Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

  1. #1

    Default Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Hello, I am thinking of getting this lens (currently deciding btw 17-55mm or 17-40), anyone thikns that the 17-40mm is not a good portrait lens? Your reason? Thks for reading.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Quote Originally Posted by loveholics View Post
    Hello, I am thinking of getting this lens (currently deciding btw 17-55mm or 17-40), anyone thikns that the 17-40mm is not a good portrait lens? Your reason? Thks for reading.
    I've been shooting numerous portraits and model shoots with my 17-40 and has proved to be very gd. But soon i'm replacing it with a 50 f/1.2 so my 17-40 will be 'reassigned' to concentrate on street shoots and landscapes.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    I would find 17-40 abit too wide for closer portraits, not to mention the max f/4, which will not have more control over DOF than the f/2.8 of the 17-55. I would go for the 17-55 if you're looking into doing portraits, and maybe some slightly more telephoto lenses (50/85/100/135 primes)
    1D MkIII, 5D MkII 16-200 2.8L, 35L, 50L, 135L
    View my flickr

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    It's all abt personal prefs as portraitures are not limited to teleshots. f/4 is gd enough for portraits.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Distance between subject and photographer also matters right?

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    it matters too whether full body plus clothes are to be captured. for wedding portraits, there will be shots which require capturing of the entire gown with train, etc.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    this is a picture shot this morning with the 17-40. forgive me for the poor composition and blown highlights. green cast was from window panes.


  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    When i do my model shoots. Sometimes i like to frame them with the surroundings so a wide-angle is ideal. If tele is used, have to stand really far away and sometimes have space constraints.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Quote Originally Posted by loveholics View Post
    Hello, I am thinking of getting this lens (currently deciding btw 17-55mm or 17-40), anyone thikns that the 17-40mm is not a good portrait lens? Your reason? Thks for reading.
    Hi 17-40 is better for scenary. You may end up being too close to the model too. The 17-55 f2.8 is a great lens cos of its versatility ie great for wide angle and full body shots. However, it is pricey.

    For portrait shots (esp for those head shots), i prefer the 85mm f1.4. The f.14 comes in very handy for outdoor shots to help blurr out the distractions from the background. Given that it is a prime lens, the quality is great -Never regretted the above mentioned 2 lenses.

    j

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Quote Originally Posted by jessejames View Post
    Hi 17-40 is better for scenary. You may end up being too close to the model too. The 17-55 f2.8 is a great lens cos of its versatility ie great for wide angle and full body shots. However, it is pricey.

    For portrait shots (esp for those head shots), i prefer the 85mm f1.4. The f.14 comes in very handy for outdoor shots to help blurr out the distractions from the background. Given that it is a prime lens, the quality is great -Never regretted the above mentioned 2 lenses.

    j
    85mm only got f/1.2 and f/1.8. There's no such f/1.4.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Thanks all. It is indeed personal perference. I have another question for those who use 17-40mm to take portraits. Now, is the distortion in your portrait pics taken with 17-40mm noticeable, well this question just pop up in my mind when I looked at the sample shots if the 17-40mm. Thks.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    708

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    If you are using it on a crop factor dslr, I see no problem. Just go for 35mm or 50mm range after your 1.3x or 1.6x conversion.
    A camera cannot teach you how to see.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Has anyone tried the 16-35 f2.8?

    That I believe is a good lens for wedding, landscape and portrait.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    ..............
    Last edited by contaxable; 4th March 2008 at 09:24 PM.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Quote Originally Posted by loveholics View Post
    Thanks all. It is indeed personal perference. I have another question for those who use 17-40mm to take portraits. Now, is the distortion in your portrait pics taken with 17-40mm noticeable, well this question just pop up in my mind when I looked at the sample shots if the 17-40mm. Thks.
    Not at all. Perhaps it's due to me using a 1.6x sensor, therefore not noticeable.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Quote Originally Posted by loveholics View Post
    Hello, I am thinking of getting this lens (currently deciding btw 17-55mm or 17-40), anyone thikns that the 17-40mm is not a good portrait lens? Your reason? Thks for reading.
    It depends on what you mean by "portrait".

    Portrait <> Closeup.
    Portrait <> Shot of the face

    If you know the lens well, you can certainly use a 17-40 for "portraits".

    But if you try to shoot a closeup with a 17-40, you'll have to decide if your subject likes big noses. It works for some, eg. portraits of clowns.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    It depends on what you mean by "portrait".

    Portrait <> Closeup.
    Portrait <> Shot of the face

    If you know the lens well, you can certainly use a 17-40 for "portraits".

    But if you try to shoot a closeup with a 17-40, you'll have to decide if your subject likes big noses. It works for some, eg. portraits of clowns.
    Closeups of your subjects doesn't mean big noses, etc. It depends on how u take it. Results can be impressive.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  18. #18

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle View Post
    85mm only got f/1.2 and f/1.8. There's no such f/1.4.
    Standard, Telephoto & Super Telephoto Lenses
    AF 50mm f/1.4D - ($425~$448) | $448 (MS, Jul07 - die_Blende) | $425 (Grey, TCW - DeadEnd) | $445 (TK, Nov07 - Aim)
    AF 50mm f/1.8D - ($170~$185) | $175 (Lord's, Sep07 - Ambious) | $170 (OP, Sep07 - helmiz)
    AF 85mm f/1.4D IF - $1750 (CP, Oct07 - chitchit4)
    AF 85mm f/1.8D - $615 (CP, Sept05 - simon80) | $620 (Lord's, Aug06 - Jigsawman) | $635 (MS, Aug07 - matthew1381)
    AF 105mm f/2D DC - $1425 (TK, Jan06 - jOhO)
    AF 135mm f/2D DC - $1720 (CP, Jan06 - anka)
    AF 180mm f/2.8D IF-ED - $1150 (w/o gst, CP, Aug06 - nature)
    AF-S 300mm f/2.8D IF-ED II (non-VR) - $6350 (w/o GST, MS, Dec05 - flash77)
    AF-S 300mm f/4D IF-ED - $1680 (Grey, TCW, Dec05 - Nik-enduser)

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Quote Originally Posted by jessejames View Post
    Standard, Telephoto & Super Telephoto Lenses
    AF 50mm f/1.4D - ($425~$448) | $448 (MS, Jul07 - die_Blende) | $425 (Grey, TCW - DeadEnd) | $445 (TK, Nov07 - Aim)
    AF 50mm f/1.8D - ($170~$185) | $175 (Lord's, Sep07 - Ambious) | $170 (OP, Sep07 - helmiz)
    AF 85mm f/1.4D IF - $1750 (CP, Oct07 - chitchit4)
    AF 85mm f/1.8D - $615 (CP, Sept05 - simon80) | $620 (Lord's, Aug06 - Jigsawman) | $635 (MS, Aug07 - matthew1381)
    AF 105mm f/2D DC - $1425 (TK, Jan06 - jOhO)
    AF 135mm f/2D DC - $1720 (CP, Jan06 - anka)
    AF 180mm f/2.8D IF-ED - $1150 (w/o gst, CP, Aug06 - nature)
    AF-S 300mm f/2.8D IF-ED II (non-VR) - $6350 (w/o GST, MS, Dec05 - flash77)
    AF-S 300mm f/4D IF-ED - $1680 (Grey, TCW, Dec05 - Nik-enduser)
    Canon, Canon, Canon..

  20. #20

    Default Re: Is the 17-40mm 4.0L lens good for portrait?

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle View Post
    85mm only got f/1.2 and f/1.8. There's no such f/1.4.
    Standard, Telephoto & Super Telephoto Lenses
    AF 50mm f/1.4D - ($425~$448) | $448 (MS, Jul07 - die_Blende) | $425 (Grey, TCW - DeadEnd) | $445 (TK, Nov07 - Aim)
    AF 50mm f/1.8D - ($170~$185) | $175 (Lord's, Sep07 - Ambious) | $170 (OP, Sep07 - helmiz)
    AF 85mm f/1.4D IF - $1750 (CP, Oct07 - chitchit4)
    AF 85mm f/1.8D - $615 (CP, Sept05 - simon80) | $620 (Lord's, Aug06 - Jigsawman) | $635 (MS, Aug07 - matthew1381)
    AF 105mm f/2D DC - $1425 (TK, Jan06 - jOhO)
    AF 135mm f/2D DC - $1720 (CP, Jan06 - anka)
    AF 180mm f/2.8D IF-ED - $1150 (w/o gst, CP, Aug06 - nature)
    AF-S 300mm f/2.8D IF-ED II (non-VR) - $6350 (w/o GST, MS, Dec05 - flash77)
    AF-S 300mm f/4D IF-ED - $1680 (Grey, TCW, Dec05 - Nik-enduser)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •