Reading mode: Light Dark

Which of (my) lenses would be the best for portraits ?

Go to last post
P

paultr

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
488
Solutions
1
Reaction score
47
Location
UK
The real answer to this is the proof in the pudding but I am trying to establish which of my spare rooms would be best to convert into a mini studio. At the moment I have no light source so am working from theory.

The lenses in question are: 18-70 zoom, a 50 mm prime and a 70-300 zoom. This is on a DX body so I have to add the crop factor. So really it is 27-105, 75 & 105-450.

I should add that I am pushed for size. The ceilings are very tall but the two rooms in question mean that I would struggle getting more than 10 or 12 feet away from the subject.

--
My permanently unfinished web site
http://www.8thday.co.uk
 
Last edited:
I love the portrait shots I get with my 70-300. Out of focus is very nice. Shot at 200mm you can get nice subject separation I don't like the background blur from the 50 f1.8d. I just picked up a 50 f1.8g but haven't received the lens yet to test out.
 
Should also add that from experiments done on a shopfitters dummy head, I have more or less discounted the 18-70 as anything shorter than my 50 mm does not produce attractive shots so it is really down to the 50/75 prime or the larger zoom. I cannot see that I am missing much from 50/75 to 70/105 - or maybe I am .....
 
BrettDR said:
I love the portrait shots I get with my 70-300. Out of focus is very nice. Shot at 200mm you can get nice subject separation I don't like the background blur from the 50 f1.8d. I just picked up a 50 f1.8g but haven't received the lens yet to test out.
Click to expand...
I quite like the background blur from the 50D but as you point out it is more blur than bokeh (at the distances we are talking about) :)
 
Any of them. It depends on what "kind" of portrait you'd like to shoot. But, if you're referring to a classic portrait focal length, 85-135mm is the range many have used in history while shooting 35mm film.

A photographer friend of mine uses a 200mm most of the time. A wide angle (say 28-35mm) will give a little bit of a strange perspective, some might argue, but also a more "candid" appeal too. Another friend loves his 58mm for portraiture.

I vote you try a few of your lenses at different focal lengths and see what you prefer. Or, look around on Flickr or 500px or something and see what others are doing that speak to you.
 
Your rooms are going to dictate your lens choice. With limited space, and DX, you just can't back up enough in a 10-12 foot room.

In my case I take a 3-car garage and turn it into a temporary studio. I have a backdrop and a few umbrella flashes. Distance is an issue, and I have double the space you do, plus I'm shooting FX.

First issue is trying to get distance between subject and backdrop, to blur the backdrop. Second issue is shooting groups, where I have to not only get all the subjects in (usually not more than 4), but also have enough DOF to have two rows of people in focus, yet still have the backdrop at least a bit blurred.

If you are only shooting headshots, you'll be OK probably with the 50mm, which isn't a bad portrait focal length on DX. Getting a whole body in the frame will probably take you to 35mm, which will work OK on DX.

A few years ago I took a cruise and checked out the portrait photographers' equipment. All of them were shooting D70 and 35F2, in relatively limited space. The 35mm was necessary for groups to frame them. Portraits were fine. The lighting was the key, and it was well done.
 
As other posters have said, the size of the room will dictate how long a lens you can handle. The 50 might work although I personally don't like the perspective at head and shoulders range using DX. I prefer one of the 85's, even though it is a little long on DX. I have the 1.8 D older Nikkor and find it satisfactory. One poster mentioned pros using a 35mm f2 Nikkor. I think this is a great choice too if you want a little bit wider view. The edges would not be critical for portrait work. If you wind up taking pictures of families and groups, your 18-70 should work.
 
PSCL1 said:
As other posters have said, the size of the room will dictate how long a lens you can handle. The 50 might work although I personally don't like the perspective at head and shoulders range using DX. I prefer one of the 85's, even though it is a little long on DX. I have the 1.8 D older Nikkor and find it satisfactory. One poster mentioned pros using a 35mm f2 Nikkor. I think this is a great choice too if you want a little bit wider view. The edges would not be critical for portrait work. If you wind up taking pictures of families and groups, your 18-70 should work.
Click to expand...
Thanks for replies. Yes, space is my issue. The room that would be best is used in the evenings and I would not be popular if I commandeered it. I guess I will have to compromise and if this idea takes off I have a nice large stables that I could convert in the future which would tick all the boxes and would look very 'arty' - but at a price.
 
The 18-70mm will work the best. Sharpness is not at all important for 99% of portrait shots and is actually a negative. How often do you think people will add blurring to skin to soften wrinkles or subdue blemishes?

Shooting with DX camera indoors the 85mm which on a crop camera has the picture angle of a 135mm lens was too long. I wished that Nikon had a 60mm lens other than the macro and now there is the 58mm which for DX is perfect.

The 70-300mm would be my second choice. Little appreciated but the most popular lens for fashion photography is the 70-200mm lens. For studio work the 70-200mm f4 would be a good lens as you do not need fast glass.

A lens to consider as well is the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens which is a sharp lens that sells for $500 and on a DX camera becomes a 42-112mm lens. Most commonly used primes for portrait work have been the 85mm and 105mm lenses and the Tamron provides them both and can go wider for couples or full body shots.
 
PSCL1 said:
As other posters have said, the size of the room will dictate how long a lens you can handle. The 50 might work although I personally don't like the perspective at head and shoulders range using DX. I prefer one of the 85's, even though it is a little long on DX. I have the 1.8 D older Nikkor and find it satisfactory. One poster mentioned pros using a 35mm f2 Nikkor. I think this is a great choice too if you want a little bit wider view. The edges would not be critical for portrait work. If you wind up taking pictures of families and groups, your 18-70 should work.
Click to expand...
Shooting both DX and FX, the 50mm on DX feels an awful lot like shooting an 85mm on FX, which is undoubtedly one of the most popular focal lengths for portraits. I like long too, but I've never understood the criticism (by some) of 50mm on DX. IMO it's a great focal length for DX portraits and even indoors it's easy to get the shot, you only need 5-6 feet (if that). I think some folks get tunnel vision for a lens and don't see the possibilities.
 
The 18-70 AF-S DX lens was really quite nice, and you might even prefer it to the 50mm. Main thing is you need to be at least 6 to 8 feet from your subject, and in a small room you might need the flexibility of the zoom lens.
 
Nexu1 said:
you only need 5-6 feet (if that).
Click to expand...
If you are trying to blur a background, you need another 3-5 feet behind the subject, more if you can get it.
 
PHXAZCRAIG said:
Nexu1 said:
you only need 5-6 feet (if that).
Click to expand...
If you are trying to blur a background, you need another 3-5 feet behind the subject, more if you can get it.

--
Craig
www.cjcphoto.net
Click to expand...
That also maybe a problem given my lack of space. I have seen a technique demonstrated which I like called something like light for dark or vice versa. This is where the subject is lit from one side and then the backdrop is lit from the other in a graduated effect .To do this the photographer used a softbox with a honeycomb front to direct the light more precisely so I have ordered one of each. At the moment I have only got two lights but quite a lot of modifiers so may have to get a third to do this. I assume the on-camera flash will play no part in the proceedings - this is good as I have not got a flash socket on the camera so need the hot shoe down to mount the radio trigger. Also I have no choice but to shoot in manual as one of the lights is a strobe and although the other one (speedlight) is i-TTL it turns into manual if I take it off camera as far as I can work out. If I am shooting at f/8 or so all the background is going to be in focus anyway is it not ?

--
My permanently unfinished web site
http://www.8thday.co.uk
 
Last edited:
paultr said:
Also I have no choice but to shoot in manual
Click to expand...
Which you should be doing in a studio. Invest in a flash meter if you can, those are very useful.
 
calson said:
A lens to consider as well is the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens
Click to expand...
This is a good idea although I have no personal experience with that lens. I find myself in tight places and an 85mm on DX is simply too long. I played with the 35-70 f2.8 nikon and it's a bit too soft wide open on the long end.

What you are going to find in a small studio is you will have to shoot at larger apertures to get the background defocused, there simply isn't enough room to have enough space between the subject and the background to use f8. Which is why the slow kit zoom probably isn't a great choice. You need to be able to shoot at f2.2-2.8.

Of the optics you have, I'd likely be using the 50 at f2.2-2.8. My favorite DX portrait lens is the sigma 70mm f2.8 macro (105mm equiv). The below was shot shot with one on DX in a small studio wide open with the subject maybe 2-3 feet from the background.



--
Stacey
 
Last edited:
Shooting flash in manual mode is pretty typical in a studio. I have Pocket Wizards, and three TTL flashes, but I still shoot in manual mode for better control and predictability. The only problem is when I change aperture on the camera I also have to adjust ISO or shutter speed, or re-dial in power settings to the flashes.

I've come to simply judge overall exposure by looking for the peak in the histogram and keeping it about 2/3rd's of the way to the right on the camera. I adjust exposure as needed in post processing too.

For shooting a single person or two people side-by-side, I generally am shooting at F4 for depth of field, typically with an 85mm prime on FX. If shooting four people in two rows, I go to F5.6 and try to interleave the people and keep faces closer to the same plane of focus. I can't really blur the backdrop then as much as I want because I only have about 3-4 feet behind the subjects to the (muslin) backdrop.

When shooting DX in my limited space, I used the 24-70 a lot, and occasionally 85 (or even 105) for head and shoulders shots. With FX, the 24-70 was usually a bit short, so I shoot the 85 mostly, and a 50mm prime for groups.

Oddly, I never liked the 50mm on DX. Awkward focal length that is too short for portraits (though close) and too long for width. I have similar feelings about my 80-200 (too short for wildlife, too wide for indoors). That may be because I used both for 10 years on film before moving to DX.
 
use it if you can find the room for doing so. on your crop body, set the zoom to 90mm on the lens, shoot at f/5.6. adjust the iso accordingly. enjoy.

otherwise, your working distance will dictate which one you'll need to use.
 
Last edited:
PHXAZCRAIG said:
Oddly, I never liked the 50mm on DX. Awkward focal length that is too short for portraits (though close) and too long for width. I have similar feelings about my 80-200 (too short for wildlife, too wide for indoors). That may be because I used both for 10 years on film before moving to DX.

--
Click to expand...
OK I'm curious. And trying not to be pig headed. For the types of portraits I see people taking with either a 58mm or 85mm on FX, 2 of my favorite "portrait" lenses, often the portraits are very similar, whether they are full body, half body, head+shoulders with a fair bit of space around the sides & top, etc... why would a 50mm on DX not be able to accomplish similar compositions?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top