PORTRAIT LENS IN SCHOOL

rick_chen · June 24, 2012

Ok so after reading books and shooting for hobby after 1.5 years, I decided to go to school to learn actually learn the basics rather than self learning everything. I had my first two portrait lessons these 2 days (mostly focusing on head shots and lighting), and both instructors wanted us to shoot with a 105mm at f/5.6 or f/8. They said my 85 1.4G is too wide, which I thought was supposed to be a portrait lens. They also made me feel like the d800 made it worse because I am way wider at 85mm than a DX camera.... I also have the 70-200 but one instructor says primes are still better than zooms.

So I started looking on Amazon for 105mm lenses, and found the 105mm 2.8 VR micros and 105mm 2.8 micros. Then there is always the 105mm and 135mm DC. Now I read a lot online and most say the macro lenses are way too sharp for portraiture. So does that mean the best lenses for portraiture are the 105 and 135 f2 DCs? I also read (I think from Scott Kelby or Ken Rockwell, dont hold me to that) that head shots are supposed to be in the 200-300mm range. So I am not sure who's right now, or that depends on the different circumstances?

I also feel if we are supposed to be shooting at f/5.6 and f/8.0, then what's the point of having expensive f/1.4 f/2.0 f/2.8 lenses....sounds like variable kit lenses will do just fine.

In fact due to the strong lighting, we had to shoot at f/11. I thought most Nikon cameras only support AF up to f/5.6, with the exception of D4 and D800 which goes to f/8.0. Kind of confused as everything I read online seems to contradict what the instructors are making us do.

Perhaps some pros here can put me in the right perspective, thanks

craigd · June 24, 2012

Most Nikons support AF with lenses that have maximum apertures of f/5.6 or wider. You can still use AF when shooting at smaller apertures such as f/11 because AF works with the lens wide open (when you half-press the shutter release button). The lens only stops down just before the shutter is released.

There is no "right answer" about what focal length to use for portraiture. It depends on the effect you want. You could use anything from an 8mm circular fisheye to a 1000mm mirror lens, as long as it gives you the result you're looking for. Your instructor is presumably thinking in terms of conventional portrait work (think school yearbook photos and corporate executive portraits) where the desired perspective is achieved by standing roughly 8 to 10 feet from the subject. If, at that distance, you want a close-up head shot, then 85mm will be a bit too wide; 105mm or 135mm will give the framing you want.

You're right, Ken Rockwell says somewhere that some photographers like to do portraits from about 15 feet away, and at that distance you need a longer focal length to narrow the angle of view for a head or head and shoulders shot. Personally, I don't much like the effect of shooting portrait from that far away, but to each his own.

The classic Nikon 105mm to 135mm portrait lenses are the f/2 DC AF lenses (the DC feature gives you some degree of control over the character of your bokeh) and the older manual-focus 105mm f/2.5 lens. You could certainly use a macro lens for portrait work, but you might find that the extreme sharpness of macro lenses brings out every little imperfection of skin in a way that can be rather unflattering. Then again, it isn't always the goal of portraiture to be flattering -- it depends on what you're trying to say about the subject.

george_ghio · June 24, 2012

While this may sound trite:

Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach.

What sort of school are you attending? The last time I was doing a dip.art course the person teaching was a photographer first and a teacher last. What ever camera a student had, he taught them how to use it to its best effect.

Your teacher sounds like he read a book on how to do it.

Alan Marcus · June 24, 2012

The choice as to which lens is best for portraits is a controversial one. Early favored portrait lenses yielded a soft image. Technically these lenses produced a circle of confusion (the smallest element that contains intelligence) surrounded by halo, at large apertures. Stated a different way, a marked change in sharpness resulted as the aperture was stopped down. All these great portrait lenses have a common denominator. They all had aberrations that were under-corrected. Thus, a precedent was set that the portrait lens delivered softer results than a standard lens. Today, we can use tack sharp lenses and using computer editing software, duplicate all this and much much more.

Many believe the best technique is always to have background out-of-focus. This is achieved by using a large aperture which delivers up shallow depth-of-field. One rule-of-thumb is "eyes in focus, ears and nose slightly soft".

It's a sure bet that I won't settle any arguments, but when it comes to the focal length of choice, I stand on sound science.

Your human subject has a preconceived notion of what he or she looks like. If you want to sell them portraits, best you deliver this vision. If you don't, your client will most likely say "I don't photograph well" or " I break cameras". The trick is, how do you deliver this representation?

First, understand that the view we are talking about is the view seen in the shaving or makeup mirror. Duplication of this view requires some understanding of optics and what is termed the human perspective.

First, making a picture that matches the human perspective is rarely important except in portraiture. Additionally, photography is both an art and a science, and art usually wins. In other words, you are free to throw out the science and go your own way.

Why 105mm:

Things close to the camera reproduce larger and things far from the camera reproduce smaller. This effect is normal but more pronounced when a wide angle (short focal length lens) is used, particularly for portraiture. The result is more of a caricature as the whole face becomes distorted -- nose too big and ears too small.

Many facts are intertwined in this answer.

First, viewing distance from the photograph. People gravitate to a viewing distance that is about equal to the diagonal measure of the picture. For the 8x10 that's 13 inches (30cm). Most portraits are printed on 8x10 paper. To make an 8x10 from a 35mm film (24mm height by 36mm long) the image must be magnified about 8x.

The perspective seen in the makeup/shaving mirror is just about duplicated if the focal length used is about 2 1/2 x the diagonal of the film/chip format. For the 35mm film and full frame digital, that dimension (diagonal measure) is 43mm. Thus 43 x 2.5 = 107mm (rounded by opticians to 105mm.)

For other size cameras, such as APS (Advanced Photo System), better known as compact digital, the chip measures 16mm height by 24mm long, and has a diagonal measure of 30mm. Using the 2.5x rule of thumb, for this camera it's 30mm x 2.5 = 75mm.

OK, what I am saying is, for portraits that sell best and win contests, think 2.5x the diagonal measure of the format as a starting point. Longer OK, shorter with caution. By the way, the 2.5x times the diagonal for a starting focal length for portraits carries through all format sizes. However, Hollywood uses 3x the diagonal for the big screen.

More gobbledygook from Alan Marcus

rick_chen · June 25, 2012

Woa I am learning a lot today. Thanks for all the responses. So there's a reason behind everything after all

I see...so essentially 85mm is not an ideal head shot portrait lens it's more of a half body lens then. And if I dont want to deal with the over-sharpness of the macros it seems like the 105mm 2.0 DCs would be the one to get for the class.

They are classes in a community college in my city.

Matt Laur · June 25, 2012

You're learning, so learn. Use the tools you've got. The 70-200/2.8 is a stellar lens, and will let you experiment across all of the focal lengths you're wondering about. It's a fine lens wide open, and deadly sharp stopped down some. It's the perfect laboratory for establishing what focal length(s) you like for the working distance and perspective you find appealing. Armed as you are, I'd hold off on glass and pay attention to lights, light modifiers, and shooting opportunities.

george_ghio · June 25, 2012

They are classes in a community college in my city.

Sort of defines the problem, is the teacher a professional photographer? Or is he a teacher who swatted up on the subject?

The thing is that if you have a good understanding of light and composition even a shoe box pin hole camera is capable of award winning photography.

As has been documented here you have found that some lens' are more suited for some types of portraits. OTOH a change of shooting distance may be an effective option.

The real question is do you really want to buy a new lens every time you want to shoot a different scene?

If you are planning a career as a high end portrait photographer then by all means invest in the gear required for the job.

If you want to be a mediocre portrait photographer then learn to use this camera, with this lens, this far from your subject and never vary your formula.

If you want to be a good to great photographer, learn to take good portraits with what you have. Take the time to develop lighting and composition skills. The time will come when your skills will exceed your gear's ability, that is when you up grade to better equipment.

The attached photo was taken within a space 4 metres x 3 metres with a base line Pentax K100D with a kit lens and a single flash. It got me a grade of high distinction. If I had a teacher like yours the photo would never have been taken.<div></div>

mpalmquist · June 25, 2012

I don't do a lot if portraits but Alan's point about undercorrected lenses is a good one. Very few people over the age of 10 have flawless skin, a macro lens is too sharp to make good portraits of most people. the exception is if you want to show the ruggedness of a weather beaten/ haggered face then a macro is great but most people want a pleasing smoothness to their portraits especially women. I have not done a lot of portraits focusing more on sports and nature but one trick I have in my bag is the Canon 135 soft focus lens it has a ring that can dial in differing amounts of spherical abberation to create a softer portrait. Not sure if Nikon has something similar. The other option is filters to add the soft focus but they create a different look. basically for full frame I look for 100-135 for crop look for around 85 for the look I like. Like he also said there is no right focal length, I have taken some portraits with a 17mm and a 300mm 2.8 which also work well but like macro lenses is very sharp and yelling across the 30-45 feet to the model gets annoying after a while.

Alan Marcus · June 25, 2012

First, a macro lens is optimized to image at 1:1 which is unity otherwise known a life size. A macro is compromised at other distances. However, today's micro's are so well corrected, likely any deficiency will go unnoticed. A prime is optimized for distance and compromised at close distances.

As to focal length: The use of the 105mm as suggested by many text books and teachers has as its origin: A portrait print is likely hung on the wall or placed on the fireplace mantel. It will likely be viewed from a distance of about 3 feet (1 meter). The ideal focal length, if used, will yield the human perspective when the print is viewed from approximately this distance.

The formula:

Focal length X Magnification = Viewing Distance

Take the venerable 105mm as used on a 35mm full frame: The magnification to make an 8x10 is minimally 8x. Carrying out the formula: 105 x 8 = 840. What this math tells me: The best placement of the 8x10 shot with a 105 is 840mm (distance to the ovserver). That’s about 33 inches.

A compact digital is used with a 75mm lens:

The magnification needed to make the 8x10 is 13x. Now using the formula: 75 x 13 = 975. In other words, with a compact digital, with a 75mm mounted, an 8x10 print will have a ideal viewing distance of 975mm = 38 inches.

The gobbledygook is:

Diagonal of the format multiplied by 2.5 yields the approximate focal length needed to duplicate the human perspective in a portrait situation.

Spearhead · June 25, 2012

Diagonal of the format multiplied by 2.5 yields the approximate focal length needed to duplicate the human perspective in a portrait situation.

</blockquote>

There's no requirement to "duplicate" anything when taking a photo. Plenty of excellent portraits don't meet that criterion for focal length. The idea that there is a better magnification comes from years of pumping by the equipment manufacturers for "portrait lenses." Other than portfolio headshots, there is no reason to use a specific focal length, as countless great portraits have shown. Years ago, there was no such thing as a "portrait lens" and the vast majority were shot with "normal" focal lengths. In addition, there are often situations in which a longer lens won't work as portraits are not always taken in controlled environments. The one below was taken at 51mm in a very crowded situation. I seriously doubt that having a long lens would get anything other than the mouth. <center> <img src="http://spirer.com/images/liliane2.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="427" />

Mistress Liliane</center>

wmervine · June 25, 2012

Rick, just to throw the cat among the pigeons, have you considered using your 85 and just cropping afterwards? I'm sure on the D800 you have enough resolution to afford doing that.

joseph_wisniewski · June 25, 2012

The use of the 105mm as suggested by many text books and teachers has as its origin

</blockquote>

Something that few people understand, and fewer are willing to believe. The 135, about 3x the diagonal, was the dominant portrait lens for years, with excellent offerings across the board from Nikon, Pentax, Canon, Minolta, etc.

Someone ambitious folks decided to take a stab at a 105 using a "heavy" design, like a Sonar. The one that "caught on" the most was probably the 105mm f2.5 Nikkor. Heck, Nikon later changed over to an even heavier Xenotar design. Going from 135mm f2.5 to 105mm f2.5 with that design cuts the weight of the glass elements in half. When you have a heavy design where the glass dominates over the brass, that effectively determines the weight and handling of the lens. 105 became the "standard" simply because 135 was "too heavy", either in the minds of the camera marketers, or in reality, I'm not sure which.

So, I'll go with the others, shoot your zoom from where you get a good perspective for your shots, zoom to frame, and you're there. There's no "perspective" associated with focal length. Distance determines perspective, focal length is nothing but framing.

Alan Marcus · June 25, 2012

A tip of the hat to Joseph Wisniewsk!

Hollywood uses 3X the diagonal for close-up work. It's all a matter of the viewing distance of the final display. The formula is focal length multiplied by the magnification used to get the final display size.

For those obsessed with the wrongness of the 2.5 X or 3 X the diagonal, it's just a suggestion.

Surly you know that art has no rules.

Anyway I always introduce my remarks by telling -- I am an old geezer filled with gobbledygook.

Uhooru · June 25, 2012

I don't think there is any controversy here. It sounds like the instructor specified a 105 mm lens. Does the school check them out? Can you rent one? Other's opinions here should not matter as to what length of lens you should get. Don't listen to Ken Rockwell, there is no "right" length, you can take headshots with a 28 mm if you handle it right. In your situation, the teacher said 105 so that is your "right" length. There is often good reasons why a teacher specifies a focal length. One of them is they want everyone on the same page so when reviewing and critiquing the photos all the students are playing in the same length. This actually makes it easier to critique the photos when you are all doing the same project. This was often the case in most of the first level classes when people were learning the basics. It applied to all the different formats too. When I was going they also specified the film as well. OMG how restrictive!!! I don't know where you heard that Nikon cameras only support AF up to f/5.6, its not correct. My opinion is if you want to learn on your own and/or off the internet, than go do that. If you want to take classes and learn from the ground up, then go to your instructor for advice. Everyone on the internet, including me, has their opinions on all these matters. You are undermining your own stated purpose to "actually learn the basics" if you subject the instructions of your teacher to the jury of the internet. Why don't you do the program and see if it works first before spinning off to search for opinions that maybe say what you want to hear. I say this because it sounds like all you are doing is getting yourself very confused with a lot of contradictory advice, and opinions. Sorry if this sounds a little rough. BTW shooting at the 5.6 to 8.0 means that you have to go find light that is in that range so you can shoot to the requirements of the assignment. That's is a learning proposition as well. It's photography from the bottom up and personally, I think it would really give you a more solid fundamental education if you followed the instructions. All these things are teaching you about basic framing and exposure.

craigd · June 25, 2012

First, a macro lens is optimized to image at 1:1 which is unity otherwise known a life size. A macro is compromised at other distances.

</blockquote>

Not always. Check out published lens tests or anecdotal data such as Bjorn Rorslett's Nikon lens reviews. Some macro lenses are optimized for their minimum focus distance, but many are not.

rick_chen · June 25, 2012

Rick, just to throw the cat among the pigeons, have you considered using your 85 and just cropping afterwards? I'm sure on the D800 you have enough resolution to afford doing that.

</blockquote>

Yeah I actually did that and instructor told me not to do that. I thought I would be close to 105mm by cropping DX...

BTW shooting at the 5.6 to 8.0 means that you have to go find light that is in that range so you can shoot to the requirements of the assignment. That's is a learning proposition as well. It's photography from the bottom up and personally, I think it would really give you a more solid fundamental education if you followed the instructions. All these things are teaching you about basic framing and exposure.

</blockquote>

I agree with you, I am doing exactly what i was told.

A lot of stuff to digest here, it's always good to hear what others think and realize how little stuff I know. Alan perhaps explained the why of 105mm best while my instructor didnt even allow the option of asking "why 105mm". I guess another way of looking at this is while I am following instructions and learning fundamentals, it's important to keep the mind open to breaking rules when appropriate and might end up with pleasant surprises............. :)

daverhaas · June 25, 2012

Rick -

Honestly I've used everything from a 16-24 to a 70-200 and everything in between for a portrait lens.

The key is knowing how each one behaves, what its strengths are, and what it's weakness is.

If I were teaching and told the students to get or use a specific lens for an assignment, I explain to them that in reality you can use whatever lens you have as a portrait lens (In fact most school photographers - Lifetouch, etc.. Use 18-55 or 18-70 kit lenses), but for this assignment I want a special effect or to illustrate a point.

My go to portrait combo lately is a D700 with a 70-200 f2.8 and a D7000 with a 28-70 f2.8. Depending on the situation I may mount 85 f1.8 on the 700 if the mood is right.

Dave

JRCrowe · June 25, 2012

The D800 has a DX mode, so why not use the 85mm with the camera in DX mode. It still gives you a 15.4 megapixel photo. You can read more about it <a href="http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D800/">here</a>

Uhooru · June 26, 2012

while I am following instructions and learning fundamentals, it's important to keep the mind open to breaking rules when appropriate and might end up with pleasant surprises............. :)

</blockquote>

Absolutely! But maybe its not a matter of breaking rules. The instructor maybe holding you to a set of parameters for a reason. It is weird that he wouldn't answer why. I guess I'm wondering is if your teacher is saying a 105 is the "right" lens for headshots and others aren't, or if he just wants everyone to use one for instructional purposes. In our ist classes we were required to use a 50 mm (we weren't doing portraits), and they had no qualms of explaining why at first they wanted everyone to use the same lenses and film, (yes they still use film in at least the first class) it wasn't any big mystery. They wanted us all to see through the same lens perspective for the various use of lens projects we had such as Depth of Field exercises, etc, and they wanted us to use the same film so they could discuss proper exposure and developing technics that were standardized to one film. It's more difficult to handle a class using a bunch of different films and try to sort out the various developing problems when each emus ion had different requirements. It's not that they were pushing one correct film. After the first couple of classes you were free to use whatever you wanted in lenses or film and then digital as well. It seems from what you say, that its a departmental thing too as both your instructors are demanding use of a 105. Someone there should be able to tell you why they require use of that lens. Is this a photography department at a school? If so, ask one of the non-teaching techs if they have one who's been around if they may be able to clue you in as to why the 105. Really everyone can tell you their favorite headshot lens, a 105 would be popular or maybe used to be more popular, others like a 135 others like an 85 and others like myself, use what I have with me or like a weird wide angle look. So on and blah blah. You know what I mean.

bikealps · July 15, 2012

Your instructor needs to chill out. 105 vs 85??? You can take great portraits using 16mm on FX to 300mm on DX

If you are working in the studio where you can control backgrounds and light, f8 is good and so is f16 and f2.8

depending on the style you want to achieve. If you are working on location f2.8 and f4 are wonderful. Using f1.4 well

takes a lot of skill and practice so be patient. Do not limit yourself to f8.

And 85 vs 105... What is that? 20%? Just use your 85 and crop in lightroom. Or don't crop. Do you think the

instructor can tell 20% in focal length? Just erase the exif data. Tell the instructor it is your default in LR and you don't

know how to change it.

bikealps · July 15, 2012

105 micro too sharp? I have used my 105 micro, 85 /1.4, 70-200, and 24-70 in the studio. They are all brilliantly

sharp.

Too harsh for prtraits? Unflattering? Too revealing? If so, you have a lighting problem. Fix it in the studio or cover it

up in post (negative clarity in LR or Gaussian blur in PS). Or learn retouching. The lens is not your problem.

brian_bankston1 · July 20, 2012

The beauty is that we have choices available to us. Every scenario is different. Obviously lenses are a powerfull tool in photography. Gives us compositional control. Not a bad idea to experiment to discover which lens is best suited for the subject/concept you are shooting.

ken_max__parks · August 3, 2012

Rick,

I take it that the portrait class is for beginners. Starting out with a 105mm prime is a good choice for a beginner and this class. I do find it unusual to be shooting above f/8. For the most part, you want to keep it between f/5.6 and f/8. There is a reason for this: Most lens' sweet spot is in this range, allowing for the best resolution, less aberrations, and the best "tack sharp." Studio lights or strobes can be adjusted. I would recommend a flash light-meter.

After you complete the portrait class, I recommend you experiment with various lenses and find your style. Portrait photography, like any other type of photography, has many variants and styles. You may find that the 70-200mm lens offers the best type of portraits or you realize for your style effect that a short focal length lens works for you. I have experimented with several types of lenses in shooting portrait. The range is from 24mm to 200mm. However, my best lenses are the ones I can control the most, all manual, and they are legacy lenses. I found that a Zuiko 55mm (88mm equivalent), f/1.2 and a Zeiss Planar T*, 80mm (135mm equivalent), f2.8 are my two best prime lenses for portraits. And the 70-200mm, f/2.8 is used for wedding formal setting shots.

Generally, the faster prime lenses, such as f/1.2 or f/1.4 are better than the slower lenses in that they offer greater flexibility and also are found to be better glass than the kit lenses. I have found that the best "tack sharp" lenses are much more expensive and provide better imaging than that of the lower quality and cheap kit lenses. In comparing standard Canon or Nikon kit lenses to the Zeiss (It's a hassy lens), there is a fathom of difference.

If you can afford Zeiss or Schneider glass, go for it.

Sign In

PORTRAIT LENS IN SCHOOL

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in