OMD: Can I take the same pictures with the 12mm f2.0 and the 17mm f1.8 ?

marike6 wrote:

lambert4 wrote:

But Tedolf has a valid point, the question is impossible to answer technically, I have seen FE portraits but that doesn't make the 7.5 Rokinon the better lens for portraits....

page solid base of knowledge first and a reference tool like a book or bookmarked set of sites to help sort the needed gear no matter what the expense.

I use the PL25 often for candid portraits, but have always been disappointed by the distortion in anything framed correctly.

The problem is nobody bothered to slow down the conversation a bit to find out what the OP meant be "portraits". Traditional head and shoulder portraits? Environmental portraits? Edgy MTV group portraits? Street candids?

Technically both the 12 and 17 can be used for some types of portraits, i.e. environmental or group portraits. They are not the classical portrait length of 85-135mm that produce a pleasing rendering of facial features, i.e. little distortion like bulbous noses like a wide angle lens or not too much compression flattening features like a long telephoto. A 50mm can be used for full-length portraits but a) getting too close with a 50 distorts the face b) doesn't provide enough working distance for lights if you're in a studio.

Anyway, the chorus of "no" may have been a bit premature without knowing what types of images the OP has in mind. But it is good advice to warn beginners that wides can be difficult to use when photographing people.

I think that this thread has some kind of filter on it so that some information is invisible to some people.

Those people then go on to moan that others didn't mention certain things, then go on to repeat things previous posters said.

Uncanny.