|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
The 85mm for head shots, true 85 or cropped?
OP...I'm not sure if anywhere during this piss war, your question got answered. Without saying a damn thing about this distortion or that distortion, I will try based on my experience and preferences, for whatever it's worth. Lets assume, no matter what lens you mount on your camera, regardless of dx or fx format, be it a 35, 50, 85, 105, 135, or 200mm. If your intent is to fill your frame for a head shot or head and shoulder shot, as I believe your question pertained to, there are very real differences between focal length and the result. If you fill the frame with a face on an fx camera with a 35mm lens, the face in my opinion will look like shit. I feel the same about a 50, and somewhat an 85, though to a much less degree. You are so close to your subject, that you are missing the sides of their head, giving it an odd appearance, and giving the illusion of a very large nose. By putting those same lenses on a dx format camera, and again filling the frame for your intended shot, you are now further back from the subject, and you have more of this persons head, front and sides in your frame, and as a result in my opinion a much more flattering shot, given any focal length listed. For my personal taste, it takes at least 150-200mm on a full frame camera (filling the frame again) to give me the desired result I'm after. Because I'm being pushed back by a dx camera to fill the frame like the fx setup, I find I can use less length if needed to get the same result, 105-150mm. Having said that, I still find myself shooting the vast majority of my head shots between 150-200mm regardless of format, because I find the results more flattering. Feb 01 13 05:13 pm Link Marty McBride wrote: The Space Cowboy wrote: Feb 01 13 05:20 pm Link The Space Cowboy wrote: That's your opinion ok, that's not mine! Feb 01 13 05:23 pm Link Marty McBride wrote: I didn't actually give an opinion. I gave an estimate about other people's opinions. Feb 01 13 05:26 pm Link Sometimes I just stare endlessly at the computer screen at the amazing image quality of the Canon 85mm/1.8 on the 7D after an outdoor location shoot. I love this lens so much, used it on 5D years ago, but totally in love again with 7D crop-sensor camera!! Feb 01 13 05:27 pm Link PhotoPower wrote: Sometimes I wonder if the Canon 85 1.2 is reason enough to switch from Nikon. Feb 01 13 05:29 pm Link The Space Cowboy wrote: I can't find a single instance in this entire thread, where you have attempted to address the OP's question. Instead you have misinterpreted some of the best in the business, who actually know a thing or two about head shots and how to best obtain them. Feb 01 13 05:39 pm Link Marty McBride wrote: Here is his exact question: Untitled Photographer wrote: Once again, his question is, when people rave about the 85 for head shots are they raving about it on a crop or on a FF? The Space Cowboy wrote: Notice the answer, like the question, is about what other people think about the 85 under what circumstances Marty McBride wrote: You owe me an apology Feb 01 13 05:43 pm Link The Space Cowboy wrote: Marty McBride wrote: Here is his exact question: Untitled Photographer wrote: Once again, his question is, when people rave about the 85 for head shots are they raving about it on a crop or on a FF? The Space Cowboy wrote: Notice the answer, like the question, is about what other people think about the 85 under what circumstances I've seen you say "as others have said" and you said "many agree" But where is your contribution, where is your opinion based on the OP's question??? Feb 01 13 05:47 pm Link Marty McBride wrote: The OP is not asking for your opinion on lenses. Feb 01 13 05:50 pm Link The Space Cowboy wrote: You're lost, and what's the old saying, "when hell freezes over!" Feb 01 13 05:55 pm Link Marty McBride wrote: I agree. Most of headshots and head and shoulder shots I shoot are either with the 55-200 ED-VR or the 70-300 ED-VR from 120, all the way up to around 250. I think to most flattering headshot focal lengths are within those ranges... Feb 01 13 06:13 pm Link Marty McBride wrote: The Space Cowboy wrote: Marty McBride wrote: QFM Feb 01 13 06:14 pm Link In the days of film there were two lenses that were primarily used for portrait work, one was the 85MM and the other one the 135MM. Either of these two focal lengths will give superb results in a prime lens that few if any zoom lenses (regardless of cost) can match in color, detail or clarity. Feb 01 13 06:28 pm Link I love using my 85mm f/1.8D on my Nikon D90 for headshots. At one point it was the only lens I had so I used it for everything. Love it. Feb 01 13 06:37 pm Link The focal length "by itself" has nothing to do with "distortion" I knew that. Got that and said that and it continued to be driven as if we didn't. This is an attempt to get back to the OP... The "subject distance" and "field of view" affect things. Take crop sensors, they magnify the field of view. In a crop sensor, it crops the image and makes it appear to be closer to the subject. The focal length measures how long the lens is and I'm putting it to 35mm full frame definition. A medium format camera with a 80mm lens would be more like a 50mm lens on a 35mm full frame camera and a 35mm lens on a 1/3″ sensor would be like a long telephoto lens. It all all has to do with field of view and distance to the subject in determining desired perspectives, compression and distortion. I like the 85mm on my crop sensor because it comes close to the traditional 35mm form factor rule that a 135mm lens works well for portraiture/head shots. I tested that out with my trusty Canon AE1 film camera and it proved to my liking. I like to get it right in camera. Again, this originates from a desired 35 mm full frame camera factor and using the 135mm focal length lens to create great looking head shots. It has also been taught and handed down a couple generations as "golden rule". I like to think of it as, it just works instead of a rule. In MY ideal shooting scenarios I love to shoot head shots from a distance that an 85mm on a crop sensor allows me. This falls into my desired "perspective" and is what I like most of the time. With nothing else said, this is an attempt in itself to answer the OP on how I achieve my head shots. Like them or not, so be it. This has nothing to do with how good a certain lens is or how well I enjoy the optics from my 85mm Nikon glass. Although, that is a bonus. This has everything to do with "perspective" or acceptable "compression" with the 85mm on a crop sensor and getting it right, "In Camera". It relates to an ideal focal length for shooting in a variety of circumstances and also easy to work with in tight spaces and still give best results. So, when I refer to a wider angle lens as distorting the face, it is actually referring to the angle of the field of view. Telephoto would be to have a narrow angle and thus compresses the image. A compression that is more pleasing to my eye in head shots. Whatever it takes to shoot and get it right in camera and to please the masses is what I am going to recommend. I am not going to figure out a distance that is equal to my desired field of view to stand at and take pictures and then have it cropped in Photoshop to produce a head shot that is similar in distortion or compression values. There is no reason for that insanity and then try and legitimately help the OP. So, "In General"....I am not going to recommend shooting a head shot with anything less than an 85mm lens for a 35mm cropped sensor camera. This falls "In Line" with the mathematics of the traditional rule of a 135mm works well with the 35mm film camera days. So, a 135mm lens is ideal to shoot head shots on a full frame sensor and is basically close to the same as an 85mm on a 1.5 or 1.6 or 1.8 crop factor for effective head shots. The best plug and play lens to shoot good quality head shots time and time again. The money lens. The go to lens for head shots time and time again is the 85mm on a crop sensor. Everything else is simply a personal taste towards some other character creation or an attempt to fix something in camera, such as giving a different perspective on a long face or round face. So, my point is choosing the ideal lens to shoot head shots with on a crop sensor camera. Which is what I think the original post was going for in wanting to know. This is based on ideal circumstances in relationship to cropped and full sensors in the 35mm camera format. As mentioned, mine is the 85mm for crop sensors and 135mm for full. This opinion has been pretty much handed down from generations for what lens to use for head shots/portraits from the 35mm form factor. Everything else is personal taste to be considered in creating character type head shots or correcting certain facial features in camera. Feb 01 13 07:18 pm Link Untitled Photographer wrote: I apologize, I skimmed previous posts. However, my opinion does not change. 85mm on an APS-C camera. On my D90, my 85mm 1.8 was bomb for headshots and more. On my FF cameras, I use my 80-200 2.8 and keep it longer than 140mm. I usually aim for 175mm or longer. The compressed perspective naturally smoothes the skin a lil - and generally shows the skin and shape of the head better. Feb 01 13 09:23 pm Link Marty McBride wrote: 85mm on a FF camera is too close. Ylou'll get warped cheekbones/browbones/more easily, and see every blemish & red-zone. I don't say that from reading about it or hearing others say it, I say it from learned experience. I usually do practically nothing to my images after converting them with appropriate preset applied in LR3, with a special mention of how I rarely need to smooth skin, even when finishing more glamorous images. Feb 01 13 09:33 pm Link An 85mm lens has the Perspective of an 85mm lens no matter what the sensor or film size. The angle of acceptance changes but the perspective doesn't!! So it may be the perfect head shot lens with any sensor. Feb 01 13 09:39 pm Link Personality Imaging wrote: The perspective doesn't change, the distance-to-subject does. Drastically, in most cases. This is what we're referring to by the crude & non-technical term "Compressed Perspective". Old-assed debate, relating predominantly to terminology. To get the same framing, one needs to stand 1.5 times father back with his D300 than he does with his D3. I'd link threads with links citing this, but my white ass is in bed atm. Night! Feb 01 13 10:18 pm Link Sigma 85 1.4 (@ 1.4 ) on a full frame 5D:  85 works for me Feb 01 13 10:25 pm Link The 85mm 1.8D is awesome on a crop sensor and can do headshots well. On a full frame a fixed lens choice for me would be the 135mm. I dream about owning that lens. Feb 01 13 10:49 pm Link I use 180mm at f2 when room allows for it. Compromise with 85mm at f1.5. All prime lenses on a full frame sensor. Besides the room given to work in dictating lens used, the desired DOF also determines what lens is the flavour for a shoot. Feb 01 13 11:15 pm Link The Space Cowboy wrote: agreed; I discovered I hated the look of my headshots with the 85. They were just... a little rounded at the front of the face. A little too prominent. Feb 02 13 03:48 am Link I swear I just stepped away from the computer for a few minutes..... and  Feb 02 13 06:10 am Link Just for conversation here are a couple I shot this week with a Canon 5D MkII in natural light with an Canon 85mm. Dollar for dollar the best lens I have including sever "L" series lenses.   Feb 02 13 06:17 am Link Canon 5DII and 85 1.2  Feb 02 13 08:06 am Link Andrew Thomas Evans wrote: I agree with you. I personally like 100 at least to 135mm or more for headshots. The 85mm is usually a fast lens and is practical but on a full frame sensor it is a very short telephoto. The standard 50mm lens which has a 46 degrees angle of view and is touted as representative to human eyesight. It is only in the angle of view which is misleading. The one on one ratio is obtained with a 68 to 70 degrees lens. 85 mm is barely above that. It's not a real telephoto. Feb 02 13 08:37 am Link Untitled Photographer wrote: The 85mm lens is a great lens but for head shots I prefer a bit more on a full frame sensor with no magnification factor. Something in the 100 to 135 range or a bit more. If your camera gives you a 1.5X factor, then your 85mm is around 130 mm which is perfect. Without that factor it is more of a portrait lens, some cropping is needed. Feb 02 13 08:40 am Link PaulHomsyPhotography wrote: I meant 68 to 70 mm lens, not degrees. sorry. Feb 02 13 08:43 am Link Great thread btw! Feb 02 13 10:58 am Link to be honest it can be all...even with a 24 mm you can use for head shots, just like a 300...it depends what you want to express....all lens questions start from "what do i want to express", and follow your taste... that said, you can not imply redefine a 50 mm as a 85 for cropped sensors...even as the view-angle wold be the same you would need to reposition yourself and therefore the perspective would change...perspective is about physical position, not about lens choice Feb 02 13 11:39 am Link Feb 02 13 11:58 am Link Daniel Sulla wrote: +1 (except old) Feb 02 13 12:08 pm Link Besides all other factors that might come into play, it's as simple as this: if you put a 50mm lens on a 1.5 crop sensor, you're shooting at 75mm. Period. And that of course is not the same as 85mm on full frame. Period. It's almost like using a tele converter. Almost. However, there is a slight difference in shooting on a crop sensor at 70mm = 105mm or shooting a 105mm prime on full frame. All full frame lenses where calculated to be used on a 35mm window (film or sensor). That's the look and feel you get. If you're trying to get that same look and feel by using a shorter lens on a crop sensor, you're cheating and you might be disappointed that trying to bend physical laws doesn't look the same. Bottom line: as a 35mm film shooter before the digital days, I never liked what the crop sensors did. So, I finally got my Nikon D800 last year and I went back to mostly prime lenses. The only zoom lenses that I can accept are fixed f-stop lenses like my 70-200mm VR/2.8. However, even that great zoom lens is physically not perfect, as they say the 200mm is not really 200mm. Why? Because it's a zoom, and you can only bend physical laws so much without compromising too much on price and weight. Even the best zoom lens has it's sweet spot at a certain focal length and f-stop combo. Feb 02 13 12:46 pm Link Herman van Gestel wrote: If the angle of view is the same, then you don't need to reposition yourself. Feb 02 13 01:02 pm Link If I use an 85 f/1.4 on the D800 and use large/fine jpeg (no NEF to keep this simple) I get an 7360x4912px - ~ 18mb image with all the Cream Machine smoothy stuff the 85 f/1.4's known for. Given all the talk here on it's more than a focal length; If I crop into the picture during pp at the crop factor of a DX camera/lens (1.5x or 127.5mm) it produces an image of 4800x3200. Do I retain the 'creaminess'? Do I lose anything? /stir mode Feb 02 13 01:10 pm Link Herman van Gestel wrote: for crying out loud, did you just skim through the whole thread? this has been covered over and over again. assuming a crop factor that gives a 50mm lens roughly the same angle of view as a 85mm on ff, why would you need to reposition yourself? no change in angle of view = no change in position needed to get the same shot. Feb 02 13 01:28 pm Link CP_ wrote: ..strangely enough will happen unconsciously in most cases Feb 02 13 01:28 pm Link JET Photo Works wrote: You're forgetting 105. Feb 02 13 01:38 pm Link |
