| Author |
Message
|
molja |
 Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:37 pm Post subject: Lenses for portrait photography |
 |
|
Fanatic
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 172
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
| Eugene |
| Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
King
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 421
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ckurz7000 |
| Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 3:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aficionado
Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Posts: 51
|
Personally, I don't find the article in the blog overly helpful -- but that's just me. Here's my approach:
I try not to use a zoom lense, particularly not one of the kit zooms that are packaged with the camera body. Most affordable zooms are a compromise between size, zoom range, speed (minimum f-stop) and price. When doing a portrait I usually want the subject at the center of attention and don't want a distracting background. For this reason I usually open up the aperture (small f-number) all the way, which decreases the DOF and dips the background into blurry oblivion. The kit zoom that came with my Nikon D80 is a 18-135mm/3.5-5.6 lense. That means at a medium focal length (say about 50 mm) it has a minimum aperture of 4.5. My Sigma 50mm/2.8 prime lense is about 4 times quicker (f-stop 2.8 vs. 4.5). That allows me to shoot with an aperture of 2.8 and have the background nice and blurry so as to set off my subject against it. Another advantage of the 2.8 speed is that I can still use available light when other photographers with slower lenses (those kit zooms :-) are already scrounging for their flashes or fling their curses around for not having brought a tripod.
Also and almost as importantly, the 50mm prime lense will give you much sharper pictures wich less chromatic aberration (color fringing) and less distortion. What good is a 10 megapixel camera where the resolution is limited by the lense rather than by the sensor?
So, there you are: My recommendation is to go for a fast, prime lense with a focal length between 50-90mm and a speed of at least 2.8. Toss the zoom. Most people think that the zoom ring on their lenses is there to save them from walking to and fro. That's totally wrong!
Someone suggested to me once to buy a camera body and a single prime lense in the 28-50mm range (for DSLRs). Then he told me to take a lot of photographs and use my legs instead of the zoom. Thereby I was to discover the specific quality of this focal length. Once I knew how 50mm felt, he suggested to go for another prime lense -- either a wide angle (18mm) or a tele (90mm). And only after I had mastered those three lenses would he recommend that I buy a zoom lense.
I followed his advice (it was my father, after all) and have not been sorry for it.
Best wishes, -- Chris. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lynxy |
| Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aficionado
Joined: 29 Jan 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Poland
|
hmmm.. it's strange why it's suggested to use zoom lenses for portrait photography. I've heard a lot of times that Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens was meant to be a portrait type.
I'm just writing it cause now I'm a happy owner of it. It's really convenient to use it when zooming is made with your own legs:)
And f/1.8 - that's awesome! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Aleksandra |
| Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aficionado
Joined: 26 Jan 2009
Posts: 66
|
You're right but it depends on what kind of portrait you are going to photograph. This lens beats any zoom with its aperture value (1.8) especially in a place with poor illumination.
50 mm is good not only for portraits but also for almost any kind of photo such as reportage, wedding and even sport! (The one condition is a close distance to the object.)
And it's very practical not to think about zoom when shooting at a fast pace. The lens gives good sharpness and quality of a shot. Also you will get very nice blurred background! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ratbert |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Posts: 20
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lynxy |
| Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 2:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aficionado
Joined: 29 Jan 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Poland
|
| oh, yeah! 1.4 is much more better! but the price is also higher. I hope I'll change my 1.8 to 1.4 in some time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| TJRusso |
| Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aficionado
Joined: 30 Sep 2008
Posts: 88
Location: South Florida
|
| My daughter and I both use a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens for portraits. She's a graduate of the Art Institute and does pro-photography. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| black_shogun |
| Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fan
Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Posts: 4
|
Hi
I use Canon 85mm f1.8 great lens. If i would have a lot of money would buy 85mm f1.2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lynxy |
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aficionado
Joined: 29 Jan 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Poland
|
Good for you! I'm pretty sure your lens is great! Would like to use it, too!
_________________
my photos are O.K. to edit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Live Chat
