Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
What lens I need for portraits?
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
Mar 15, 2020 10:46:50   #
ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio
 
camerapapi wrote:
A known professional photographer here in Miami, a good friend for many years, asked my opinion about the 85 mm f1.8 Nikon lens. He told me he was interested in improving his portraits and needed a good portrait lens. I know he owns a Nikon two touch 80-200 f2.8 and I asked him if there was something wrong with his lens. He said no.
I cannot understand why you need a “better” lens for portraits having the excellent 80-200 f2.8 was my reply. Perhaps you meant portability? No was his answer. He was after a “better” lens for portraits and portability was not his priority.

I am no professional photographer although years ago I made a part time living as a professional. My portrait lens of preference has always been the Nikon 105 mm f2.5 and mine is from 1969, single coated, a lens that has served me well and continues to do so.
Perhaps I do not have the right answer but my feelings are that the best lens for portraits is the lens that you happen to have in your camera when you are shooting. Even a wide angle with its distortions of facial features could be exactly what you want. I do not know of your expertise as a photographer and I do not know what your artistic style is.

I asked this young man to pose for me. It is an indoor shot with the model looking into a window facing south. The lens I had in my Olympus OM-10 Mk II was the 40-150 f4-5.6 kit lens. I have the 12-40 f2.8 Pro, a better lens and a Sigma 60mm f2.8 Art which is a very sharp lens for micro fourth thirds but it was the 40-150 lens what I had in my camera. I simply set it at 100 mm and opened it up to its maximum opening. I could be too old and too lazy by now but I though the kit lens could do a good job. I went with ISO 400.

Technically there are some things I could have done for a better portrait like selecting a better lens. I could have used a reflector to bring more light into the shadow areas although I like it like it is. Even a low intensity hair light could have been effective but available light was all I had in mind. I did not pose him and let the young man to show his spontaneity.

I tend to warm a little bit my b&w images to simulate the Agfa warm tone fiber base paper I used in the past. I kept sharpening to the lowest setting. I like to add contrast to my b&w images. Original RAW data edited with Olympus Workspace and Affinity Photo.
Which lens for portraits? A dedicated portrait lens between 85-135 mm is an excellent choice but if you do not have the budget use good techniques and the lens you have now in your camera. You could be pleasantly surprised at the results.
A known professional photographer here in Miami, a... (show quote)


I have read that the Tamron 35-150 f2.8-4 is an excellent “portrait” lens that covers the entire range needed for portraits.

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 11:11:50   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
In the first place I want to thank all of you for your excellent comments on this thread. My gratitude specially goes to Mr. Shapiro for his very interesting post which I read when it was posted.

"f/1.8 gives a more shallow DoF than f/2.8.

Also an 85mm prime is smaller and lighter than an 80-200mm. Easier to carry around." Yes, the 85 mm lens is smaller and lighter than the 80-200 f2.8. I made it clear that my friend was not precisely interested in portability. If a lens cannot focus closer should not be a big deal, just come closer to the subject as allowed and focus properly.

When photographing a portrait, how far is the background from the subject? I have used f2.8 lenses often for portraiture and if I shoot in the studio I do not open the lens to maximum aperture, it is not necessary. Outdoors I do not necessarily shoot at maximum lens opening and case in point are environmental portraits using wide angles. If I want my best bokeh with the f2.8 lens I come closer to the subject and try to place the background farther away from the model. What I want to say is that although the portrait of the young man was shot with the lens wide open to allow more light into the lens I am not a fan of shooting every single portrait wide open. I do not shoot all of my waterfalls with a slow shutter speed either.

Let me repeat once again that my favorite portrait lens is the Nikon 105 mm f2.5 single coated from 1967. The lens is old, single coated but it performs to my satisfaction. I am convinced the new optics are superior and they have lots of technologies built in but my old lens performs for me and that is what counts. I am not into portraits to the point of looking for a better lens or all kind of gobos to improve my portraits. I am happy with what I have. I want to repeat that I have experience with the 85 mm f1.8 D lens but I have not used other other versions of this focal length. To me the lens is sharp enough for good portraits.

My friend photographer has excellent images from his 80-200 f2.8 and to repeat it again portability was not an issue. He has not discussed lenses for portraits with me again and he did not buy the 85 mm lens or any other lens as far as I know. He also has the 24-70 f2.8 that he uses for his weddings and I bet he shoots portraits with it. He is using a Nikon D700, an excellent tool capable of beautiful enlargements.

Once again, my thanks to all of you for your interesting and useful contributions.

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 11:15:51   #
Eagle Wing
 
Is there a reason to not use my Sony 90mm f2.8 Macro G OSS lens for portraiture?

Reply
 
 
Mar 15, 2020 11:26:21   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
"Is there a reason to not use my Sony 90mm f2.8 Macro G OSS lens for portraiture?" I do not see any. It is a great lens for portraiture.

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 11:31:01   #
Eagle Wing
 
Thank you. I was concerned that the Macro design could compromise face proportions or something else?

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 11:37:23   #
ksmmike
 
camerapapi wrote:
Let me repeat once again that my favorite portrait lens is the Nikon 105 mm f2.5 single coated from 1967. The lens is old, single coated but it performs to my satisfaction. I am convinced the new optics are superior and they have lots of technologies built in but my old lens performs for me and that is what counts.


I agree that old 105 F 2.5 is still a wonderful lens for portraits. The skin tones along with a Nikon D700 are hard to beat. Despite being pretty good with manual focus lenses, I still think the keeper rate is higher with the newer 85mm 1.8 because of the autofocus. I've used both lenses quite a bit. The 105mm is a tad softer if you are looking for that look but its hard to argue against the Nikon 105mm 2.5 other than the lack of auto focus.

If you want slightly better contrast than I still believe the 85mm 1.8 beats the 105. 2.5 and for overall contrast, sharpness and just a better image the Voigtlander beats both of them but its only 58mm and manual focus. My older Nikon 80-200 F.8 lens is far heavier than the others and competes with any of the lenses above but I would say is a hair less of a lens than a prime but not by much. You really have to nitpick to see a difference in those lenses but there are differences in contrast, sharpness and overall color. It really depends on how much you might use the lens for other things as well.

Meaning, I could use the 80-200 for landscape and sports more so than the 85 mm. I use the 58mm as a walk around lens and landscape more than the 85mm.

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 12:34:44   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
ksmmike I am in full agreement with your statement. Thank you for taking the time to make some comments.

Reply
 
 
Mar 15, 2020 12:44:26   #
ksmmike
 
camerapapi wrote:
ksmmike I am in full agreement with your statement. Thank you for taking the time to make some comments.


Smiles. You are welcome. Thanks for the comment.

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 12:55:57   #
ELNikkor
 
My favorite lens for portraits was my final version AI 43-86 Nikkor on my FM II, zoomed in and wide open at 3.5. Excellent bokeh and pleasing sharpness and compression. Since then, 85mm has always been my choice for portraits.

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 13:02:13   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
"My favorite lens for portraits was my final version AI 43-86 Nikkor on my FM II, zoomed in and wide open at 3.5. Excellent bokeh and pleasing sharpness and compression. Since then, 85mm has always been my choice for portraits."

Why not? If it works just use it.

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 13:11:18   #
Nicholas DeSciose
 
Your reply is excellent. So is the portrait you made. Keep doing it

Reply
 
 
Mar 15, 2020 13:35:16   #
ksmmike
 
Here is a link with some examples of portraits using the Voigtlander 58mm 1.4 lens I mentioned earlier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZZnK6DnYlI&t=69s

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 14:24:14   #
MichaelMcGrath Loc: Ireland
 
Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.7 is one of the finest lenses ever made, it's as good as the Leica Summicron or even better!

The wide angled Konica Hexanon 28/3.5 is an excellent lens as well.

because of a small flange distance you could never adapt Konica lenses to DSLR cameras, but now you CAN adapt them to mirrorless with focusing to infinity!!!

I may have started a rush on eBay:-)

Reply
Mar 15, 2020 14:50:11   #
Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida
 
rmalarz wrote:
Linda, the focal length of the lens determines the position of the camera to the subject to fill the frame appropriately. The longer focal lengths will place the camera further away from the subject but still produce the same size image on the film or sensor. Thus, someone who is familiar with me will not feel uncomfortable with the camera, and me, closer. For that, I'd use the 85mm lens. For someone who is unacquainted with me, I'd use the 135mm lens and place my self and the camera a bit further from the subject.

Providing a reasonable comfort zone for the subject allows for a more comfortable environment and a more natural-appearing portrait.
--Bob
Linda, the focal length of the lens determines the... (show quote)



Reply
Mar 15, 2020 15:52:04   #
MJPerini
 
William, Don't take your friend's desire for a 'Different' lens than you have ,or would choose, bother you.
Good portraits can be made with just about any lens. He may want the 85 f/1.8 or F /1.4 because he wants really shallow DOF...... Or because he just wants a new lens. Or because he has seen portraits made with that lens that appealed to him.
Personally , I favor 35mm & 85mm and if I could only have one it would be the 35mm because I favor portraits with a bit of the person's surroundings. There is nothing wrong with 105 or 135 either. Longer lenses tend to flatten the face and I've seen studio portraits done with 300mm f/2.8 and they worked well.
In my view, You choose a lens based on the person you are photographing, the location, and the result you want. Choosing the lens first because it is a "Portrait Lens" takes away creative options that might work better for you and the subject. Seeing the person and the location first, allows you to begin by asking yourself 'what kind of picture do I want to make'.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.