24mm too wide for portrait photography...?

I am considering the new Zeiss 24mm 1,8 (still awaiting reviews to make the final decision) for the NEX-5N.

24mm is great for general photography (street, landscape etc), but do you find it too wide for portrait photograhy? Shooting distance, distortion etc? I really want an "all-in-one" prime, like my 35mm 1,8 for A-mount, which I can stick on my camera at all times and use for a very wide range of photos...

O.

Just try it and see what happens.
--
Andrew
Novice photographer

Fritzo said:

I am considering the new Zeiss 24mm 1,8 (still awaiting reviews to make the final decision) for the NEX-5N.

24mm is great for general photography (street, landscape etc), but do you find it too wide for portrait photograhy? Shooting distance, distortion etc? I really want an "all-in-one" prime, like my 35mm 1,8 for A-mount, which I can stick on my camera at all times and use for a very wide range of photos...

O.

Click to expand...

For most situations, the 24mm will be too wide for portraits. Not flattering since you will put enormous noses, foreheads and chins on people.

There is no such thing as a all-in-one prime. That's why the zooms exists. Some are more versatile than others, but they are still best for their intended use. Try the 50mm and use the panorama stich function for those panoramic moments the 50 cannot capture in one shot. Or shoot a bunch of photos and explore stiching in postproduction.

The trick is to include some environment. You will get distortion if you get too close.

Check out Arnold Newman's portraits, many of which were taken with wide angle lenses.

http://www.arnoldnewmanarchive.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8&Itemid=9

if you try to use it as a 85mm equiv. portrait, then for sure, its not suitable for that purpose. if you treat it as a wide angle portrait, then it works.. its not a head and shoulder type of lens, you have to go at least have half a body and include the environment.. thats the whole point of a fast wide

Fritzo said:

I am considering the new Zeiss 24mm 1,8 (still awaiting reviews to make the final decision) for the NEX-5N.

24mm is great for general photography (street, landscape etc), but do you find it too wide for portrait photograhy? Shooting distance, distortion etc? I really want an "all-in-one" prime, like my 35mm 1,8 for A-mount, which I can stick on my camera at all times and use for a very wide range of photos...

O.

Click to expand...

The only way you would get decent perspective using a 24mm lens on an APS-C for a portrait would be to only quarter-fill the frame and then crop the hell out of it. Not great for detail. Fill the frame and suddenly everybody has huge noses and chins.

For APS-C, 50-70mm is about right (according to taste) if you want your subject to be reasonably frame-filling without making them look distorted (the recommended lengths will slightly flatten the features at frame-filling distances which is flattering to most people).

I think Sigma's 70mm macro would be ideal for "close" portraits, if they would kindly make an E-mount version. It seems to be sharp, judging from examples posted on the web.

Here is a link to a Fujifilm X100 Portrait Thread... Essentially, same focal length:

http://www.x100forum.com/index.php?/topic/592-x100-portraits/

All Twenty-One pages...

Fritzo said:

24mm is great for general photography (street, landscape etc), but do you find it too wide for portrait photograhy? Shooting distance, distortion etc?

Click to expand...

Yes, it's a bit too wide for head and shoulder shots.

Using an e-35mm lens is just the ticket for other types of portrait photography, like full and mid-body shots, familly and group portraits.

Here's some portraits done with an 35mm lens, equivalent to a 24mm on an APS-C sensor. There are lots more examples on the net.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shutterhack/galleries/72157622385159368/#photo_3538666345

--
Villebon

Fritzo said:

I am considering the new Zeiss 24mm 1,8 (still awaiting reviews to make the final decision) for the NEX-5N.

24mm is great for general photography (street, landscape etc), but do you find it too wide for portrait photograhy? Shooting distance, distortion etc? I really want an "all-in-one" prime, like my 35mm 1,8 for A-mount, which I can stick on my camera at all times and use for a very wide range of photos...

O.

Click to expand...

It is an excellent length for portrait work.

I use my 21mm and 35mm lenses for portrait work on my M9 with great success.

I expect to use them both on the NEX 7 I just pre-ordered.

The Zeiss should be a fine choice for a general purpose prime.

Best,

Bill

villebon said:

villebon said:

Fritzo wrote:

24mm is great for general photography (street, landscape etc), but do you find it too wide for portrait photograhy? Shooting distance, distortion etc?

Click to expand...

Yes, it's a bit too wide for head and shoulder shots.

Using an e-35mm lens is just the ticket for other types of portrait photography, like full and mid-body shots, familly and group portraits.

Here's some portraits done with an 35mm lens, equivalent to a 24mm on an APS-C sensor. There are lots more examples on the net.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shutterhack/galleries/72157622385159368/#photo_3538666345

--
Villebon

Click to expand...

Beautiful portraits with the 35mm f1.4.

I realize this thread is a few years old, but any thoughts on using the 24mm as a portrait lens? Currently have the 35mm f1.8 but still find it a little too long to use for indoor photography.

MarcusTeee said:

MarcusTeee said:

MarcusTeee said:

Fritzo wrote:

24mm is great for general photography (street, landscape etc), but do you find it too wide for portrait photograhy? Shooting distance, distortion etc?

Click to expand...

Yes, it's a bit too wide for head and shoulder shots.

Using an e-35mm lens is just the ticket for other types of portrait photography, like full and mid-body shots, familly and group portraits.

Here's some portraits done with an 35mm lens, equivalent to a 24mm on an APS-C sensor. There are lots more examples on the net.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shutterhack/galleries/72157622385159368/#photo_3538666345

--
Villebon

Click to expand...

Beautiful portraits with the 35mm f1.4.

I realize this thread is a few years old, but any thoughts on using the 24mm as a portrait lens? Currently have the 35mm f1.8 but still find it a little too long to use for indoor photography.

Click to expand...

I read the thread before seeing the date. Imagine my surprise at reading about a new 24z lol. Must be one of the biggest cases of necro thread I encountered in a while.

But the relevant information was already given. 24mm is not a portrait focal length. You just don't want to distort someone's face unless for some 'artistic' purpose. You can shoot a person of course, but wide angle shots like that work only when you include at least some surroundings.

Seems you want a wide angle lens because 35mm is being too narrow, which makes sense, but you also want it to be a portrait lens, which doesn't.

For head and shoulder shots, something starting at 50mm is a lot better. Perhaps you should consider a zoom, 16-50, 16-70z or 18-105.

Traditionally, portrait lenses are used in the range of 50 to 135mm FL.

I don't think that for such as most Members here there is any golden "absolute" rule that every Portrait pic has GOT to be the pure professional olde-World type of strictly staid posed pics with a very OOF background and the magical Bokeh !!.. Far from it indeed.. there are many occasions generally when you can grab a very nice happy portrait type pic and it will make a record of one happy moment.

I absolutely LOVE the Zeiss 24 that I bought for my A6000... it is a wonderful lens capable of excellent pics that quite definitely will often give me the sort of result that I have rarely seen from many cameras & lenses I have used in digital times ..excellent generally but NONE have given me that Zeiss quality that I remember so well from old film days with top-class cameras and Zeiss lenses that I've just not seemed to have had on any of my digi cameras otherwise.

The 24 is a versatile and very super lens and is quite capable of covering almost anything from about 2-feet or so to street-distance.. it's just a matter of choosing/using the best available positioning mainly. I'd recommend the Zeiss 24 to anybody who is NOT particularly a "distance" shooter...





By the way .. I don't think these latest posts will likely do much good for the OP .. as this thread is now 4 years old !!... but Portraits and photo matters are universal so I hope maybe somebody will still find a bit of interest here...



--
/eric
Staffordshire, UK

Thanks you all for your input!

IMO - 35mm (or 52mm equivalent) may be the perfect outdoor walkaround lens, but it is too long for indoor photography and perhaps street photography. Hence I'm wondering if the 24mm might be a good fit for my shooting styles.

I would like a fast, sharp walkaround prime lens that allows me to take environmental portraits & street photography. Over the past few months since I have picked up photography, I realize that I don't particularly enjoying taking photographs of my subject's head & shoulders only... A fast lens will allow me to blur the background slightly to place more emphasis on my subject while retaining some context, but not enough bokeh to mask the background entirely...

Fritzo said:

I am considering the new Zeiss 24mm 1,8 (still awaiting reviews to make the final decision) for the NEX-5N.

24mm is great for general photography (street, landscape etc), but do you find it too wide for portrait photograhy? Shooting distance, distortion etc? I really want an "all-in-one" prime, like my 35mm 1,8 for A-mount, which I can stick on my camera at all times and use for a very wide range of photos...

O.

Click to expand...

24mm on an APS camera gives a 35mm FoV. It's a pretty good choice for an 'environmental portrait' - a shot of a person, as well as their surroundings (a seamstress in the dress-making shop, a hiking guide on the trail, a chef in the kitchen, etc.)

However, if you want to emphasise the face and eyes, then yes, I find it too wide. For that my preference is a 50-90mm FoV.

My Full Frame 55mm is my favourite and most versatile lens. On the APS camera I think the 35mm f1.8 would be the most versatile prime.

35mm Street Environmental:



90mm Headshot:



--
http://marsweekly.wordpress.com/

You all are replying to a 4 year old post. The 24 is no longer a new lens but an old lens. Is the OP still around to read this?

MarcusTeee said:

captura said:

You all are replying to a 4 year old post. The 24 is no longer a new lens but an old lens. Is the OP still around to read this?

Click to expand...

I must apologize for bringing back an old thread. When OP asked the question, not many people owned the Zeiss 24mm yet.

Hence I'm bringing it back to see what others think having played around with it for a few months/years.

Click to expand...

There have been numerous discussions about this lens, on the forum, over the past 4 years. Why didn't you just search the archives?

It is a highly regarded lens.

Fritzo said:

OP here, ans yes Im still reading the thread. Was a bit (a lot ) suprised to see this up again, but I still think its a valid question. I never purchased the 24mm, but Ive always felt the urge since people describe this as the holy grail of APS-C. My feeling was that a 24mm gives a type of "intimacy" to the subject that you dont get with a 50mm+ lens, even though you of course would get some distortion.

For me,its now a decision about sticking with APS-C or go all in on Full Frame. Havent quite decided yet, as I love the size and weight of APS-C but love the image quality of FF. At the moment I intend to keep both, but if I would go all APS-C with the mythical A7000 in the future the 24mm is first on my list.

Click to expand...

A very good choice. But as you say, mythical.