90 to 280 afor portrait?

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maybe, but I think that as in many other areas of aesthetics and cultural appreciation, we have found that the more we remove those artefacts, the less 'human' (and thereby the less engaging) they become.

I'm not sure 'human' is the word. I suspect such characterful/imperfect lenses remind us of the classic photography of those times when all lenses were like that. A feeling of nostalgia? That Hollywood glow? I'm not denigrating it - I have my Hektor 7.3cm f/1.9 for when I want to lay glow on with a trowel, so I can understand the attraction of lenses with less obvious 'character'.

[geetee1972]

I'm not sure 'human' is the word. I suspect such characterful/imperfect lenses remind us of the classic photography of those times when all lenses were like that. A feeling of nostalgia? That Hollywood glow? I'm not denigrating it - I have my Hektor 7.3cm f/1.9 for when I want to lay glow on with a trowel, so I can understand the attraction of lenses with less obvious 'character'.

I meant 'human' with regard to our imperfections.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Lazytiger]

As a proof of the appreciation I have for all the helpful contributions in this thread, please let  me introduce you to my brand new 90/280 I'll follow up with a post in a couple of months once I got to know the lens better. For now all I can say is that it feels as great in my hands as it looks to my eyes. A true beauty she is...

 

[thighslapper]

Congrats.

 

I think you will find the results as good as the lens looks .....

 

This is one of my better 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!

 

 

[dancook]

Meant to post this the other day but Flickr server must have been down, so on the subject on different FL's for portraits

 

I did some 28mm macro photos of my colleagues one time  

 

colleague_portraits by dancook1982, on Flickr

[Lazytiger]

Meant to post this the other day but Flickr server must have been down, so on the subject on different FL's for portraits

 

I did some 28mm macro photos of my colleagues one time

 

 

 

Yeah, 28 and getting that close takes care of some noses

 

To me, 35 is the perfect lens for "realistic" (non-beauty) portraits at a medium distance. 50mm if really close. Captures the soul. Here is an old friend of mine, shot last year in Norway. 35mm Distagon @ f1.4

 

[geetee1972]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Meant to post this the other day but Flickr server must have been down, so on the subject on different FL's for portraits

 

I did some 28mm macro photos of my colleagues one time

 

colleague_portraits by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

Well, I'm sure the more self conscious among them won't have been thrilled by the result, but I actually really like these and I think they do work, in a sort of London street artist caricature way. They're a bit cheeky, very irreverant and clearly not taking themsleves at all seriously.

[dancook]

More portraits on the 28mm portrait front, shot with the Leica Q 

 

Leica Q in one hand, flash with softbox in another

 

There's very little room to photograph within the halls of Comic con, lots of people walking by. 28mm let me shoot in the cramped conditions, any distortion is fine for the subjects,

 

I cut out environmental light and overpowered it with a flash.

 

Collage of Comic Con photos by dancook1982, on Flickr

[geetee1972]

More portraits on the 28mm portrait front, shot with the Leica Q 

 

Leica Q in one hand, flash with softbox in another

 

There's very little room to photograph within the halls of Comic con, lots of people walking by. 28mm let me shoot in the cramped conditions, any distortion is fine for the subjects,

 

I cut out environmental light and overpowered it with a flash.

 

Collage of Comic Con photos by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

Love these - this is really good Dan.

[dancook]

Love these - this is really good Dan.

 

Thanks!

[antigallican]

SL with LM 28 2.8 ASPH

Lens Test - SL with LM 28 2.8 ASPH by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

Leica Q 28mm @ 2.8

Lens Test - Leica Q 28mm 2.8 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

Leica Q 28mm @ 1.7

Lens Test - Leica Q 28mm 1.7 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

SL with LM 24mm 1.4 ASPH

Lens Test - SL with LM 24mm 1.4 ASPH by dancook1982, on Flickr

judging from her smile I would say she prefers the Q at 2.8 Dan.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lik]

My view: If you have a lot of time you can chose the rendering of maybe R 80/1.4 (which I also have) Cron M 90 or whatever. 

If you need reliable results in a slot of one or two hours - the 90-280 wide open is a great performer in every situation...

From a shooting here at 90mm / 2.8 / ISO 100 / sun bouncer 

Best regards

lik

 

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!

[lik]

100mm / 3.0 / ISO 100 

 

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!

[lik]

94mm / 2.9 / ISO 100 / sun bouncer 

The background is about 3m behind

 

 

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!

[lik]

.... it feels as great in my hands as it looks to my eyes. A true beauty she is... 

I agree! Well done congrats!

[sls]

I haven't used any of the lenses your asking about, but I shoot a lot of portraiture. Maybe I shouldn't comment but my opinion, for what that's worth, is that by far the bigger issue with the 90-280 for portraiture is the sheer bloody size of the thing. Having that thing pointed at you will be intimidating and will limit your work. If you're shooting a professional model in a formal setting, that's not going to be an issue. Afterall you're working with a professional and he or she can be expected to at least feign comfort in front of the camera if not actually experience it. Of course, the size of that lens does then mean you'll still probably not want to hand hold for very long. Again that will limit your ability to capture something meaningful or compelling. If this is formal studio work then 'meaningful' or 'compelling' (in the human experience sort of way) isn't what you're after so it's a moot point. But still, you'll likely need to shoot with a tripod. No great shakes.

 

It will also depend on what composition you're aiming for as well. 90 is already quite long and if you want to maintain any kind of dialogue with your subject, you'll be framing for head and shoulders only at this focal length; again not impossible to hold a conversation at a longer distance but it is harder. If you were doing that at the long end of a lens, then of course that lens is versatile to go back to say 50mm to 75mm and give you more options. Alternatively if by portraiture you mean candid portraiture, removing yourself entirely from the immediate vicinity, then the longer lens is ideal. I think this works in the sort of wedding photography most clients are looking for. I'm not sure I call that strictly portraiture, but then a) I'm not the client and that's just my opinion.

 

One lens I have used that is genuinely a bit different and which I would love to have again for specific use, is the Zeiss C Sonnar 50mm 1.5. That has a very lovely glow to it, the results look like classic Holywood or as if it was shot on film. It works very well on the SL and isn't hugely expensive.

I was discussing that Zeiss at Classic Camera, totally different from the Leica 50 Lux. They had 2, now only one listed.

http://theclassiccamera.com/epages/BT0261.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/BT0261/Products/C8259

 

I'm not big on portraits, but got some lovely results with the Voightlander 75/1.8 Heliar

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cpclee]

Lazytiger: I'm curious which wrist strap is it you have there as the Leica one only mounts with the vertical grip and I don't see a vertical grip on your SL?

 

I'm also interested in the 90-280 for portraiture.

 

 

As a proof of the appreciation I have for all the helpful contributions in this thread, please let  me introduce you to my brand new 90/280 I'll follow up with a post in a couple of months once I got to know the lens better. For now all I can say is that it feels as great in my hands as it looks to my eyes. A true beauty she is...

 

[Lazytiger]

@cpclee: Couldn't test it yet due to too much work. But looks perfect to me. If anything you got to blur skin due to too much detail.

 

Can't remember which strap it is. The lower part is attached to the RRS SL base plate. Only bought the horizontal part, which makes the SL exactly fit in my quite big hands and allows attaching the hand strap, as well as sticking a belt via quick release to the bottom. Battery is fully accessible. Best SL accessory out there.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Lazytiger

[cpclee]

Thanks so much. Glad to know that there is another way to attach a wrist strap to the SL.  Did you try Leica's vertical grip before settling on the RRS plate?

 

 

@cpclee: Couldn't test it yet due to too much work. But looks perfect to me. If anything you got to blur skin due to too much detail.

Can't remember which strap it is. The lower part is attached to the RRS SL base plate. Only bought the horizontal part, which makes the SL exactly fit in my quite big hands and allows attaching the hand strap, as well as sticking a belt via quick release to the bottom. Battery is fully accessible. Best SL accessory out there.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[cpclee]

And if there is an easy way for you to find out which company makes that wrist strap of yours, please do.  It looks very comfortable!