Hello. This is my first time on this sight and I want to compliment you guys and ladies. Thus far, what I am picking up on, is that you all are just ordinary, yet quite knowledgeable (and probably very talented) folks who are not full of yourselves. Do you know how refreshing that is?! There are so many forums where there are SOooo many people who are bloated individuals who just like to hear themselves talk, drop jargon, etc.

Okay...to my question. If I am going to do portrait photography, can I do it with a zoom lens such as a 24-105, or a 24-70, and simply set it at portraiture length (50-70? Or do I need a dedicated portraiture lens? In other words, by using a zoom lens which is set to the proper focal length, will my portraits suffer in quality when compared to images that I would achieve by investing in a dedicated e.g. 50 mm lens? Thank you. Terry M.

A 24-105mm would be just fine because you're not at the fully extended zoom length to achieve the 70-85mm focal length you desire. A dedicated lens may be a slight bit crisper but unless you have a real reason for it, such as doing a lot of portraits or running a portrait studio, the investment isn't really warranted unless you have money to burn.

What would matter more is whether you're currently using a lower quality 24-105mm kit lens versus a higher quality 24-105mm (typically two different animals completely) when comparing a zoom to a dedicated fixed focal length prime lens which certainly is built with a high grade of glass.

Rent a higher end fixed lens from a national rental company and compare to your zoom. If you can see a difference you're ready for buying one. If you can't, stick with what you have and do your best with it.

Investigate inexpensive DxO Optics Pro software which will have profiles for your specific camera and your specific zoom lens in it. Convert your RAW files to 16-bit TIFF and simply run your files through DxO Optics Pro so it can alter them to compensate for the weaknesses of your specific equipment pieces. It will convert your RAWs if you like but I like to do my own in any Adobe software which has a superior converter. You'd be amazed at the improvement DxO can make though. They have a trial version so you can try it out.

BTW, you just haven't been around long enough to see the bloated individuals who just like to hear themselves talk, drop jargon, etc. - bragging repeatedly and reiterating their resume of decades of photographic experience to top anyone who argues a point so they can remain Kings of Their Imaginary Hills. They're here and some are quite repulsive about it so just keep watching. But welcome anyway!

Hello. This is my first time on this sight and I want to compliment you guys and ladies. Thus far, what I am picking up on, is that you all are just ordinary, yet quite knowledgeable (and probably very talented) folks who are not full of yourselves. Do you know how refreshing that is?! There are so many forums where there are SOooo many people who are bloated individuals who just like to hear themselves talk, drop jargon, etc.

Okay...to my question. If I am going to do portrait photography, can I do it with a zoom lens such as a 24-105, or a 24-70, and simply set it at portraiture length (50-70? Or do I need a dedicated portraiture lens? In other words, by using a zoom lens which is set to the proper focal length, will my portraits suffer in quality when compared to images that I would achieve by investing in a dedicated e.g. 50 mm lens? Thank you. Terry M.

A 24-105mm would be just fine because you're not at the fully extended zoom length to achieve the 70-85mm focal length you desire. A dedicated lens may be a slight bit crisper but unless you have a real reason for it, such as doing a lot of portraits or running a portrait studio, the investment isn't really warranted unless you have money to burn.

What would matter more is whether you're currently using a lower quality 24-105mm kit lens versus a higher quality 24-105mm (typically two different animals completely) when comparing a zoom to a dedicated fixed focal length prime lens which certainly is built with a high grade of glass.

Rent a higher end fixed lens from a national rental company and compare to your zoom. If you can see a difference you're ready for buying one. If you can't, stick with what you have and do your best with it.

Investigate inexpensive DxO Optics Pro software which will have profiles for your specific camera and your specific zoom lens in it. Convert your RAW files to 16-bit TIFF and simply run your files through DxO Optics Pro so it can alter them to compensate for the weaknesses of your specific equipment pieces. It will convert your RAWs if you like but I like to do my own in any Adobe software which has a superior converter. You'd be amazed at the improvement DxO can make though. They have a trial version so you can try it out.

BTW, you just haven't been around long enough to see the bloated individuals who just like to hear themselves talk, drop jargon, etc. - bragging repeatedly and reiterating their resume of decades of photographic experience to top anyone who argues a point so they can remain Kings of Their Imaginary Hills. They're here and some are quite repulsive about it so just keep watching. But welcome anyway!

The key to doing portrait photography is figuring out your style and tastes. A part of how you create your style will depend on the equipment, but the equipment should follow the style, not the other way around. Since you asked about lenses, there are two major aspects of the style which can be expressed differently by different lenses: perspective and depth of field (DoF).

When taking a full-body shot, we're making a 2-dimensional, 1 inch image of a 3 dimensional, 6 foot person. If the focal length is short, you need to be fairly close to fill the frame with the person, and angle between the head and the foot is quite apparent, giving a sense of curvature. If the focal length is long, the subject will be much further away, the angle between the head and foot is much smaller, so the image looks flatter. The same effect happens with closer portraits, though smaller, but it's more apparent because we notice this in the face more than in the whole body.

The depth of field is about what is visibly in focus and what is not in focus. Some portrait shooters like things in front of and behind the subject in focus so they can include things which help define the subject. If you're doing a portrait of an athlete, for example, shooting on their field or court could give context for what is important to the person. Having more of the area in focus is good, because it is integral to the portrait. This is a "deep" DoF. Alternatively, the portrait could be all about the person, with the setting secondary, so you want it out of focus, since the viewer's attention is drawn to things in focus. This can be done with a "shallow" DoF. One pro photographer friend described this as "incorporate vs isolate". There is no right or wrong on this, it's about your style.

To the question of which lens to use, let's say you're using the Canon 5D Mark III, and you want to take a full body standing shot of someone which fills the frame. The if we then pick a focal length for the lens, the distance to the subject is set. With these factors, perspective is simple: a shorter focal length has more sense of curvature, a longer focal length is flatter. Meanwhile, DoF depends on two more things: the focal length and the aperture, but the dependence is not simple. With a longer focal length, the DoF is also longer, and a smaller aperture (f/8 instead of f/4), the DoF is deeper.

To the question of specific lens choices, the main question is whether you want a shallow DoF? One thing associated with DoF is bokeh, the character of what is out of focus. It can be smooth and creamy or harsh and distracting. This isn't a big factor for deep DoF since everything is supposed to be in focus anyway. For shallow DoF, however, the prime lens has two advantages: for comparable level lenses, the prime will tend to have a larger maximum aperture, and their design can concentrate on good bokeh. Meanwhile, zooms offer a lot more versatility.

If you want to isolate your subjects, consider primes. If you want to include the environment in the portraits, zooms are an easy choice.

The issue with a portrait lens is this: longer lenses all you to fill the frame and stand back farther from the subject and thus avoid "stretching" the features...i.e. the nose looking longer..the ears looking like they are on the back/far side of the head..etc.

You will fill the frame with your subject, (for example a head/shoulders shot) and to get the right framing, you'd need about an 85mm lens.

It depends a bit on what camera you have...if you have a cropped sensor camera you naturally stand a few more feet back to get the same framing.

So...to get the most pleasing facial compression of features....this is sort of the guide/rule of thumb:

50mm
Nothing closer than full length

85mm
Head/chest

135mm
Head/shoulders

200mm
Tight head shot.


I know that people will say that they take fine head shots with a 50mm but....I disagree. I've done that and then went back and looked at them side by side with a longer focal length and was shocked at the (now noticeable) distortion.

This set of images illustrates what you get with each lens choice.