Which focal length for full body?

[Yoz]

I am just new to shooting video, and currently just use a 55mm lense for photography.

With the work I am wanting to do which is often full body/fashion, yet also some closeups, I notice that 55mm is just to tight in landscape. For this type of work, what focal length would be best, or do I go for more of a zoom with different focal ranges?

If it is a wider lense will this distort faces to much?

Thanks

 

[Andrew S10]

What brand and model camera are you using? What's the sensor size?

Generally a 70mm-90mm lens is used for portraits on full frame cameras.

On an APS-C camera, I generally don't need to shoot wider than 16mm for landscapes, and I'm usually in the 24-50mm range, as I can back up and move forward in most outdoor situations.

 

[Markr041]

I am just new to shooting video, and currently just use a 55mm lense for photography.

With the work I am wanting to do which is often full body/fashion, yet also some closeups, I notice that 55mm is just to tight in landscape. For this type of work, what focal length would be best, or do I go for more of a zoom with different focal ranges?

If it is a wider lense will this distort faces to much?

Thanks

The principles of focal length for photography are the same as for video. What focal length will depend on sensor size, but also on what DOF you want for subjects. So, using a fast lens that is also telephoto can isolate the subject. And, yes, using wide-angle lenses for portraits will distort if close up.

Here is a frame grab of a full-length fashion shot taken at 70mm f2.8 on a full-frame camera (in 8K):



The background was of importance (since the place was important), but because it is very busy it was necessary to have it not in focus.

 

[DMKAlex]

I am just new to shooting video, and currently just use a 55mm lense for photography.

With the work I am wanting to do which is often full body/fashion, yet also some closeups, I notice that 55mm is just to tight in landscape. For this type of work, what focal length would be best, or do I go for more of a zoom with different focal ranges?

If it is a wider lense will this distort faces to much?

Thanks

I find lens focal length are not quite the same for still and video, at least, for my style of shooting.

I tend to shoot a lot more close and tight with still so I use my 50-200, and sometimes, with the 1.4x converter. When I use my 12-60, it's more in the 35 and up (on my M43 GH5).

However, video is about movement. A closely cropped image doesn't give you the sense of movement as much as a wide lens that capture a lot of the background. So, I shoot mostly close to 12-16mm. Yes, you may want to zoom into to a close-up of a portrait, but that's rare. I find the effect is more dramatic when I walk close to the subject so the subject become bigger while the background got pushed away.

On the contrary, when you shoot a wide scene wider than your lens offer, you can always do a slow pan in video.

I would say, the 12-60mm (on M43) takes care of 95% of my shoot.

 

[mkfed]

I am just new to shooting video, and currently just use a 55mm lense for photography.

With the work I am wanting to do which is often full body/fashion, yet also some closeups, I notice that 55mm is just to tight in landscape. For this type of work, what focal length would be best, or do I go for more of a zoom with different focal ranges?

I assume 55mm on a Full-frame sensor? You can simulate lens and aperture choices here https://dofsimulator.net/en/ - e.g. given you are on a FF sensor with your 55mm lens you can film the full body of your 1.7m tall model at 4.1m distance. Play with the tool to find what you need/like (sidenote: this tool is for photography, for 16:9 ratio video you'll need to include some vertical margin in your framing)

If it is a wider lense will this distort faces to much?

Yes distortions stay the same, so if you cannot be 4m away from your model and you have to use wide angle lenses, try to keep the face in the center of the frame. I don't find distortion too bad at 35mm and even 24mm can work okay (for e.g. multiple people dancing). Going even wider you definitely need to pay attention how you frame though.

 

[Off The Mark]

I am just new to shooting video, and currently just use a 55mm lense for photography.

With the work I am wanting to do which is often full body/fashion, yet also some closeups, I notice that 55mm is just to tight in landscape. For this type of work, what focal length would be best, or do I go for more of a zoom with different focal ranges?

If it is a wider lense will this distort faces to much?

Thanks

How big is the room that you will be shooting in?

Personally, I would look at something like a 24-70 f/2.8 or 28-75 f/2.8 or a 24-105 f/4 so you have the flexibility for a full length shot as well as a tighter shot.

As for distorting the faces, technically, that is up to how close or how far away you are from the subject.

If you are two-inches away from someone's nose tip, then their nose is going to look disproportionately larger than their eyes and ears.

Wide angle lenses ALLOW you to get close because they can get more of the subject in the frame when close up than a longer focal length lens would.

 

[Sean Nelson]

As for distorting the faces, technically, that is up to how close or how far away you are from the subject.

If you are two-inches away from someone's nose tip, then their nose is going to look disproportionately larger than their eyes and ears.

Wide angle lenses ALLOW you to get close because they can get more of the subject in the frame when close up than a longer focal length lens would.

Wide rectilinear lenses can also create distortions of subjects that are far away but are located near the left or right edge of the frame. This is due to the "stretching" of the image required to render straight lines as straight over a very wide field of view.

See point 5 in: 10 Tips on Using a Wide Angle Lens

 

[Off The Mark]

Wide rectilinear lenses can also create distortions of subjects that are far away but are located near the left or right edge of the frame. This is due to the "stretching" of the image required to render straight lines as straight over a very wide field of view.

See point 5 in: 10 Tips on Using a Wide Angle Lens

I have to respectfully disagree. I am about 90% sure that is a myth. At least in the age of digital cameras with lens correction. (Back in the days of shooting on film it was probably a thing.)

Take a look at point number 6 in that same article. He is shooting straight-on to a large building with columns out front.

The columns near the edges are not disproportionally wider than the columns near the center of the frame.

He even says in point number 5, "It’s hardly noticeable with landscapes, buildings, etc."

So why are humans affected by this warping while inanimate objects aren't?

As a professional real estate photographer and videographer, I shoot between 16mm and 18mm all day, every day. If I am shooting STRAIGHT ON, then I never notice features of a room getting wider and shorter AS LONG AS LENS CORRECTIONS HAVE BEEN APPLIED (either to the jpg image in camera or in post to a raw image).

My hypothesis: when shooting people, the photographer is usually much closer than when shooting a building, so smaller amounts of accidental tilting / angling the camera will cause more noticeable perspective distortion than when a photographer has to stand further back to take a photo of a building. When at that far a distance, small amounts of tilting and angling the camera (away from parallel to the building) will be far less noticeable.

 

[Sean Nelson]

Wide rectilinear lenses can also create distortions of subjects that are far away but are located near the left or right edge of the frame.

I have to respectfully disagree. I am about 90% sure that is a myth. At least in the age of digital cameras with lens correction. (Back in the days of shooting on film it was probably a thing.)

It's a subtle effect with most wide angles but is more pronounced with ultrawides, especially in the corners where the stretching effect is the strongest. Look at this image of a hotel room, for example:



All the straight lines look straight, but look at the lower right corner:



That does not look natural. You can imagine what a face would look like in that position.

Here's another example - the people at the extreme left and right are clearly distorted:

 

[Off The Mark]

Wide rectilinear lenses can also create distortions of subjects that are far away but are located near the left or right edge of the frame.

I have to respectfully disagree. I am about 90% sure that is a myth. At least in the age of digital cameras with lens correction. (Back in the days of shooting on film it was probably a thing.)

It's a subtle effect with most wide angles but is more pronounced with ultrawides, especially in the corners where the stretching effect is the strongest. Look at this image of a hotel room, for example:



All the straight lines look straight, but look at the lower right corner:



That does not look natural. You can imagine what a face would look like in that position.

I think your photo examples help to prove my point

When shooting STRAIGHT ON things are proportional if they are at the same distance from the sensor plane.

In your photo and crop, things are obviously at different differences from the focal plane. The table in the lower right is SIGNIFICANTLY closer to the sensor plane than the wall with the closet.

And also note how CLOSE to the sensor plane that table is. Because it is so close, perspective distortion is exaggerated because the relative distance between the near items on the table and the far items on the table is rather large when you compared it to overall distance from the sensor plane to that table.

Meaning, imagine you are instead shooting STRAIGHT on to a wall about 10 feet away with a wide angle lens. Move that same size table so it is up against the wall. Keep it in the corner of the frame, but move it further away. It will look "normal" because the difference in distance relative to the plane of the sensor is smaller.

If the front of the table is 8 feet away from the sensor plane, and the back of the table is 10 feet away, there is a 25% difference in distance to the sensor between the front and back of the table.

Now, move that table so it is closer to the camera. Put it in the center of the frame. But move it so it is much closer to the camera. The perspective distortion will return because the relative distance to the sensor between the front and back of the table is more significant.

If the front of the table is two-feet away, and the back of the able is four feet away from the sensor plane, then the back of the table is TWICE as far away from the plane of the sensor as the front of the table. Much higher than the 25% difference when the front of the table is 8 feet away from the sensor and the back of the table is 10 feet away.

Again, my belief is that since wide angle lenses ALLOW the photographer to get closer, perspective distortion is enhanced, whether the item is in the middle of the frame, on the edges of the frame, or in the corners of the frame. As long as the lens has been "corrected" for things like barrel distortion and such either in camera or by applying the corresponding lens profile.

Longer focal lengths (typically) don't allow you to get closer. Hence, you are always shooting in situations where there is less of a relative distance between the near and far parts of an object.

--
What Middle School Is Really Like:

 

[Sean Nelson]

Again, my belief is that since wide angle lenses ALLOW the photographer to get closer, perspective distortion is enhanced, whether the item is in the middle of the frame, on the edges of the frame, or in the corners of the frame.

Once more, I'm not talking about perspective distortion. My whole point was that wide rectilinear lenses have an additional distortion issue that does not depend on distance.

Look again at my last photo of the group of people. The woman on the extreme right is at the same distance as the people in the middle of the frame - she is suffering from no more perspective distortion than they are. Yet her face is stretched and skewed due to the rectilinear correction of the lens.

 

[Off The Mark]

Again, my belief is that since wide angle lenses ALLOW the photographer to get closer, perspective distortion is enhanced, whether the item is in the middle of the frame, on the edges of the frame, or in the corners of the frame.

Once more, I'm not talking about perspective distortion. My whole point was that wide rectilinear lenses have an additional distortion issue that does not depend on distance.

Look again at my last photo of the group of people. The woman on the extreme right is at the same distance as the people in the middle of the frame - she is suffering from no more perspective distortion than they are. Yet her face is stretched and skewed due to the rectilinear correction of the lens.

Maybe it is just a bad lens???

Or the barrel distortion hasn't been corrected by the camera / post processing???

Also, looks like you are tilting the camera down a significant amount as the things that (I assume) are supposed to be vertical are splayed outward toward the top of the frame. (If you were tilting upward, they would be keystoning, with the verticals converging to a point in the top middle, while in your shot, what appear to be vertical slats / walls appear to be diverging at the top). The tilt makes it more difficult to analyze whatever is going in your shot.

I have literally hundreds (if not thousands) of photos taken at either 16mm full frame (or 10mm aps-c) of architecture in one-point perspective and NONE of them show the same effect that is in your photo of the group shot.

My clients wouldn't pay me if the photos did show that effect. No real estate agent is going to accept a photo of a five-million-dollar house if it shows the weird warping that is in your group shot.

--
What Middle School Is Really Like:

 

[Sean Nelson]

Look again at my last photo of the group of people. The woman on the extreme right is at the same distance as the people in the middle of the frame - she is suffering from no more perspective distortion than they are. Yet her face is stretched and skewed due to the rectilinear correction of the lens.

Maybe it is just a bad lens???

No

Or the barrel distortion hasn't been corrected by the camera / post processing???

...and NO.

As I keep trying to point out, this is an inherent characteristic of a rectilinear projection that covers a very wide field of view. I invite you to look at the Wikipedia entry for rectilinear lenses , which states:

At particularly wide angles, however, the rectilinear perspective will cause objects to appear increasingly stretched and enlarged as they near the edge of the frame.

You should also have a look at the Wikipedia entry for Gnomic Projection, which is the way that rectilinear lenses project the image onto the film plane. In particular note the diagram showing Tissot's indicatrix of the distortions created by this kind of projection:

The orange dots show what happens to the shapes of equally sized perfectly round circles that are located across the subject. Note how much those circles are distorted toward the edges of the projected image. This is an extreme example that would show the distortions for a lens that had a field of view of over 120 degrees, which is wider than any photographic rectilinear lenses of which I'm aware. The distortions of a more conventional superwide lens would look closer to the oval dots nearer to the centre than the ones at the edges. And for a plain-Jane wide angle they would hardly be noticeable.

Note that in the inner circle of orange dots, the one at the 2 o'clock position represents just the kind of distortion that occurred in the photo of the woman that I posted above - her face is stretched in a diagonal direction.

Finally, I invite you to take your own superwide lens (one with a field of view roughly equivalent to that of a 15mm lens on a full-frame 35 camera) and shoot some photos that include people located near the edges or the corners of the frame. The distortions will be readily apparent. These distortions are not obvious on architectural subjects because the whole point of the lens is to keep straight lines appearing straight across the entire frame. But our sensitivity to the shapes of human figures and faces makes these kinds of distortions very apparent.

 

[areallygrumpyoldsod]

Dofsimulator is cool - THKS