John Bragg
Well-known
I was brought up old school, with many reasons given for using a lens in the short telephoto range. Less distortion of the features hence more flattering, discrete distance from the sitter and not "in their face". I wonder if in these times, where we are used to the wide effect of smart phone cameras on our features, there is more of a case to be made for the Nifty Fifty? I have shot a good few portraits lately using a Nikkor 50mm f1.4 Ais and it is a joy to use. I also love lenses in the 85mm range but the 50 is handy where there is little room to move. Your thoughts please ?
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
John, I don't shoot high school yearbook or passport style portraits anymore. I just don't care for head and shoulder portraits. I've really come to like environmental portraits. If I'm using a wide lens I avoid getting close enough to exaggerate the perspective. The 50mm to me is a perfect 'telephoto' for someone who favours 35mm lenses.
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
I agree with Deardorff38. My standard shooting combo in 35mm is 28, 35, and 50, and I too regard the 5O as my telephoto. But my favorite portrait lens is my Pentax 43mm, the perfect compromise in perspective and angle of coverage. Might just be my favorite lens, period.
John Bragg
Well-known
Thats a great take on it. I used to use a 28mm very often but lately I have been a one lens wonder. I have a cracking little 35mm f2.8 Zuicko and I should use it more.
John Bragg
Well-known
I use 28 35 50 85 and occasionally 135 with my OM1n, whereas with my Nikon FM2n, I use 28 50 and a Tamon Zoom 70-210. As I say though, these days it is the 50 mostly.
leicapixie
Well-known
My lens as a pro was Nikkor 105mm f2.5, or Leitz 90,, f2.8 Tele Elmarit.
I discovered on a PJ shoot I really preferred a wider look.
No more Heads on Sticks. Period. also end of "headshots".
The 50mm my favorite then 35mm on FF film cameras..
I discovered on a PJ shoot I really preferred a wider look.
No more Heads on Sticks. Period. also end of "headshots".
The 50mm my favorite then 35mm on FF film cameras..
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I was into "heads on sticks" for a while. With 50.
Also took more than these body parts, two persons portraits with 50. Even more than two with 50.
My wife took great close up portraits with 28-80 or so, Canon EOS 300 kit lens. With tele end.
Also took more than these body parts, two persons portraits with 50. Even more than two with 50.
My wife took great close up portraits with 28-80 or so, Canon EOS 300 kit lens. With tele end.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Some of these perspective problems are related to subject to camera distance. Someone with a big nose does not look good with a head and shoulder (or even tighter) portrait with a wider lens.
Also, profile portraits reduce subject to camera perspective problems. I've seen 28mm (35mm camera) close portraits that look fine, but turn the subject 90 degrees and it looks like you are looking into a Christmas tree ball ornament.
Also, profile portraits reduce subject to camera perspective problems. I've seen 28mm (35mm camera) close portraits that look fine, but turn the subject 90 degrees and it looks like you are looking into a Christmas tree ball ornament.
Sanders McNew
Rolleiflex User
I drank the Kool-Aid all these years about avoiding wide lenses for portraits. But this year I put a 1968 20mm Nikkor-UD on my Sony A7 body for infrared landscapes, and to my delight have found it makes a great portrait lens. Another rule bites the dust.
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
The "rules" about portraiture and the "proper" portrait lens are mostly derived from long-standing traditions in commercial work, where a flattering, generically pleasant likeness was desired. These shots have their place, of course, but for those of us trying to dig a little deeper into nuances of personality and expression, the only rule should be "Anything goes!"
One of my favorite portraits that I've done of my partner was made from waist level with a 25mm, and it's not a distorted, unflattering caricature.
One of my favorite portraits that I've done of my partner was made from waist level with a 25mm, and it's not a distorted, unflattering caricature.
Shab
Veteran
I agree with Deardorff38. I make a lot of environmental portraits to my family... and above all I use 35mm with my rangefinder camera (M5). If I use an SLR (OM-1n) I love using the 35mm and the 50mm. If I use the X-T3 then the 23mm 1.4 is my go to lens.
But sometimes, when I'¡m using the M5, I love to use the 21mm... or the 16mm 1.4 on the X-T3, but you must be careful.
But sometimes, when I'¡m using the M5, I love to use the 21mm... or the 16mm 1.4 on the X-T3, but you must be careful.
john_s
Well-known
I have a friend with a fairly large nose. He's rather mischievous and I took a close portrait of him with probably a 24mm lens. It's a caricature but captures his personality IMO. However he hates it.
Back to flattering portraits, I think 50mm is quite long enough for pics of young children: closer is more intimate.
Back to flattering portraits, I think 50mm is quite long enough for pics of young children: closer is more intimate.
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
I was wondering if you had tried a Nikkor 24mm?
I've got one I like to use for shots of cars since it doesn't distort them, even if I'm close up. I'd think it would work on people too. My wife is not a good subject to shoot portraits of so I don't even try on her.
I've got one I like to use for shots of cars since it doesn't distort them, even if I'm close up. I'd think it would work on people too. My wife is not a good subject to shoot portraits of so I don't even try on her.
Doug A
Well-known
105/2.5 Nikkor (on Nikon F) or 90/4 Elmar (on Barnack Leica) for portraits. Otherwise, 50/1.4 Nikkor (on Nikon F) or 35/2.5 Nikkor LTM (on Barnack Leica) for almost everything else.
narsuitus
Well-known
My typical prime lens kit for shooting individual portraits with 35mm cameras include:
A. Nikkor 135mm f/2 AIS
D. Nikkor 105mm macro f/2.8 AIS
G. Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 D AF
I. Nikkor 55mm micro f/3.5 AI
If I know I will be shooting environmental portraits, I will add a Nikon 35mm lens to my prime portrait lens kit.
Portrait Lenses by Narsuitus, on Flickr
A. Nikkor 135mm f/2 AIS
D. Nikkor 105mm macro f/2.8 AIS
G. Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 D AF
I. Nikkor 55mm micro f/3.5 AI
If I know I will be shooting environmental portraits, I will add a Nikon 35mm lens to my prime portrait lens kit.
Portrait Lenses by Narsuitus, on Flickr
narsuitus
Well-known
For group portraits, I prefer to use a 6x9cm medium format camera with a 65mm lens (28mm equivalent).
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
Ditto! Trying to use a view camera for those while folks are moving & milling about is a nightmare!
dof
Fiat Lux
I typically choose portrait lenses for their contrast rendition as the primary consideration. Focal length is more a matter of the shooting circumstances, when choices are possible.
My favorites are the Summilux-R 80mm and Summilux-R 50mm. I find they flatter most people.
That said, circumstances don't always allow for those choices.
I broke one of my "cardinal rules" years ago when asked to shoot a friend for a press kit photo. Was visiting out of town and had the M with the Tri-Elmar lens with me. The light was perfect in a spot that required using the 35mm position. Up until then, I'd railed against the 35 as being "unfit for portraiture", citing the unflattering perspective that wides invariably imparted on people.
What a bunch of nonsense. Necessity taught me that composition was far more important than focal length. I just needed to use more care with a wider lens to ensure the perspective was balanced. This turned out to be one of the better portraits I'd done.
My favorites are the Summilux-R 80mm and Summilux-R 50mm. I find they flatter most people.
That said, circumstances don't always allow for those choices.
I broke one of my "cardinal rules" years ago when asked to shoot a friend for a press kit photo. Was visiting out of town and had the M with the Tri-Elmar lens with me. The light was perfect in a spot that required using the 35mm position. Up until then, I'd railed against the 35 as being "unfit for portraiture", citing the unflattering perspective that wides invariably imparted on people.
What a bunch of nonsense. Necessity taught me that composition was far more important than focal length. I just needed to use more care with a wider lens to ensure the perspective was balanced. This turned out to be one of the better portraits I'd done.
Evergreen States
Francine Pierre Saget (they/them)
Minimum focus distance is more important to me than focal length. Fast 50mm equivalents seem to be my home focal lengths. But I love 90-100mm equivalents too if I have the room. Every time I get a satisfying portrait with a 90 or 100 it just feels right. But I've made good portraits with 21 and 35mm equivalents too if I can get close enough. Even on portraits, the perspective distortion that comes from wide angle lenses doesn't bother me in the slightest if the pose is correct.
The 50 equivalents feel like the best working distance for me. I have severe social anxiety and often trouble verbally communicating due to my autism, so have to resort to a combination of instructions and pantomime to direct a subject's pose. Before COVID, I was most comfortable standing about 1m from people when speaking to them and would use 35mm and 50mm equivalents for candids and spontaneous portraits.
The 50 equivalents feel like the best working distance for me. I have severe social anxiety and often trouble verbally communicating due to my autism, so have to resort to a combination of instructions and pantomime to direct a subject's pose. Before COVID, I was most comfortable standing about 1m from people when speaking to them and would use 35mm and 50mm equivalents for candids and spontaneous portraits.
CMur12
Veteran
In 135 format, my "normal" lens is an 85mm and my wide is 28mm. I do most of my shooting with these two focal lengths.
For most portraits I use 85mm and 135mm. I would use 50mm or 35mm for environmental portraits.
I've seen a number of Rolleiflex TLR portraits taken with the camera's normal (80mm) lens and a Rolleinar 1 close-up lens. These have always looked distorted to me, so I'm generally wary of using a normal lens up close. I know there are ways around it, but I find it much simpler and more effective for me to use a short-to-mid telephoto.
- Murray
For most portraits I use 85mm and 135mm. I would use 50mm or 35mm for environmental portraits.
I've seen a number of Rolleiflex TLR portraits taken with the camera's normal (80mm) lens and a Rolleinar 1 close-up lens. These have always looked distorted to me, so I'm generally wary of using a normal lens up close. I know there are ways around it, but I find it much simpler and more effective for me to use a short-to-mid telephoto.
- Murray