LarryD Loc: Mojave Desert

85mm to 135mm used to be a standard "portrait lens" in the days of 35mm..

However, with todays crop cameras, that 50mm lens acts like the old 85's in use, and if you put a too long lens on your crop camera, you run out of room to take a portrait and may need to stand in the next room....

MPratter Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

80 is very popular in 120 (6x6) for that famous "hasselblad look."

Sensei

I often rent equipment from Adorama in NYC. But for the most part it is the high end kind of thing that is very expensive and which I would rarely use.

Sensei

I often rent equipment from Adorama in NYC. But for the most part it is the high end kind of thing that is very expensive and which I would rarely use.

commodore-don Loc: Cleveland, OH

Well, it's been many years since I learned photography, but one of the things I was taught was that a 50mm lens, which was the "standard lens" on just about every 35mm camera, saw a wider angle than the human eye did and things in the distance appeared smaller than they had appeared to our eyes when we took the photo. Folks used to complain about this; they'd take a picture of the Grand Canyon, for example, and when they got the color slide or print, the base of the canyon was almost not visible. It sure was when they took the picture, but wasn't in the picture.

We were taught that for a 35 mm camera an 85-90 mm focal length lens created the same perspective that the human eye did and was therefore the correct lens to use for portraits. It did not exaggerate (lengthen or shorten) the features of the subject.

I have a number of lenses for my digital Nikons, but the ones I use for most portrait-type shots is either the 24-85mm f/2.8-4 D at 85 mm or the 70-200 F/2.8 AFS VR at about 85 mm. Note that the first of these two requires a camera body which includes a self-contained AF motor, as one is NOT in the lens. Some of the lower-priced Nikon dSLR's do not have this feature to keep the cost down.......these require a lens with a focusing motor in the lens.

Don

wingincamera Loc: Spanaway, Washington

I believe using a 50mm lens depends on the type of camera, a cropped or full frame. On a crop it might be fine.

anotherview Loc: California

Simple principle when doing photography: Use the gear that suits your intention for the subject.

liv2paddle Loc: Wall, NJ

Here comes that terse again..lol

liv2paddle Loc: Wall, NJ

Wedding photographers use 70-200 2.8.and the 85 mmm for most of their portrait shots..at least the ones I have worked with..I have a 50 mm 1.8 ..did a shoot for a gal for portfolio...perfect.,,no distortion. Not sure what this distortion is all about?

dasloaf

I agree with renting a lens before buying it. Renting it and returning when you find out it is not what u want is better then paying for it and being stuck with it!

Rufus Loc: Puget Sound area, WA

Remember, the relative size of objects, what we call perspective, is determined by the position of the camera lens,and not by the lens. The lens for a portrait should have a focal length long enough so that the camera can be far enough away from the subject so that facial features look normal. Experiment, with any lens, get up close as possible, shoot, then move away, say, 5 or more times as far from subject. Compare the size of the nose to size of the ear in the two shots. Up close will appear to distort nose size. So a proper portrait lens is any lens with a focal length long enough to allow getting good facial perspective while providing an adequate image size of the subject's head.

WisconsinPat Loc: Wisconsin

This site will give you tons of insight on different lenses once you click on a lens pay special attention to pg 2
http://photozone.de/Reviews/overview

Randyb1969 Loc: Armpit of California

Most everything I've read says to use between 80mm and 120mm on a full frame setup. That means even with the crop sensor, the 50 is still at the short end of that list, but it's still usable. And as for which one, well that depends on how important it is to you. I know with Canon you can get a 1.8 cheapo, a 1.4 mid grade, and a 1.2 "L"(top of the line). There are differences in performance, but they are not nearly as significant as the differences in price. You go from $120 to $400, to a whopping $1600. If you've got that kind of money, I would first recommend the 24-70 2.8 as was recommended by an earlier poster. It's not as fast, but it has much more versatility. I also agree with another earlier post that the "nifty fifty" 1.8 at about $120 is the best bang for the buck.

Edit: I should also not that the difference between the 1.8 and the 1.4 are much greater than the difference between the 1.4 and the 1.2 as far as what you gain( at least in the case of Canon)

oleg Loc: NYC

1.4 is a real B--CH to focus. True 50 is not a real portrait lens but I'd start w. it. Shoot wide crop tight. Kids, 80mm, 1.2 Ha! Good luck!

overexposed Loc: hawaii

hahaha,, well i guess u r more confused than before,,from a 50 to 200 you pick it hahaha