50mm on APS-C for indoor portraiture?

I'm considering a Pentax K-x with 50/1.4. I'm primarily interested in taking pictures of my child and my dog. A lot of these pictures will be taken indoors. Is a 75mm EFL too long for that purpose?

No, it's not too long at all. For APS-C, many of us consider around 75-85mm to be optimum, but even that is no fast and hard rule for portraiture.

Before I moved to full frame, I generally carried three lenses for an outdoor portrait shoot. They would be a 35 f/2, an 85 f/1.4 and a 300 f/2.8. In a home, I'd drop the 300mm, of course.

With full frame, I've kept all three and added a 105 f/2.5 to the mix.

One thing casual portrait photographers fail in is getting in really tight. Most of the space around the subject is a waste and doesn't contribute. Again, thats not hard and fast either, but a good thing to consider.

The 50mm will be a little wide, actually as what might be considered the perfect portraiture lens or a one lens fix, but it will do quite well if you're willing to move right in. For a head shot, you might find yourself in so close as to be a little uncomfortable for the subject. With my 35 f/2, I often find myself only inches away. It distorts features a little but gives depth and space.

Here's my grand nephew shot first up tight with a 35mm and then back with an 85. I'm not the best photographer, but this is to show the difference in perspective with different focal lengths, not to show great portraiture. With the first, my 35mm was almost touching his elbow.

Both shot with a Nikon D300 (APS-C) and both at aperture.

35 f/2 at 1/80 and f/2



85 f/1.4 at 1/200 and f/1.4



--
Cheers, Craig

The shot with the 35 has more impact and interest, at least to me, than the one with the 85. It probably helps that babies have small noses but the perspective looks perfect with the shorter lens.

But you were probably in grave danger of getting fingerprints or Pablum on your lens.

--
Leonard Migliore

Thank you my friend. It was close to getting the lens element wiped. LOL

I too like getting close with a wide angle, but for me it works best with something in the foreground to add the sense of depth. In this case it was the baby's arm.

Like I said, I'm just an amateur, but I think any lens can be a portrait lens if you want a certain effect. For example, I was at the annual swamp Muck-About at the famous studio of Clyde Butcher deep in the Big Cypress Swamp in SW Florida. I wanted a portrait of Clyde signing my calendar. I wanted some of his work in the background and he frowns on flash. There was almost no space. I used a fisheye and not defished. For me, it turned out good, but I think few would think of a fisheye as a portrait lens.



If you ever get down this way, you need to visit this place. Clyde Butcher thinks 4x5 field cameras are small format. I love the place and love to do workshops with my 4x5 there. Clyde shoots 8x10 and larger format. They're huge cameras. He's sort of a modern day Ansel Adams in my mind.

http://clydebutcher.com/

--
Cheers, Craig

A lot of people do not understand the difference if zooming with a lens and zooming with your feet. Just because an image fills the frame does not mean it will look the same with lenses of different focal lengths. Your shots show the different impact you can achieve.
--

'Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.'

Rene Descartes