Focal length and way/style of shooting

Does the FL of the most often used lens influence (develop) the style of approach to taking pictures? I notice that when I used to use 100 and 200 mm equiv. vintage manual lenses for all my portraits, I used to shoot in a different manner than I do now with 55 equiv. I even pose the model differently now than I used to. I used to work slowly. I am most uncomfortable with super wide angle lenses, and I have never used any (except in a film point and shooter). Any thoughts?

I think it does. I have a similar preference, I like lenses of around 85mm (35mm film equiv) and am perfectly happy with a 135, but struggle to use a wide angle effectively. I started out with a 58mm lens, my first additional lens was a 135, it wasn't until a while later that I aquired anything wide.

I did like a zone-focused 24mm for street shooting, but in general, I do feel more comfortable with longer focal lengths.

I often venture out with a single lens, and experiment how that focal length is best used. There's nothing wrong with a nifty-fifty either. The purpose of the exercise is to learn to "see" situations in an appropriate way. Conversely, once you have a good feeling for what certain lenses will do, it's easier to choose the best lens for a particular scene. I experiment mainly with prime lenses, but the principal is the same when using a zoom. Where do you stand, and how do you set the lens?

 

I use wide angle lenses to exaggerate things in the foreground, or simply to get more of the subject in the frame when I can't move further away. A long lens emphasizes things in the background or horizon. I use a medium telephoto for landscapes to make hills and mountains larger with respect to things in the foreground, and to highlight rolling terrain. Long lenses also screen out distracting elements, or simply lets you get in close when you can't do it by moving. Long lenses work well for closeups too, because the narrower field of view eliminates distracting elements in the background.

 

The most important aspect of portraits is the distance from the subject, which determines how perspective renders the face. The best distance varies, but 6-8 feet is fairly typical. If you use a wide angle lens (< 50 mm), you take in more of the person and the environment. If you use a medium telephoto, you get the head and shoulders. Too close, and the face and head is distorted. Too far and the face is flattened.

Edited July 5, 2019 by Ed_Ingold

I often wander around my neighborhood with a single lens (walking the dog). Different focal lengths absolutely change what and how you shoot. I am usually a landscape guy, so 24-45 is my most used range when actively shooting. My 24-70 f 2.8 zoom saves lens changes here.

I have grown fond of the 100 mm focal length, and to my surprise, lately 35 mm is growing on me.

Many times I am shooting just to see how the lens behaves, like into specular highlights. I know they are throwaway pictures, but it is "good to know" what to expect.

Wide- Up close subject with lots of distance. tele- subject isolation with backdrop blur.

All good fun. Probably just OCD rearing its head.

I used the standard 50 mm for years (for all subjects) but found my preferences drifting towards wider angle. Cellphones pushed me over the edge but I think I would prefer a 35 m equiv.

As you know, focal length is the determining factor that dictates camera to subject distance. If you mount a short focal length lens, you are forced to work in too close. If you mount a moderate telephoto, you will be forced to step back. Correct subject to camera distance is a key factor when it comes to successful portraiture.

 

So what focal length is best? This subject has been well studied. The consensus is: Use a moderate telephoto. This is because facial distortion creeps in if you work in too close. What happens is, the nose reproduces too large and the ears too small. Such distortions are often miniscule, however, when it comes to the human face, slight imbalances become significant, especially to the subject. It’s facial distortion that likely causes them to declare, “I don’t photograph well”. This is because they already possess a self-image forged from their make-up (shaving) mirror. You will succeed if you can replicate this perspective.

 

To achieve, you need to figure out what focal length fits these descriptions, when mounted on your camera. What is wide-angle --- normal --- moderate telephoto --- telephoto? First let’s define “normal”. Normal is a focal length that about equals the corner-to-corner measure of the frame size. For the full frame 35mm, this is about 50mm. For the compact digital, this is about 30mm. If your camera came with a zoom lens, “normal” will likely be the center of zoom range.

 

Wide-angle is about 30% of “normal” = 35mm for the full frame or 20mm for the compact digital.

 

Moderate telephoto is about twice (2X) normal. For the full frame, this will be about 100mm, and for the compact digital about 60mm. Telephoto is about 2.5X normal and longer.

 

OK – The message is --- For portraiture, try to use a moderate telephoto. Mounting such a lens will force you to position yourself at a subject distance that likely will replicate the perspective of the make-up mirror.

 

One more thought – Art has no rules, you are free to follow your heart. However, if you make your living doing portraiture, your pockets are best served following this rule-of-thumb.

Where do you stand, and how do you set the lens?

I had several lens, some of them were manual, some AF. I shoot portraits, fashion, street, products. Mostly I do half length portraits. AV mode.

 

I have grown fond of the 100 mm focal length, and to my surprise, lately 35 mm is growing on me.

Good choice. I love 50 mm. 100-105 is very good. Especially classic 100-105 mm (Like Nikkor DC or AI-s)

 

 

I did like a zone-focused 24mm for street shooting, but in general, I do feel more comfortable with longer focal lengths.

Hell yes. In my town the streets is so wide so the car, or person 10-15 meters away would be as small (in 24 mm ) as a mosquito. The 24mm is wonderful on very narrow streets (like those in Indian and Middle East towns or Riga, Lvov, Tallinn, tight interiors, etc).And moreover I hate distortion in most cases. I would get some good shots with 24 mm cause I have seen a lot how to use it nut not in my usual location. :)

As you know, focal length is the determining factor that dictates camera to subject distance. If you mount a short focal length lens, you are forced to work in too close. If you mount a moderate telephoto, you will be forced to step back. Correct subject to camera distance is a key factor when it comes to successful portraiture.

 

So what focal length is best? This subject has been well studied. The consensus is: Use a moderate telephoto. This is because facial distortion creeps in if you work in too close. What happens is, the nose reproduces too large and the ears too small. Such distortions are often miniscule, however, when it comes to the human face, slight imbalances become significant, especially to the subject. It’s facial distortion that likely causes them to declare, “I don’t photograph well”. This is because they already possess a self-image forged from their make-up (shaving) mirror. You will succeed if you can replicate this perspective.

 

To achieve, you need to figure out what focal length fits these descriptions, when mounted on your camera. What is wide-angle --- normal --- moderate telephoto --- telephoto? First let’s define “normal”. Normal is a focal length that about equals the corner-to-corner measure of the frame size. For the full frame 35mm, this is about 50mm. For the compact digital, this is about 30mm. If your camera came with a zoom lens, “normal” will likely be the center of zoom range.

 

Wide-angle is about 30% of “normal” = 35mm for the full frame or 20mm for the compact digital.

 

Moderate telephoto is about twice (2X) normal. For the full frame, this will be about 100mm, and for the compact digital about 60mm. Telephoto is about 2.5X normal and longer.

 

OK – The message is --- For portraiture, try to use a moderate telephoto. Mounting such a lens will force you to position yourself at a subject distance that likely will replicate the perspective of the make-up mirror.

 

One more thought – Art has no rules, you are free to follow your heart. However, if you make your living doing portraiture, your pockets are best served following this rule-of-thumb.

I have been photographing and usind SLR for 23 years, thank you, I know how to use lenses, but the question was how switching from one FL to different FL influenced your shooting style.

When you have a hammer, you look for the right-sized nails.

As you know, focal length is the determining factor that dictates camera to subject distance. If you mount a short focal length lens, you are forced to work in too close. If you mount a moderate telephoto, you will be forced to step back. Correct subject to camera distance is a key factor when it comes to successful portraiture.

 

 

Hey, I never can resist the urge to post this when this general topic pops up again:

 

 

from The Camera. Life Library of Photography

Hey, I never can resist the urge to post this when this general topic pops up again:

 

[ATTACH=full]1302098[/ATTACH]

 

from The Camera. Life Library of Photography

I have seen very alike picture in 1996 in Nikon lens catalogue, but the picture was colorful and top quality of printing. In your scanned example the photographer uses the same style of shooting and even the pose, but I'm saying about different approach when a much different lens has been attached to the camera body.

I’ve never had anything other than a zoom lens

Last fall you reported on the forum that you had bought a RF Leica. :p

i didn’t buy, darling beloved did. Not my camera

Night,

:p

A better example would be the same subject (pose), the same size in the image, but with different focal lengths and proportional distance from the subject. I have examples, but it's not appropriate to scan and publish things I didn't create.

• The depth of field is the same, at the same relative aperture (f/stop) and same film size.
  
• The shorter the focal length, the more background is included
  
• The closer you are to the subject, the more parts of the subject closer to the lens are exaggerated
  

The second factor is probably the most important in determination of the "style". By including more of the background (the angle of view is greater), you create a sense of place for the portrait. This is more apparent when the subject is further from the background than in the multi-panel illustration above. At the same time, more background may mean more distractions from the intended subject. This is also true for closeups in nature. I prefer to use a longer lens, with extension tubes if necessary, to get better subject isolation with fewer distracting elements.

 

Environmental portraits can tell a lot more about the subject than a face alone. A prime example would be of a college professor in his/her often eclectic office. Street and sports photography would also be examples; portraits of people doing things.

 

Conventional head-and-shoulders portraits leave little room for creativity in lens choice, if you wish to flatter the subject (and get paid). There's always room for creativity in lighting, posing, and getting the right expression.

 

To sum up, the focal length of a lens has a profound impact on how I see a subject. Conversely, I choose a focal length that best expresses what I am seeing.

Absolutely a fixed focal length lens effects your results, but I also believe the color hat you are wearing does too.

@Ed_Ingold: Well said (as always)!

Mike

When you have a hammer, you look for the right-sized nails.

I fully agree with @Ed_Ingold's comments, especially his second. It's fine to choose a focal length (hammer) and look for subjects (nails) that suit the lens. FWIW, I think it's much more important to choose a lens that best matches a subject/scene.

 

I'm an amateur but for 'events ' (social, business, concerts) I like to take shots with different focal lengths. From overview (wide angle) shots to close-ups (70-200mm). I have two main zoom lenses (often on two different cameras) that cover this range: 24-70mm and 70-200mm. Depending on the shots I want to take and how close I can get for 'close-ups', I choose the appropriate lens.

 

I've recently (voluntarily) been taking photos that support articles in a local newspaper. These articles are based on interviews. I pretty much know beforehand that either:

a) the context (indoor/outdoor) is important, so I don;t need close-ups, and/or

b) I'm going to be so close to the person/people being interviewed that I don't need a tele-lens

 

So my 24-70mm 'mid range' lens is just fine for this kind of work. It's also my 'walkabout' lens when I don't want to carry any others, Very occasionally, I use a 50mm 1.8 lens or - even less occasionally - a macro lens.

 

Coming back to Ed's point, the focal length of the lens you choose depends on the your photographic intentions, subject/scene, distance, style, etc.

 

If I could misuse Ed's analogy, then I would suggest first choosing your 'nails', and then selecting your best hammers.

 

 

Mike

I fully agree with @Ed_Ingold's comments, especially his second. It's fine to choose a focal length (hammer) and look for subjects (nails) that suit the lens. FWIW, I think it's much more important to choose a lens that best matches a subject/scene.

Depends on the type of shooting you do. If you’ve got a subject in mind and a purpose in mind for that subject, choosing a lens wisely may well be the way to go. But if you’re just out shooting with no particular purpose in mind, letting a lens impact your seeing can be a creative and even liberating way to go.

 

An important thing to consider is that not all photos are about “subjects” in the usual way, so lens can affect photos in other ways than a subject/predicate view. And, sometimes, having the “wrong” lens when I encounter a subject I wish I had a different lens for, forces me to see the subject (and more importantly the photo I’m taking) differently than I might have anticipated. That’s worked out well. I like being surprised. I like being in photographic situations that get me to see differently than I might have anticipated or even originally desired.

 

Then again, my services are not being paid for, so I’m at liberty to be free, or at least freer when I want.

My hammer has always been a fixed lens camera and I'm perfectly comfortable seeking the right sized nail and walking away from the others.

Sometimes it's very important to get it "right." Sometimes, especially if a photo is more art than product, the concept of "right" may just not apply, at least in the same way.

In the history of science, sometimes the (new) tools come first, sometimes later.

 

Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding.

 

To someone who has only a hammer, the entire world looks like a nail.

 

Edited July 6, 2019 by JDMvW

@samstevens:

 

Yes I understand your point .

 

Mike

 

QUOTE="samstevens, post: 5763642, member: 10978622"]Depends on the type of shooting you do. If you’ve got a subject in mind and a purpose in mind for that subject, choosing a lens wisely may well be the way to go. But if you’re just Cletting a lens impact your seeing can be a creative and even liberating way to go.

 

An important thing to consider is that not all photos are about “subjects” in the usual way, so lens can affect photos in other ways than a subject/predicate view. And, sometimes, having the “wrong” lens when I encounter a subject I wish I had a different lens for, forces me to see the subject (and more importantly the photo I’m taking) differently than I might have anticipated. That’s worked out well. I like being surprised. I like being in photographic situations that get me to see differently than I might have anticipated or even originally desired.

 

Then again, my services are not being paid for, so I’m at liberty to be free, or at least freer when I want.

Makes little difference to me. I'll still keep *making* photographs.

I use "subject" in a generic sense. The subject of a photo could be a person, a large rock, or a stone lantern. On this occasion, I was "seeing" what I could find, suitable for new 21 mm lens.

 

Sony A7Riii + Loxia 21/2.8

"Makes little difference to me. I'll still keep *making* photographs". Brad.

 

There's a thought.

 

Ed, looks somewhat out of focus on my monitor. But then it is a little JPEG file.

 

But credit for posting. We can all talk a photo, but some actually take them, and share.