50mm 2.5 macro - a good portrait lens?

Started Dec 10, 2012 | Discussions thread
OP Pixelhater Forum Member • Posts: 64
Re: 50mm 2.5 macro - a good portrait lens?

pcassel wrote:

It depends if you are APS-C or FF. I'd say it less than ideal on an FF where FL of from about 80mm to 135 mm tend to be favored. People look better with longer lenses in portraits and also prefer you being further from them. They act weirdly if you get all close up on them. Nobody will smile naturally if you are right up in their face & they feel your hot breath on them from behind the camera.

So if you have an APS-C the 50mm equivalent is about 80 mm or the minimum for a standard portrait lens. The f2.5 isn't ideal either for some portraits where very thin DOF is desirable.

I'd suggest something like a 100 mm 2.8 as a better compromise for both a macro and a portrait lens. Just keep in mind that serious snappers have many lenses not because they like the expense but because each one has an idea use.

-- hide signature --


I will use the lens on a FF camera. I would not use the lens as a professional portrait lens. What I want to use it for is taking portrait on myself handholding the camera with my hands in front of my head. If that makes sense.

A 35mm lens get as close as this 50mm macro but 35mm looks more wacko up close.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow