50mm - summilux or APO summicron for portraits

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No, it's thinking ftom 1994 to 2017. Twenty three years of professional succesful work.

 

In the hasselblad world, the 150mm lens is the portrait lens (head and shouders is what's considered portrait). None of the names you dropped shot portraits with a 80.

 

Anyways, I'm off this conversation. What's the point in getting lessons from people that never took lessons?

 

 

23 years of professional successful work based on 1950s kodak theory books doesn't mean much to me. You are confusing opinion and taste for fact and I don't think you understand what a portrait means, other than a commercial head shot.

 

Yes, they did shoot portraits with standard lenses.

 

I took lessons from people who said don't shoot portraits with a 50mm lens and they were wrong too. Lessons are only useful if they come from people who know what they are talking about. You've yet to find that out it seems.

[jip]

Sure it can be done. But it won't be nice.

 

 

So all my portraits above are horrible and bad, and I shouldn't have been paid for some of then. Awful really the quality. 

[NB23]

Since when is portraiture limited to head and shoulders? What about 3 quarters length and full length? Not sure what you're trying to teach us here my friend.

I was clear on this since the beginning: no 50 for head and shoulders in order to avoid distortions.

 

Now if you start talking about full length or 3/4 length portraiture, I think we all know the theory of optics to agree that a 50 will not introduce distortions in those situations.

[NB23]

So all my portraits above are horrible and bad, and I shouldn't have been paid for some of then. Awful really the quality.

If you knew how to properly read you'd have understood correctly.

 

I will make it clearer for you:

 

The second pic contains 2 heads and 4 shoulders, so this takes you away from their faces and avoids distortions if their features. however, the hand takes place of a classic bad 50mm portrait and look at how big it is in relation to their faces. One hand is bigger than 2 faces. Is your hand as big as 2 faces? This is why a head and shoulders portrait with a 50 is not good.

 

The third one is not a head and shoulder so no distortion to speak of. But Not showing her arm is a mistake. And shooting the model against the fountain is another mistake. The overall form of tje model is not clear anymore. Too many distractions.

 

The first one is interesting and proves the point. There is distortion. But the model is not facing the camera, thetefore there is no nose to be blown up out of proportion.. Her hidden ear takes that place and it's hidden. But her ear would have been bigger than her nose. Again, there is distortion but the nose is controlled by NOT facing the camera. Otherwise it would have been unflatteriing.

 

The last one isn't a portrait.

[Lord Lucan]

Attention everybody, Please define your understanding of the word portrait.

PS: Ref post 28

[NB23]

23 years of professional successful work based on 1950s kodak theory books doesn't mean much to me. You are confusing opinion and taste for fact and I don't think you understand what a portrait means, other than a commercial head shot.

 

Yes, they did shoot portraits with standard lenses.

 

I took lessons from people who said don't shoot portraits with a 50mm lens and they were wrong too. Lessons are only useful if they come from people who know what they are talking about. You've yet to find that out it seems.

Since you seem to be impressed by name dropping alone, I think we have already established that hcb agrees with the "old kodak theories", which are theories of physics, by the way.

I repeat: physics. Not opinions

 

But please impress us with your modern work. I'm always open to learn new stuff.

[Lord Lucan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think we should call them not portraits but Bodyscapes.

[pop]

I'm always open to learn new stuff.

This might be new to some:

 

If you want to take a portrait showing how someone looks from a great distance away, take the photograph from a great distance away. 

If your want to take a portrait showing how someone looks from close up, take the photograph from close up.

 

The effect we can observe when doing so is called "perspective" and is not any kind of distortion.

 

One is not better than the other (and vice versa), and neither is one "more natural" or "more correct" than the other. However, a photograph taken of someone from close up might transmit a sense of intimacy that might not be intended.

[Paul J]

Since you seem to be impressed by name dropping alone, I think we have already established that hcb agrees with the "old kodak theories", which are theories of physics, by the way.

I repeat: physics. Not opinions

 

But please impress us with your modern work. I'm always open to learn new stuff.

 

 

Physics has little to do with expression, communication, emotion, perception and art.

 

Henri Cartier Bresson was an anarchist, he did not conform or agree with any old theories.

 

It is your opinion that a 50mm is not a suitable portrait lens, that is not physics.

 

Who uses a 50 for portraiture?

You are the one asking for names to be dropped.

 

You could assume much less who you are dishing out advice to.

[dunkelblau]

 

In fact, the CV 35/1.2 I like alot for portraits:

 

Yessss!I keep my VC 35/1.2 just for portraits. My favorite portrait lens. And are any of these faces distorted?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Belmondo]

I did this one with 35mm. The nose is not small, ok, but it' s one of my favourite portraits:

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[erl]

All too technical and obfuscating for me.

Right and wrong does not exist for me.

Hell, half the time I don't even what is the focal length of the lens I'm using.

What I do know is how it draws my subject for me. Now that is important.

I have as many lenses as anyone I reckon. There is not one I have not used for portraiture (whatever that is!).

I think they are great (after editing). Don't give a damn what anyone else can't understand about my images.

If they pay me, I assume they approve.