File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
What's the best focal length (35mm equiv.) for portraits?
I don't want to carry any extra lenses, and I prefer primes.
>> Anonymous
>I don't want to carry any extra lenses
>I prefer primes

incongruity error
>> Anonymous
>>172959
Ah, my bad. I ment I did not want to carry any extra lenses this weekend, going on a trip.
>> Anonymous
70-120mm
>> Anonymous
The longest focal length you're comfortable with. If you're having trouble using a 160mm, then don't, but if a focal length like that wouldn't bother you, then use it.
For convenience, I would stick with something within the 80-140 range though. I use a 90mm ona crop and it's awesome, but not very convenient all the time.
>> Anonymous
>>172957
Depends on what you like. I'd suggest the 50 or 85mm, certainly you can go to 100 though.
>> Martin !!ve2Q1ETWmJH
>>172957
At the photography studio I worked at, the guy used 85.
>> Macheath !8b4g0BkNZg
50, 85, 135 are considered typical portrait focal lengths.
>> Anonymous
70-200

fuck primes
>> Anonymous
Traditionally, ~50mm to 135.

80-90mm range is typical for a semi-dedicated portrait lens, though you'll find them longer.
>>172967
>The longest focal length you're comfortable with

Why? Something around 160mm definitely has its uses, but it's too long for portraits. Makes everything flat.
>> Anonymous
What's the reason for using more telephoto lenses than 35mm? It flattens the picture, but what else?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>173120
Makes the DoF look shallower without actually shrinking it (i.e., the blurry background looks closer, and the out of focus areas look bigger, but you still get exactly the same amount in focus as you would with a shorter lens at that aperture), which helps separate the person from the background.

But mostly it's just because it flattens facial features. That's enough.
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
>>173067
Get out.

OP - what camera system are you using? Most people consider a short tele the best option for portraiture, though depending on what you're going for anything from a fisheye to a super-tele can be used effectively.

On Canon, the 85mm f/1.8 and 100mm f/2 are both excellent and reasonably priced.

On Nikon, the older manual focus 105mm f/2.5 is considered by many to be the best lens of that general focal length ever made, and the few I've had back that up. They can be had very inexpensively as well.
>> Anonymous
>>173137

no you
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
>>173192
With a few exceptions, primes aren't really bought for reasons of budget. It is easier to make a prime faster and sharper than it is to do same with a zoom, and if you need really fast glass then primes are your only option. Nobody makes an f/1.2 zoom.
>> Anonymous
>>173185
>>173192

>In film and photography, a prime lens is either a photographic lens whose focal length is fixed

first fucking line of the very first google result.

go fuck your stupid inept self.
>> Anonymous
>>173195
gtfo my /p/ asshat
>> Anonymous
>>173192
There's a small image quality advantage, but it's small compared to good zooms. And speed, as Warren said.

The real reason to use primes, though, unless you need the speed, is the one outlined in this article:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/the-case-against-zooms.html

Also, personally, I find it awkward to shoot with a lens where I don't know exactly where it will be, because I don't keep the camera glued to my face when I'm shooting; I'm more of the watch-the-scene-and-wait-for-the-picture type. I'm sure people who prefer working the other way dig zooms more than I do.

The only "image quality" that really matters is subjective, i.e. how well the look the lens produces jives with the work one does.
>> Anonymous
>>173195
you are bit too late, someone already answered the question.
>> Anonymous
>>173218
With my 18-55 I sort of use it like its 3 primes in 1. I've memorised how 18mm, 35mm and 55mm look, and rotate it to the focal length I want for a particular shot before even raising the camera.

I only adjust framing by zooming only if there's some eyesore just in the edge of the frame I didn't plan on, or if I can't get closer/further away from the subject for some reason e.g. walls, barricades... That or if its something which needs to be shot quickly otherwise the moment is gone.

The trade-off for me is that with a zoom I don't have to change lenses and I've got some flexibility. The downside is that I lose 3-4 stops of aperture over a prime.
>> Anonymous
>>173194
YET MOTHER FUCKER
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
>>173326
When they do it and it costs less than a Mercedes, I'm all over it.
>> Anonymous
I love Sonic, America's Drive-In.

If you do, spam 4chan to let everyone know.
>> Anonymous
>>172957
A Shoot 20-40mm.
It kicks my primes in the nutz.
>> Anonymous
>>173137
This weekend I'm planning on using pentaxgear.
Thanks for tips everyone, I've decided to go with 85mm.

>>173431
Enjoy your deformed faces.
>> Anonymous
In Soviet Russia we use FishEye Lensus :)
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
135 is better, and usually just as cheap (or cheaper). i just picked up an awesome nikkor 135 2.8 for 100 bucks.
>> Anonymous
I understand that portrait shots use 50mm and higher.
But I really don't understand why like 35mm isn't used. It's not disorting and especialy if you not have a studio but a small room quite handy. You can get full body shots but also close ups.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>173513

>It's not disorting

yeah it is. in fact, i would argue that even 50mm carries a small degree of distortion if you use it for anything closer than a 3/4 length portrait.
>> Anonymous
>>173515
But is it really that bad with a 35mm if you don't do full body shots?

Have to try it out sometime...
>> Anonymous
>>173408

Even if it was cheaper than a car it would weigh about the same.
>> Anonymous
Unless you are dpreview then sharpness isn't the only important thing in photography. Zooms are plenty sharp for this kind of thing. Often I've found some are too sharp and give unflattering results without a lot of touch ups and processing.
>> Anonymous
>>173522

/p/ just likes primes because it's instant art and it's not cool to use zooms
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>173655
I dunno about other people, but I like 'em more because of the wide apertures. The extra sharpness is a bonus, but my 50/1.8 and 35/2.0 are my go-to lenses for low light or shallow-DoF needs.