if the lighting conditions are less than optimum. For the price it's a terrific lens, but you may find that your 70-210 does the job just as well (although you'll need to stand further away, of course )

The item you might want to invest in for the portraits is a reflector (if you weren't using one already). This will let you bounce the available light back onto the subject's face and can create extremely pleasing portrait lighting for very minimal investment.

HTH!

Scott_Quier

Gotta agree with divamum with respect to the look of the shot. DOF with a 50mm at f/2, with subject at approx 8' will be something in the neighborhood of about 6". Which means, if you're focus is off even just a little bit, you're hosed.

And, she's right about a reflector. Even a white foam-core board from a craft store (~$3.00) and any available team member and you're set.

Something else to consider.... My 50mm f/1.4 is quite soft and shows a bit of CA (even in the center) until it's stopped down about f/2.0 - you may experience the same thing with the 50mm f/1.8 so test it.

My recommendation, FWIW, would be to go ahead and get/use the 50mm f/1.8 but stop it down to about f/2.5 or so. Boost your ISO if you need to for the shutter speed - for stationary portraits you're probably going to want at least 1/30 just counter blur caused by subject motion. Use a tripod. Take a gray card with your for CWB purposes. You should be golden!

cmkultradome

Thank you both divamum & Scott. That is exactly the information I needed!! Sounds like I'll be purchasing the 50mm 1.8 and a reflector (or maybe for this shoot the white foam core-board).

Stephanie

divamum

cmkultradome wrote:

Thank you both divamum & Scott. That is exactly the information I needed!! Sounds like I'll be purchasing the 50mm 1.8 and a reflector (or maybe for this shoot the white foam core-board).

Stephanie

Car windscreen shades make great el-cheapo reflectors too, and the silver is just a bit brighter than the white which, if the conditions are gloomy, might be helpful. Watch for stray specular highlights, however - I've noticed when I use tinfoil or one of the carshades that sometimes little highlights pop up where I wasn't expecting them!

chrismoore

I have shot with the 50mm 1.8, 1.4, and 1.2 and they are all excellent portrait lenses. There is a good review and comparison here. Aside from DOF issues (1.8 is so narrow that an eye may be in focus and the other eye completely OOF if even in a slightly different plane), these lenses are all soft wide open. I did several comparisons shooting the same subject at decreasing apertures and if you do the same I think you will find that the 50mm lenses are sharpest around f/2.8-4.0. In addition, the CA is quite severe even in the expensive 1.2 when shot wide open.

craig_d

My usual style for near-range portraits (say, standing five or six feet away) with APS-C is 50mm at f/2.8 (or with full-frame, 80mm at f/4.5). This gives you about 5.5" DOF, so the face can be sharp and the edges of the hair can be just a little blurred. At 50mm f/1.8, DOF would be only about 3.5", which is doable but you'd better get the focus dead on.

The "nifty fifty" f/1.8 is incredibly inexpensive for what it can do, but also very cheaply made. I've heard of people knocking the front element off it by bumping it against something. You might be better off looking online for the original (not "II") version, which is a bit better constructed and frankly looks a bit nicer. It shouldn't be too hard to find one for under $150, which is still less than half the price of a 50mm f/1.4. Of course, these lenses are all about 20 years old now, but the one I bought on eBay a while back (made in 1987, according to the date code) works flawlessly.

If I were in the market for a 50mm prime right now, I'd probably get the f/1.4 version for its superior bokeh, quieter focus motor, and wider aperture, but you can't beat the f/1.8 in terms of value for money.

chrismoore

FWIW, Here is a quick illustration what I and others are referring to with the lens wide open. Granted these are not portraits like you will be taking, but I just threw this together quickly and it does a good job at the point (note this was done with the 50mm f/1.2 on a FF body, but the 1.8 does have similar characteristics wide open). These are straight out of the camera.

100% crop f/1.2 distance approx 5 feet from subject:


100% crop f/2.8 distance approx 5 feet from subject:


100% crop f/1.2 distance approx 30 feet from subject (note the softness and CA around the leaves):


100% crop f/2.5 distance approx 30 feet from subject: