Would EOS 100D + Tamron 90mm f2.8 be suitable for protrait taking


Jan 29, 2012
264
0
16
#1
Dear all, I'm intending to supplement my 18-55mm kit lens with a prime lens for portrait and general photography to achieve better image quality.

I'm looking to buy a Tamron 90mm f2.8 because I've read very positive reviews on it. However, I'm wondering whether it would be suitable with the 100D because a crop factor of 1.6x would give it a reach of 144mm. At this reach, how far would I need to stand from my subject to get full body, half body and shoulder up portraits? Also would my subjects' faces look flat at this range?

Are there any other prime lenses that would be more suitable at a similar pricing?

Looking forward to all opinions.

Best regards
Hong
 

rhino123

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 1, 2006
5,243
15
38
NA
#2
Dear all, I'm intending to supplement my 18-55mm kit lens with a prime lens for portrait and general photography to achieve better image quality.

I'm looking to buy a Tamron 90mm f2.8 because I've read very positive reviews on it. However, I'm wondering whether it would be suitable with the 100D because a crop factor of 1.6x would give it a reach of 144mm. At this reach, how far would I need to stand from my subject to get full body, half body and shoulder up portraits? Also would my subjects' faces look flat at this range?

Are there any other prime lenses that would be more suitable at a similar pricing?

Looking forward to all opinions.

Best regards
Hong
I think the Tamron 90mm f2.8 is more of a macro lens, of course you can use it as a portrait lens, but wouldn't a Canon 85mm f1.8 a better choice, since both offered about the same focal length.

Also... since you have the 18-55mm, have you use it for portrait before? If not, I would advise you use it, then see which focal length you like best, before getting a prime lens to that focal length. If you find the focal lenght of your 18-55mm too short, then consider a longer focal length prime lens.
 

Octarine

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 3, 2008
12,491
26
48
Pasir Ris
#3
Since you know nothing and ask such basic questions I recommend skipping all purchases. Reviews sound great because people write them after they used the lens for a specific purpose. If this purpose is not the same, or if you have different ideas, expectations, situations then the result and opinion might not be the same.
Use your kit lens at 55mm and learn from there. Lenses don't take pictures, it's the person behind the viewfinder.
 

Jan 29, 2012
264
0
16
#4
I think the Tamron 90mm f2.8 is more of a macro lens, of course you can use it as a portrait lens, but wouldn't a Canon 85mm f1.8 a better choice, since both offered about the same focal length.

Also... since you have the 18-55mm, have you use it for portrait before? If not, I would advise you use it, then see which focal length you like best, before getting a prime lens to that focal length. If you find the focal lenght of your 18-55mm too short, then consider a longer focal length prime lens.
Hi Bro Rhino, thanks for the advice. I get what you mean. I did try using the 18-55mm as a portrait lens before, usually at about 3 m from the subject, I'll be able to get a shoulder up shot at 55mm and at 18mm a full body shot. But I'm just not sure what the distance from subject would be with a 90mm lens. I'm just afraid it'll be too long.

Best regards
Hong
 

Jan 29, 2012
264
0
16
#5
Since you know nothing and ask such basic questions I recommend skipping all purchases. Reviews sound great because people write them after they used the lens for a specific purpose. If this purpose is not the same, or if you have different ideas, expectations, situations then the result and opinion might not be the same.
Use your kit lens at 55mm and learn from there. Lenses don't take pictures, it's the person behind the viewfinder.
Hi Bro Octarine, thanks for your advice. Yes, composition and mastering the camera is certainly more important than the equipment.

Best regards
Hong
 

SkyStrike

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 29, 2010
3,444
11
38
Somewhere
#6
Hi Bro Rhino, thanks for the advice. I get what you mean. I did try using the 18-55mm as a portrait lens before, usually at about 3 m from the subject, I'll be able to get a shoulder up shot at 55mm and at 18mm a full body shot. But I'm just not sure what the distance from subject would be with a 90mm lens. I'm just afraid it'll be too long.

Best regards
Hong
For full body shots, I will not recommend using wide angle focal length, unless you are trying to achieve some effects like making the legs longer etc..

For full body, I'll recommend the focal length of at least about 35-50mm on crop, you will be aprox 4-6m away from the subject. So for longer focal length, it will definitely be alot more. Which is many times impractical in crowded events where you have less than 5m of clear working space (you maybe lucky to get 3m already).

For those tighter shots (head and shoulders), generally I will be using something >70mm. For an inexpensive kit zoom of such focal length, look at the 55-250mm which I find it quite value for money also.

If you have noticed, the distortion on the face will change depending on the focal length you use. I'll suggest some good read on this topic... *Just one of the many articles to choose from..* http://petapixel.com/2011/11/07/a-striking-look-at-how-focal-length-affect-head-shots/

Search terms used on Google: camera lens face distortion
 

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#7
Hi. I routinely use a Nikon D7000 paired with a Sigma 85mm f/1.4 for portrait shots, so I'd say you can capture all sort of portraiture styles with the Canon 100D + Tamron 90mm setup. If you want to do both macro and portraiture photography - it is a good compromise.
 

Last edited:

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#8
Yes you can, but you need to stand far far away if you shoot full length portrait.
Just imagine how far you away when you shoot full length portrait with 55mm focal length, than just double the distance will do.
 

Jan 29, 2012
264
0
16
#9
For full body shots, I will not recommend using wide angle focal length, unless you are trying to achieve some effects like making the legs longer etc..

For full body, I'll recommend the focal length of at least about 35-50mm on crop, you will be aprox 4-6m away from the subject. So for longer focal length, it will definitely be alot more. Which is many times impractical in crowded events where you have less than 5m of clear working space (you maybe lucky to get 3m already).

For those tighter shots (head and shoulders), generally I will be using something >70mm. For an inexpensive kit zoom of such focal length, look at the 55-250mm which I find it quite value for money also.

If you have noticed, the distortion on the face will change depending on the focal length you use. I'll suggest some good read on this topic... *Just one of the many articles to choose from..* http://petapixel.com/2011/11/07/a-striking-look-at-how-focal-length-affect-head-shots/

Search terms used on Google: camera lens face distortion
Hi Bro,

Thanks for your advice. It's certainly very useful and interesting advice.

Best regards
Hong
 

Jan 29, 2012
264
0
16
#10
Hi. I routinely use a Nikon D7000 paired with a Sigma 85mm f/1.4 for portrait shots, so I'd say you can capture all sort of portraiture styles with the Canon 100D + Tamron 90mm setup. If you want to do both macro and portraiture photography - it is a good compromise.
Hi Bro,

Thanks for the great advice. I visited your blog and certainly am inspired.

Best regards
Hong
 

Jan 29, 2012
264
0
16
#11
Yes you can, but you need to stand far far away if you shoot full length portrait.
Just imagine how far you away when you shoot full length portrait with 55mm focal length, than just double the distance will do.
Hi Benjamin,

Thanks for taking the time to reply. It's certainly very helpful.

Best regards
Hong
 

Apr 14, 2010
438
2
18
SG
www.flickr.com
#12
I suggest you experiment with something like this. Set your 18-55 to 50mm, and take as many portraits as you like for 2-3 weeks. If comfortable, buy the inexpensive EF 50mm f/1.8 II prime lens & use it for portraits till you've out-grown it. Many pro photographers use 85mm for portraits on a full frame camera. The 50mm on the 100D will look right physically size wise, and produce an equivalent of 80mm on a full frame camera. If you buy a 90mm macro lens for portraits, you will find it very limiting. Many times I find my 50mm limiting on my Canon APSCs. I tried the 40mm pancake lens too but finally I gave up and went back to a telephoto zoom. When used properly, my 55-250mm STM did very well for portraits. (My 18-135mm kit lens could be used too.) In other words, I'm suggesting you stick closer to 50mm.

Dear all, I'm intending to supplement my 18-55mm kit lens with a prime lens for portrait and general photography to achieve better image quality. I'm looking to buy a Tamron 90mm f2.8 because I've read very positive reviews on it. However, I'm wondering whether it would be suitable with the 100D because a crop factor of 1.6x would give it a reach of 144mm. At this reach, how far would I need to stand from my subject to get full body, half body and shoulder up portraits? Also would my subjects' faces look flat at this range? Are there any other prime lenses that would be more suitable at a similar pricing? Looking forward to all opinions. Best regards Hong
 

Last edited:
Jan 29, 2012
264
0
16
#13
I suggest you experiment with something like this. Set your 18-55 to 50mm, and take as many portraits as you like for 2-3 weeks. If comfortable, buy the inexpensive EF 50mm f/1.8 II prime lens & use it for portraits till you've out-grown it. Many pro photographers use 85mm for portraits on a full frame camera. The 50mm on the 100D will look right physically size wise, and produce an equivalent of 80mm on a full frame camera. If you buy a 90mm macro lens for portraits, you will find it very limiting. Many times I find my 50mm limiting on my Canon APSCs. I tried the 40mm pancake lens too but finally I gave up and went back to a telephoto zoom. When used properly, my 55-250mm STM did very well for portraits. (My 18-135mm kit lens could be used too.) In other words, I'm suggesting you stick closer to 50mm.
Thanks you for your valuable advice Bro Macvince.
 

Apr 14, 2010
438
2
18
SG
www.flickr.com
#14
Thanks you for your valuable advice Bro Macvince.
You're welcome. Alternatively, you could buy the newly released EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM. It will serve you well for general (& street) photography, and when used for portraits, stand closer to your subject and if the background is further away, you could get a reasonable background blur. B&H just dropped the price to USD 149 from 189. You should be able to get it locally at a reasonable price. Photos from this lens are sharp and nice.
 

Jan 29, 2012
264
0
16
#15
You're welcome. Alternatively, you could buy the newly released EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM. It will serve you well for general (& street) photography, and when used for portraits, stand closer to your subject and if the background is further away, you could get a reasonable background blur. B&H just dropped the price to USD 149 from 189. You should be able to get it locally at a reasonable price. Photos from this lens are sharp and nice.
Hi Bro MacVince, thanks once again. Ya, i'll certainly consider your recommendation. Can't seem to get good background blur using the 18-55mm kit lens unless I'm less than 2 m from my subject.
 

Reportage

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2008
5,785
2
0
#16
Also take note if you will be staying on crop sensor camera or going to upgrade to full frame in the future.

Since the 100D is very compact, maybe a budget combo of 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.8 would suit your usage (becomes 56mm and 80mm on crop)? They are also canon FF compatible.

In my case, i am using the EF 24-105mm f/4 since its focal range suits 90% of my projects.
 

Top Bottom