Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,917   Posts: 1,521,918   Online: 1049
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25
  1. #11
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    A 135 mm lens is a poor choice for portraiture. Faces will look rather flat. Something in the range 85 to 105 mm is a far better choice and will yield an image close to what the human eye sees.

    In fact 135mm is a rather poor choice for everything - too short to be a true telephoto and worthless for portrais.
    It must have been just dumb luck that I got great portrait shots with a Nikkor 135/2.8 and 180/2.8. Yup, just luck...

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,769
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    It must have been just dumb luck that I got great portrait shots with a Nikkor 135/2.8 and 180/2.8. Yup, just luck...
    I quote from the Pentax Users website, "In 35mm terms the 85mm is the classic lens, 100mm is fine and 135mm just a bit too long."

    So I guess your right just dumb luck.
    Last edited by Gerald C Koch; 11-20-2010 at 04:05 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  3. #13
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    Your right just dumb luck. Try reading some books on portraiture and see what they recommend. Then comment again.
    LOL! Proof, I guess, of the old saw about a little bit of knowledge being dangerous, not to mention embarrassing.
    Last edited by CGW; 11-20-2010 at 04:01 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #14
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    I quote from the Pentax Users website, "In 35mm terms the 85mm is the classic lens, 100mm is fine and 135mm just a bit too long."

    So I guess your right just dumb luck.
    So the "Pentax Users" website is the acknowledged canonical source for advice on portraiture? Please...

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,769
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    So the "Pentax Users" website is the acknowledged canonical source for advice on portraiture? Please...
    "A portrait lens is one that is used for taking pictures, usually of the head and shoulders, of a person. It may differ from a normal lens in a number of ways.

    1. Focal Length

    The traditional 35mm full-frame lens for portrait work was between roughly 75 mm to 105mm.

    While some people, I suspect ones with rather large noses , like longer lenses, the majority of photographers over the years have found too long lenses to flatten the face too much, while shorter lenses tend to bring out the size of the schnoz and other such features."

    I could find dozens of quotes that all say the same thing. But I have better things to do than argue. How can I say this as politely as possible. Do whatever you want for your own photography but kindly refrain from offering advice unless you have some real knowledge to offer. Your sarcasm is not appreciated.
    Last edited by Gerald C Koch; 11-20-2010 at 10:08 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  6. #16
    Mick Fagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,816
    Images
    29
    I have the Nikkor 85 f/1.4, Nikkor 105 f2.5, Nikkor 135 f/2.8, Nikkor 180 f/2.8 all of them are either Ai or Ais and I use them on Nikon F3 bodies.

    Each and every one is slightly different; each and every one is a fantastic portrait lens, at times.

    Yesterday I went to a nephew’s wedding, I took and used the 135 for portraits, this was mainly for the distance away I will be, next Friday is another wedding, I will take the 105 and the 85 as well as a 24. Once again dictated by the working conditions, not what they can do.

    That said, my first choice is always the 105, followed by the 85, usually I take these together. Second choice is the 135 and 85. Third choice is the 105 and 180.

    If I had to choose which of only one, my recommendation would be the Nikkor f/2.5 105. It is far and away the best lens I own, be that for portraiture, landscape or anything if that length is suitable or possible to use.

    My second choice would be the 135 f/2.8, it is an extremely good lens, but not quite as good as the 105.

    With the exception of the 180, all of these lenses use a 52mm filter ring, the 180, 135 and 105 have built in lens hoods, which is extremely handy. The 85 1.4 requires it’s own lens hood and it needs one. The 180 2.8 and 85 1.4 use 72mm filters.

    Mick.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    south central Missouri
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,926
    Images
    9
    If I could have only one Nikkor, the 105 2.5 would be it.

    Mike

  8. #18
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Mick Fagan View Post
    I have the Nikkor 85 f/1.4, Nikkor 105 f2.5, Nikkor 135 f/2.8, Nikkor 180 f/2.8 all of them are either Ai or Ais and I use them on Nikon F3 bodies.

    Each and every one is slightly different; each and every one is a fantastic portrait lens, at times.

    Yesterday I went to a nephew’s wedding, I took and used the 135 for portraits, this was mainly for the distance away I will be, next Friday is another wedding, I will take the 105 and the 85 as well as a 24. Once again dictated by the working conditions, not what they can do.



    That said, my first choice is always the 105, followed by the 85, usually I take these together. Second choice is the 135 and 85. Third choice is the 105 and 180.

    If I had to choose which of only one, my recommendation would be the Nikkor f/2.5 105. It is far and away the best lens I own, be that for portraiture, landscape or anything if that length is suitable or possible to use.

    My second choice would be the 135 f/2.8, it is an extremely good lens, but not quite as good as the 105.

    With the exception of the 180, all of these lenses use a 52mm filter ring, the 180, 135 and 105 have built in lens hoods, which is extremely handy. The 85 1.4 requires it’s own lens hood and it needs one. The 180 2.8 and 85 1.4 use 72mm filters.

    Mick.
    Amen. I've shot portraits--whether environmental, full-length, 3/4, h&s, tight headshots, and close-ups--with everything from 28mm to 300. This dogged parochialism about "traditional" focal lengths is undoubtedly a comfort if you lack the imagination to conceive of portraiture as something other than a well-lit passport photo.
    Last edited by CGW; 11-21-2010 at 10:37 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,769
    The present controversy seems based on one's definition of portrait. I personally do not consider a full length picture or even a 3/4 length representation to be a "portrait". To many people the word portrait denotes a picture of the head and shoulders of a person. In support of this view note the need to qualify the word portrait with phrases such as "full length" and "three quarter length."

    Certainly for a "full length portrait" a longer lens is not going have the perspective problem that would occur if the subject were closer to the camera as in a traditional (head and shoulders) portrait.

    If I misinterpreted the unqualified use of the word "portrait" then I must apologize.
    Last edited by Gerald C Koch; 11-21-2010 at 02:16 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,769
    It's interesting that no one has mentioned soft-focus lenses. They are good for portraits of women as they de-emphasize any imperfections.

    Nikon made an 85mm f/2 model.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin