Tele Prime

Davidoff

Ok, before you ask, I used the search function, but I didn't get answers to my exact question. I'm looking for a versatile lens, for low light/tele. I usually use the 50mm 1.8 for low light and portraits, but I was considering either the 85mm 1.8 or the tamron 90mm. My other tele is a sigma 70-300, so either of them would be a leap in iq and speed but I'm having trouble choosing one. I don't have a lot of interes in macro right now, but I'd really like to try it out. I know some people will say the 85 is better for portraits, but from what I've seen the tamron is so sharp and has great bokeh. For concerts and candids, the 85 is nicer because it focuses faster and is a bit faster, but I don't know it it's that much better than the 90 and I think it may overlap the 50 a bit. If I had the €, 85 1.4 surely, but until then... does anyone have both ?

Elaine

I had the Tamron 90 macro with my Minolta system. It was super sharp with great bokeh, but SLOW to auto focus. It's a macro, after all. Great pics, though.
I currently have the 85 1.8 with my Canon system (and the Canon 100 macro). The 85 is so much faster than the Tamron macro, it really is better for portraits and low light (a lot better IMO). My only frustration with the 85 is the minimum focus distance, which is about 3 ft. I'm feeling the need for the 50 1.4 so I can get closer and fill the frame more. The 85 is a sweet lens, but I don't like it telling me I have to back up! It doesn't sound like that would be an issue for you.
Really, the two lenses are for different things. It sounds like the 85 would suit your mentioned purposes. If you're really interested in macro, get a macro lens (like the Tamron 90 or the Canon 100 or Nikon 105).

EDIT: You could always start out with the Tamron 90 and see if it works for your non-macro needs. If not, at least you'll have a nice macro, and you can decide to add the 85 or a different prime. Or, you could get the 85, knowing it won't do macro. Only you know how much you want the macro capability.

lowbone

Davidoff wrote:

Ok, before you ask, I used the search function, but I didn't get answers to my exact question. I'm looking for a versatile lens, for low light/tele. I usually use the 50mm 1.8 for low light and portraits, but I was considering either the 85mm 1.8 or the tamron 90mm. My other tele is a sigma 70-300, so either of them would be a leap in iq and speed but I'm having trouble choosing one. I don't have a lot of interes in macro right now, but I'd really like to try it out. I know some people will say the 85 is better for portraits, but from what I've seen the tamron is so sharp and has great bokeh. For concerts and candids, the 85 is nicer because it focuses faster and is a bit faster, but I don't know it it's that much better than the 90 and I think it may overlap the 50 a bit. If I had the €, 85 1.4 surely, but until then... does anyone have both ?

I used to have the Tamron 90mm when I shot Pentax. It is a very fine lens. I now have the Canon 85mm f 1.8. I guess I would give the edge to the Canon lens, of course you can'tuse it for macro unless you use extension tubes.

Photoskipper

I feel the digital change the formula of photography.
Nowadays, we have the high ISO without noise and the image stablizer which allows one to 2 step compensation. Would it be part of the answer to the low light photography.
I don't mean they can replace the fast lens. Just for the sake of discussion, would the new technology help in low light situation?

Scott_Quier

The 85 f/1.8 - Wow! Not much more to say.

The EF 100 f/2.8 Macro is also a sharp performer. If focuses close. It focuses a little slower than some. But, it's very sharp. Maybe something to think about.

Tommyboy

I have both Canon 50mm 1.4 and 85 1.8. They're great. If low light is your key need, go with one of these.

Manfr3d

The Tamron 90mm/2.8 is a slow focusing lens. If you want
a bit more reach than 85-90mm take a deep look at the
Canon 100mm/2.0 USM. The sister lens of the 85mm/1.8.

Davidoff

Manfr3d wrote:

The Tamron 90mm/2.8 is a slow focusing lens. If you want
a bit more reach than 85-90mm take a deep look at the
Canon 100mm/2.0 USM. The sister lens of the 85mm/1.8.

I'm shooting Nikon everyone, the 100 f/2 is strangely expensive. Tommyboy, do you find the 85 useful for other many things that the 50 couldn't do ?

VR isn't really what I'm looking for, I'm more concerned with fast apperture and IQ.

What about colours ? Can anyone tell me what they think about the colours and skin tones these lens produce ?