I've been saying this for years and always needed to show the proof. Well here it is, 50mm lenses are NOT portrait lenses. Watch the video for proof and stop calling 'nifty 50s' a Portrait lens! Keep shooting!
Thanks again to Kim for modeling! You can watch Kim's Cancer Story here.
Kimberly by Cazillo, D3s 70-200 2.8 VR1 FX ModeKimberly by Cazillo, D3s 70-200 2.8 VR1 DX Mode
Kimberly by Cazillo, D3s 50mm 1.4D FX Mode
Kimberly by Cazillo, D3s 50mm 1.4D DX Mode
Comments
I'm interested to know your thoughts, David Stubbs, UK
Thx for the vid & keep up the good work!
You are essentially agreeing with David Stubbs. The 50mm is not a good head shot lens, but that does not mean that it can't be used for portraits. You just said that it should.
I think things would be less confusing if a distinction was made between head shots and other portraits.
I would have to agree with you 100%. The nifty 50 is not made for head shot portraits.
Due to the weird effect and distorted look on the image.
Unless you are doing a particular look for your own special project.
I for my personal use of a 50 mm would be for group shots or full body
Thanks for your brief explanation on why not to use the fifty for head shots portraits.
Thanks
Danny
Great video and the topic was in perfect timing with a discussion I had with a co-worker today about this very topic. I feel from reading forums a little confusion about the term "portrait". While one could take a full body portrait with the 50 and be fine it's really the head shot portrait that will suffer from distortion. The other confusion I've seen too is between FOV (field of view) and how that relates to distortion. The distortion will be there regardless of the sensor crop but the FOV will be tighter (FX -> DX).
And I use my 70-200 lens and also my 85mm lens. I love the first one because I can zoom in and
Get areal nice tight shot . Thanks fir all the wonderful inf keep it coming
I have the 50mm as well as an 85mm for my Canon 60D
If you got a 50mm for that day and you are out traveling or whatnot.
How would you do to minimize any distortion? If you want do some portraits maybe not headshot but anyway.
Cant you if you use full format step away a few meter to get good lightning and then crop it tight? ; which of course is not maybe optimal but lets play with the idea we have only 50..
If we talk proportions waist to head or shoulder to head ?
Btw your videos rocks so keep them coming :)
Your video is very interesting, because it brings a lot of questions.
From what I see, when switching from DX to FX mode, you didn't change your distance to the cute Kimberley, and then the perspective didn't change. But the framing changed.
You were actually closer to your model with the 50mm than with the 70-200mm, hence the more flattering perspective with the 70-200mm.
Now, you could compare the 50mm in DX mode to your 70-200mm at 75mm in FX mode with the same framing, which would normally lead to the same distance to your subject. And then I think we would see the same perspective, don't you ?
Perspective, and perspective distortion, are linked to the distance between the photographer and the subject, not the the focal length. This is why zooming and moving are not equivalent, and why a prime lens cannot replace a zoom.
In addition, the distance between the photographer and the subject is only a matter of intimacy.
I find it refreshing to see a great portrait photographer with such misbeliefs. It shows you make your portraits with your heart, not with all this theoretical shit. ;-)
You only changed it when switching from your 50mm to your 70-200mm.
Mr. Hohner explains the problem more clearly than I would ever do (see #5 & #8): http://www.mhohner.de/essays/myths.php
I'm not going to debate the matter with you for the above reason, but you may want to throw in a "In my view" or "In my opinion" or "In my experience" more often. They are phrases that get rid of the absolutes in your statements and open up a subject for a proper debate.
I don't have clients, I only do portraits of family and friends and in over 45 years of shooting I haven't really used anything shorter than around 80mm for portraits but that's my preference and I wouldn't tell someone their method is wrong, just that "I find my way suits me best".
The pictures taken with the dx crop is much tighter than the full frame shoot. You must step back when you shoot with the crop to get the same field of view. I was out shooting today, using a 9,5 mm focal length with a 4,7x crop sensor. No problems with any distortion or problems with perspective. But for head shots I prefer using 20 mm on this camera (Canon S100). The perspective is in direct correlation with the distance to the subject, which will increase with a 50 mm lens used on a crop body compared to full frame....! If you are shooting with a 50 mm lens on a full frame and you are standing 1 meter away from your subject, then you have to stand 2 meters away from the subject using a 2x crop to frame the same picture. The perspective of your subject has now changed because you have doubled your distance to the subject. It's really not that hard to get.
Look at the pictures in myth 8, and compare the shot taken with the 20 mm (cropped) and the shot taken with 100 mm lens. Here you have real evidence that the 5x crop has the same perspective as the 100 mm.
Perspective is only influenced by your position, and field of view is only influenced by focal length. So when you use the 50 mm on your DX 1,6x crop or micro 4/3 you move back from the subject to get the same field of view (because your 50 mm is acting as a 80 mm) but your 50 mm still have all the same properties of a 50 mm lens. So when you move away from your subject, the perspective will change!!
I have a Canon T1i which is a cropped sensor camera. I also just purchased a Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, to replace my kit lens as an upgraded “walking around lens.” I belong to a fraternal order and take a lot of picture of our outings which I post on our website for the guys to enjoy. http://www.ecv1866.org I don’t take pictures for a living and don’t have the bucks to devote to top of the line equipment so this new lens at $650 is a spurge for me. I also own a Canon Speedlite 430EX II, and use it a lot as fill, for night shots and indoor shooting. Probably about 2/3 of what I take I take with flash.
Anyway I get what you’re saying about the issues presented by a 50mm prime lens, but at the same time I would very much like a fast prime that I can use for portraits and other things that doesn’t distort the subject as you’ve demonstrated here. Aside from pleasing bokeh, there is that issue of tack sharpness that comes with more light and faster shutter speeds.
So my problem is, given the cropped sensor, what focal length makes sense for me if I want a practical prime that isn’t just going to sit in my bag? Does the fact that I’m working with a cropped sensor reduce distortion issues that go along with a 50mm? And wouldn’t it mean standing farther away from my subject to get the same shot than if I had a full sized sensor body like one from the Canon EOS D series?
I was looking at the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, at $360 as a possibility. It fits my price range (Canon’s L-glass version is over $2,000), and it fits both styles of Canon bodies. Does this make sense as a portrait lens?
Mike
I'm new to the forum and didn't see the discussion until I scrolled down after posting. You answered most of my questions, But the biggie is still: If I have the bucks for only one prime (or two?)which prime would fill the bill? Until I started watching your videos I had assumed that having a fast "Nifty 50" was the way to go.
I hope you don't mind me answering.
A nifty 50 IS a good lens to have...it's a great bargain in lenses, both the 1.8 version and the 1.4 version...just be aware of the "less than 3/4 length portrait" issues that Greg illustrated.
Other great lens' that won't break the bank are the 24mm or the 28mm primes.
The focal length you purchased has all these focal lengths covered though so duplicating it might not be the best solution unless you are looking for faster lenses than your 3.5 minimum aperture. In that case the 50mm or the 85mm (or both :) are really good lenses.
It sells for around $300 .. manual focusing can work for portraits.
That 85mm f/1.8 is a great lens, it really is. It's a good focal length for portraits and it's pretty dang sharp. For the price, it's a great value in lenses.
Sure, the L version is amazing but this will do it for you.
I'm going to keep your comment for a future video, thanks.
I have the 50mm 1.2L and the 135mm f/2 (which I LOVE)...
I'm seriously thinking about getting the 85mm f/1.2L also...I tend to take head shot portraits or head chest portraits...har dly every full length.
The 85mm is good for head/chest type right?
I think what I'm going to do is take my new zoom lens out for a spin, maybe even for a couple of outings and see which focal length works best for me in most circumstances. I can then prioritize and buy accordingly. Sounds like the 24,50,85 and 135 are alll good candidates to consider.
Here's a question. Greg you have a video on night shooting where there is a group of women gathered under artificial lighting. I do some of that at outings. I know the power of my flash (distance) and the dynamic range of my DSLR's sensor (f stops) affect how much of a scene I can get in a picture using a given ISO, in that situation are there any additonal benefits to using a faster lens like an f/1.4 or 1.8?
I've heard my pro photog friend tell me this before but until I saw these shots next to each other...it just didn't hit home.
I went to him this morning and told him about this video and he said "I'VE BEEN TRYING TO TELL YOU THAT FOR YEARS!!! YOU WOULDN'T LISTEN TO ME!!!!"
:)
Love all your videos. Real professional help not just pushing your own itinery - makes a refreshing change from some.
I am a real amateur but even I instinctively found I worked better and achieved far better portrait shots with my 70-200 - and not just with human portraits - animals too. The bokah is tremendous with zoo shots taken from a long distance.
However, that said, I love my 50 mm - it feels like an extension of my brain when I'm doing walkabout shots!
nice vid. i only have one lens, the one that came with my D90, a AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G. Is this then properly known as a 105mm lens? And if so, that should be great for head shots, yes?
Also, for shooting weddings, what is another lens I should pick up? Will the 105 lens be a great lens for a wedding? Will I need a second lens?
Thank you,
nsterken
Just ordered an 85mm prime from B&H based on your recommendations . I have a Canon T1i, which has the cropped sensor. On my budget it was a choice beteen the "nifty 50" f/1.4 and the 85mm f/1.8. Everything's a compromise. I was looking for something I could use in low light and with a narrow depth of focus. The bocah on these two is very much alike as they have the same number of fins. As for fifty, I guess there's always next Christmas. Thanks for the discussion.
I have a question?
You explained to us that a 50mm lens sucks for portrait shots like the example you gave. You also say that regardless of regardless of sensor size a 50mm has the same distorted parallax because it is still a 50mm lens.
What confuses me is that parallax also has to do with distance from the subject .. so vs a full frame camera, using a crop sensor camera means you would have to back away from the subject to get the same shot. Would this not help with the facial distortion you demonstrated? Thanks again for the fantastic website.
They want a lens to be a portrait lens - or not.
Just that life isn't always simple like that.
Instead of giving people simple recipes, understand the ins and outs, the whys and how’s.
The issue with distortion is not the focal lengths of the lens, but the distance lens to subject. (Others pointed that out.)
The other issue is the opening angle of the lens. This has impact on how the background is captured.
Once you get the hang of this, you understand why many wedding photographers love their 50mm's for portraits in situations where they want the larger angle of the 50 to capture the background. They put the portrait into context.
For a head shot where you want to reduce impact from a “noisy” background, you probably prefer a longer focal length.
By the way I’m with Greg, a 50mm is *not* a portrait lens. Why? Because a 50mm is an all-round lens. To say a 50mm is a portrait lens is simply not right.
How comes people can shoot good portraits with a non-portrait lens then? Maybe we can agree that a 50mm is not a specialized portrait lens… because it is an all-rounder.