M11 & 28 Cron as portrait lens

[Ouroboros]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One of the main strengths of Newman's most powerful portraits is context.  He knew how to use aov to best advantage, not only for the sitter but also for himself.

The difference is knowing exactly what you want to achieve and having the ability to achieve, it as Newman did

[overexposed]

I guess the images would have turned out better if a higher distance would have preserved with higher cropping, did you use the 50mm setting in the camera and composed at that FL?

[wizard]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb LocalHero1953:

you only have to look at the Favourite Images section on the forum and ask why so many of them are of attractive women!

To be fair though, in the Favourite Images section you will find a significant number of images which a) show an attractive women, and b) represent excellent command of photography, so there is much more to those shots than 'just' showing an attractive women. Marc (benqui) springs to my mind (but there are a few others, too, e.g. Louis and jakontil), and I am constantly awed by his ability to capture women in a way that makes them shine. If I were a women, I'd ask him to take a photograph of me. 

Edited July 14, 2023 by wizard

[Ray Vonn]

1 hour ago, lct said:

It is a matter of taste though.

 

1 hour ago, Stephen.s1 said:

There are NO rules as to which lens one must use.  Hell, go with an 8mm and shoot 'em up!

And there we have it.

[THEME]

Some very constructive inputs, appreciate all. Clearly – with this shooting – did not make use of the space the 28mm is offering, so fully focused on the subject / object. Bit of a catch 22 – until one is fully able to make use of this storyteller lens.

[Kiwimac]

12 hours ago, lct said:

Big noses are not forbidden  Just kidding

Did he say "blessed are the cheesemakers"?

[benqui]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 9 Stunden schrieb wizard:

To be fair though, in the Favourite Images section you will find a significant number of images which a) show an attractive women, and b) represent excellent command of photography, so there is much more to those shots than 'just' showing an attractive women. Marc (benqui) springs to my mind (but there are a few others, too, e.g. Louis and jakontil), and I am constantly awed by his ability to capture women in a way that makes them shine. If I were a women, I'd ask him to take a photograph of me. 

Thanks a lot for your kind words wizard which are really much appreciated! And for sure I would also take a portrait from you bearing in mind to make you shine!😉

It is a very interesting discussion and I think it is not only a question of the focal length but (and this is almost the most important point for me) the light and the connection you get to the person in front of the camera. I use the Q2 for portraits a lot, but never for close ups. But in a certain distance (to get a feeling for the distance I use the 50 mm frame with the Q2) it is also possible to get really good crops.

[Jeff S]

Fortunately folks like Bill Brandt ignored any prescriptions or rules about use of wide angles and resultant body distortions. 
 

https://museemagazine.com/culture/2021/4/22/exhibition-review-bill-brandt-perspective-of-nudes-revisited

 

As usual, it’s about the photographer’s vision and skill, not the gear… and not someone else’s rules. 
 

Some critiques here remind me of Michael Johnston’s hilarious articles from years ago on TOP.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/11/great-photographers-on-the-internet-part-ii.html

 

Jeff

[geotrupede]

I like the images and they are fun.

The first is the best for me.

BTW this thing of the 28 not being good, and the 50 being the proper way to do things (or 75/80/90/135) is not matter of the law. Any lens can be good, and anything can be done, our imagination (and time available) is the limit.

A while back I found this fun video, images are very good for me. All 28mm. 

All the best and peace and love,

G

 

[Warton]

Wide angel, close-up shot demonstrates distortion. It's not a rocket science, everyone knows. I don't know why people are fussy about it.

Unless this kind of distortion is a desired effect.

I never use anything wider than 50mm for headshot.

[IkarusJohn]

This discussion gets a bit lost in terminology - lens choice and cropping doesn't change perspective, only using your feet does; cropping a 28mm image will not give you the same image as one taken with a 50mm.

The last comment will get me in trouble, I'm sure, but ... it depends where you crop.  For me, the cropping function in the Q cameras and in the M11 is, yes, a pointless gimmick.  Consider the difference between a zoom lens and a cropped image, or two images side by side - a 28mm image cropped and a 50mm image with the same field of view from the same point of view (ie, same perspective).

That said, I agree with Steve - a wide angle can be very effective for environmental portraits as it provides context.  A short tele can be good also, and can also provide context, but it will be portrayed in a different way.  Moving your feet (perspective) changes everything.  In the opening examples, the proportions of the face, arms and body are distorted by being close with a wide angle - cropping won't change that or any other distortion.

I have no idea what a portrait lens is.  Carefully composed, any lens can take an effective portrait - just don't use a 28 or 21 too close to your subject, and don't get them off centre, unless you're very careful.  Ragnar Axelsson has taken some lovely portraits, ignoring many of the rules we take for granted - Faces of the North and Last Days of the Arctic are worth a look.

Edited July 18, 2023 by IkarusJohn

[Qwertynm]

next up: landscape shots with a tele is just wrong and you should  never do it... 

funny how some people get so worked up over how other people use their gear. The examples OP showed in this thread might not be the best he's taken of that model. On the site he links are some upper body shots that are better examples imho. Personally I think 28 - 50mm is perfect for whole body to upper torso portraits. I don't shoot headshots wider than 50mm if I can avoid it as it just looks wrong in most cases. Some faces benefit but most just look weird and distorted. 

After owning the Q3 for almost 2 months now I can say not having to choose which lens to take is quite liberating. Is it possible to shoot portraits with a 28mm yes of course. Is it the best tool for headshots? No, definitely not. 

[irenedp]

The 28 is a nice lens for portraits if you want to provide context. The only thing you need to be careful of is the facial distortion (unless the subject doesn't care). Shooting from a relative low angle helps. 

[Photoworks]

57 minutes ago, irenedp said:

The 28 is a nice lens for portraits if you want to provide context. The only thing you need to be careful of is the facial distortion (unless the subject doesn't care). Shooting from a relative low angle helps. 

of the photographer does not care about the subject. what is more common

 

[lct]

...or he never shoots his mother in law

 

[irenedp]

3 hours ago, Photoworks said:

of the photographer does not care about the subject. what is more common

 

If it's a paying subject, some argument might ensue ... 🥳

[DadDadDaddyo]

I just want to tease out some of the interrelations between optical artifacts, creativity, and the role of knowledgeable intent in creative choices.

The qualities and characteristics of a lens become tools for creative image making when that lens is selected and applied to a particular image as the result of the photographer's awareness of those qualities and characteristics.

Serendipity occurs, but I can't see it as equivalent to other attributes associated with the creative process, such as experience, spontaneity, and, standing head and shoulders above all other attributes, intent. 

This marks the difference, for example, between knowledgeable jazz improvisation and just blowing notes, honks, and squeaks through your horn. 

A long, long time ago, I had a guitar student who said he wanted to learn about playing jazz. So I began walking him through some of the elemental points of chord structure, leading tones and their relation to melody. The young guy interrupted me and said, " Hey, man, I don't need to know about all that theory stuff, I just want to play jazz!"

 

[ianforber]

I use 28mm, 35mm and 50mm to take pictures of all genres without thinking about whether I have the better lens for the job in hand - I’m a hobbyist and only ever go out with one lens on the camera. Maybe I’m missing something because I’m not thinking about it too deeply or not inspecting my pictures for things like distortion. Either I like the picture or I don’t. But then again, I can’t tell the difference between the characteristics of different lenses unless they have completely mad bokeh or flare. 

[Mahesh]

I loved all the pictures and said to myself wow, this 28mm is good.... until I started reading the discussion. Horses for courses but I agree and love the distortion wide angle lenses bring sometimes. They present a different view and provide some fresh look. Of course, there is a limit to how much distortion is ok and that is individual perspective.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[THEME]

52 minutes ago, Mahesh said:

I loved all the pictures and said to myself wow, this 28mm is good.... until I started reading the discussion. Horses for courses but I agree and love the distortion wide angle lenses bring sometimes. They present a different view and provide some fresh look. Of course, there is a limit to how much distortion is ok and that is individual perspective.  

I could be blunt and counter some nonsense voiced here in this thread. Let's be honest, there's a lot of sub-par photography posted in this forum that's honored with polite praise. Never claimed these portraits are special, just thought the 28mm can serve this purpose. Some even don't dare to photograph humans and then they have a strong opinion about "portraits" with a "wrong" lens. Hilarious that someone even called a 28mm cron a bargain into Leica photography, trying to avoid the costs of "real" gear. I get it. Some arrogance voiced above is just plain amusing. There are no limits to creative rendering, there is no "correct" lens, there is no "right" and "wrong" photographic rendition. There's taste, there are opinions, there is a photographer's style. That's it! Either one likes a photo or not, but don't give me the holier and better BS... just you might not be able to make such shots with a 28mm.