Companies that make lenses would love to tell you that you've got to buy one lens for portraits and one lens for landscapes and five other lenses for four other things. I wonder why they want people to think that? 😉 (And yes in reality the correct answer is to get a 50 and then take a step forward or backward if you want to be closer or further away)
I started this video listening to you and thinking I also tend to shoot portraits wide and with a degree of fisheye. It was kind of a shock to hear you say you like the same! For myself as a street photographer and a former pro dance photographer, if I see what most people recommend to use and to edit, I tend to go the opposite direction. Following the crowd is no way to express yourself. Good video today, thanks!
I think the "shoot on the kit lens then examine your focal length meta data" is a great newcomer start. But a 50mm 1.8 is going to be very attractive because they are so cheap. Of course a new photographer might be on a crop sensor camera so we're back to 75-80mm equivalent with a 50mm. My first prime was a 35 on full frame and I loved it, but then I went to APS-C for awhile so the 24 became the standard lens.
yeah, i have a zoom lens for MFT that is equivalent of 28-280mm in the FF. After taking ~3-4k photos with it i noticed that around 80% is within 28-70mm range.
It's hard using a 28mm (18mm actually) for portraits but there's cropping when you didn't get close enough. 28mm forces you to be creative with it, because there's no way you could make a boring picture good, you have to do something to make it good. That's why i don't shoot portraits unless there's no other way to get the subject to do the stuff you want. That's why i love the people who go crazy in front of a camera 😊
I like your channel because you think outside the box. I’ve started shooting again after 30 years with my old Spotmatic’s. I use a Takumar 50, and have a 28 in my pocket. The 50 is great, but in the city it can sometimes be very tight and if I want to get a building in or I’m in a confined space the 28 becomes really useful, it also can be used for street as well.
Can confirm, lenses complicated. Hence why besides the meme lens that is the Holga HL-N 60mm, the only other two lenses I own are a Nikkor 18-55 and a Nikkor 55-200. Even old F-mount DX lenses are still expensive for me, so kit lenses it is so I can figure out what focal lengths are really useful to me before I decide what primes I want. So far on the "probable" list though is 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm.
In a portrait, as long as the eyes are sharp, you can get away with murder. I’m a big fan of finding an acceptably sharp lens with beautiful Bokeh for portraits. The old “85mm” rule for portraits has outlived its usefulness. Pick the lens that fits your eye - for me that’s roughly 40mm equivalent. Next look at its character because character is crucial. Personally I’m not a fan of fisheye portraits - too much like looking in a funhouse mirror. But if that floats your boat - go with it.
I'm hoping to get an 85mm some time soon for nature and landscape photography. My favorite photos have come from my 28mm lens, although using it is not as fun as others. My preferred street photography lens is a 300mm reflex(Don't be a creep just taking peoples faces). I got the lens for nature which it is also good at. The lens that I like shooting the most is a 50mm. This may or may not change as I just picked up a 40mm lens, still in the "honeymoon" phase with it though. Shout out to the 35mm lens for taking photos around the house and at family get togethers. 300 also works for this somehow. Note: I use these focal lengths on both 135 format film cameras(what "Full Frame" is copying) and APS-C(which is copying ASP format film). I am not talking equivalences above. Just the true focal lengths of the glass. Note Note: My 300mm reflex and 40mm lenses only work on my APS-C digital cameras. All of my other lenses listed above work on both formats.
@@huntercreatesthings It is quite narrow. I could see some people struggling with it in that way. I almost just think and see in telephoto, so it works for me.
The 85mm on 35mm or FF is the way the human eye sees (compression i.e nose to ears) while the human eye field of view is 20mm. That's why it's (85mm) is recommended as a portrait lens. Plus it's about 2 stops faster than anything comparable.
I wrote a long comment, but I think UA-cam deleted it because of the citation links I included. I don't have the energy to rewrite all of that, but in short: * I believe the main reason is that 85mm minimises facial distortion. Shorter focal lengths make the face too narrow and vice versa. Most clients don't want a distorted face. 85 and 50 are only marginally different in this respect, so same/same. * Photos featured in this video are very very nice, but it may be a stretch to label them 'portraits' solely on the basis that the subjects are humans. * Of course you can get creative... But perhaps the more you do so, the more it moves away from being a portrait.
85mm is pretty close especially when one is used to using the 135mm or longer focal lengths. Also 85mm lenses are cheap nowadays esp from 3rd party manufacturers like Viltrox or Meike. But yeah just go with whatever lenses you want for portraiture works, I have a 20mm for fun moments. :P
So i shoot a lot of 85mm but i do work as a pro for both studio and wedding work so the call for what i would call your run of the mill typical portrait you cant beat (My) 85mm 1.2 it also creates Stunning headshots. But likewise for more creative shots that include more of a focus on location i shoot as wide as 14mm and everything in between i would go as far as to say there isnt an evert or form of photography you cant do on a 50mm it is the king of versatility and as such you can spend as little or as much as you like on one and create some stunning work and a lot of my more intimate portfolio work is taken on 50mm
My main photograph type that can make money is portrait Then I choose to use Sigma 10-20 F3.5(APSC) lens people around me call me a ediot but when on the field I was the one guy who dont have a small area problem that really nice and when we are in the studio who need blurry background? I really wonder that 10-20 should be a landscape lens but most thing I shoot on this lens is portrait and macro lol
I also use the 10-20 but @ 20 with 1.3x crop on apsc. It works for me too but its better for environmental portraits and the background blur feels not enough.
A "portrait" lens is whichever is on the camera when you take the photo.
This guy gets it
absolutely true 👍
Companies that make lenses would love to tell you that you've got to buy one lens for portraits and one lens for landscapes and five other lenses for four other things. I wonder why they want people to think that? 😉
(And yes in reality the correct answer is to get a 50 and then take a step forward or backward if you want to be closer or further away)
100%
I started this video listening to you and thinking I also tend to shoot portraits wide and with a degree of fisheye. It was kind of a shock to hear you say you like the same! For myself as a street photographer and a former pro dance photographer, if I see what most people recommend to use and to edit, I tend to go the opposite direction. Following the crowd is no way to express yourself. Good video today, thanks!
Glad you enjoyed!
I think the "shoot on the kit lens then examine your focal length meta data" is a great newcomer start. But a 50mm 1.8 is going to be very attractive because they are so cheap. Of course a new photographer might be on a crop sensor camera so we're back to 75-80mm equivalent with a 50mm. My first prime was a 35 on full frame and I loved it, but then I went to APS-C for awhile so the 24 became the standard lens.
For crop sensors I recommend a 28 - but for anyone looking to buy their first camera my pick is always full frame: Canon 5d ii
yeah, i have a zoom lens for MFT that is equivalent of 28-280mm in the FF. After taking ~3-4k photos with it i noticed that around 80% is within 28-70mm range.
It's hard using a 28mm (18mm actually) for portraits but there's cropping when you didn't get close enough. 28mm forces you to be creative with it, because there's no way you could make a boring picture good, you have to do something to make it good. That's why i don't shoot portraits unless there's no other way to get the subject to do the stuff you want. That's why i love the people who go crazy in front of a camera 😊
People going crazy for the camera is the best, nothing quite like it hahaha
@@huntercreatesthings absolutely agreed lol ✨
I like your channel because you think outside the box. I’ve started shooting again after 30 years with my old Spotmatic’s. I use a Takumar 50, and have a 28 in my pocket. The 50 is great, but in the city it can sometimes be very tight and if I want to get a building in or I’m in a confined space the 28 becomes really useful, it also can be used for street as well.
28 is the ultimate focal length
Maybe my favourite video of them all. Love the examples, great work.
Thanks!
50mm is my fav for portraits cos I get up and close to them. Makes for a more intimate shot.
For Sure!
Good stuff… I have however noticed a distinct lack of Yorkshire tea in your videos of late.
Will fix, thank you for bringing to my attention!
Can confirm, lenses complicated. Hence why besides the meme lens that is the Holga HL-N 60mm, the only other two lenses I own are a Nikkor 18-55 and a Nikkor 55-200. Even old F-mount DX lenses are still expensive for me, so kit lenses it is so I can figure out what focal lengths are really useful to me before I decide what primes I want. So far on the "probable" list though is 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm.
Those old nikkor zooms are super underrated imo
@@huntercreatesthings I'd love to get one of the higher range zooms, or the 70-200 F-2.8, but I got sticker shock. So probably primes first. XP
In a portrait, as long as the eyes are sharp, you can get away with murder. I’m a big fan of finding an acceptably sharp lens with beautiful Bokeh for portraits. The old “85mm” rule for portraits has outlived its usefulness. Pick the lens that fits your eye - for me that’s roughly 40mm equivalent. Next look at its character because character is crucial. Personally I’m not a fan of fisheye portraits - too much like looking in a funhouse mirror. But if that floats your boat - go with it.
40mm is one of my all time faves!
Hope you don't mind if I steal that first sentence when teaching people, the wording is absolutely phenomenal
This just resonated as I was thinking the same re whether I should buy a lens that it’s not commonly used in the field. Thank you
You're most welcome!
I'm hoping to get an 85mm some time soon for nature and landscape photography.
My favorite photos have come from my 28mm lens, although using it is not as fun as others.
My preferred street photography lens is a 300mm reflex(Don't be a creep just taking peoples faces). I got the lens for nature which it is also good at.
The lens that I like shooting the most is a 50mm. This may or may not change as I just picked up a 40mm lens, still in the "honeymoon" phase with it though.
Shout out to the 35mm lens for taking photos around the house and at family get togethers. 300 also works for this somehow.
Note: I use these focal lengths on both 135 format film cameras(what "Full Frame" is copying) and APS-C(which is copying ASP format film). I am not talking equivalences above. Just the true focal lengths of the glass.
Note Note: My 300mm reflex and 40mm lenses only work on my APS-C digital cameras. All of my other lenses listed above work on both formats.
I think I'd get vertigo trying to shoot a 300mm on a crop sensor hahahaha
@@huntercreatesthings It is quite narrow. I could see some people struggling with it in that way.
I almost just think and see in telephoto, so it works for me.
The 85mm on 35mm or FF is the way the human eye sees (compression i.e nose to ears) while the human eye field of view is 20mm. That's why it's (85mm) is recommended as a portrait lens. Plus it's about 2 stops faster than anything comparable.
I wrote a long comment, but I think UA-cam deleted it because of the citation links I included.
I don't have the energy to rewrite all of that, but in short:
* I believe the main reason is that 85mm minimises facial distortion. Shorter focal lengths make the face too narrow and vice versa. Most clients don't want a distorted face.
85 and 50 are only marginally different in this respect, so same/same.
* Photos featured in this video are very very nice, but it may be a stretch to label them 'portraits' solely on the basis that the subjects are humans.
* Of course you can get creative... But perhaps the more you do so, the more it moves away from being a portrait.
85mm is pretty close especially when one is used to using the 135mm or longer focal lengths. Also 85mm lenses are cheap nowadays esp from 3rd party manufacturers like Viltrox or Meike.
But yeah just go with whatever lenses you want for portraiture works, I have a 20mm for fun moments. :P
20 is a super underrated focal length imo!
Great video! Totally agree with you.
Thanks for watching!
So i shoot a lot of 85mm but i do work as a pro for both studio and wedding work so the call for what i would call your run of the mill typical portrait you cant beat (My) 85mm 1.2 it also creates Stunning headshots.
But likewise for more creative shots that include more of a focus on location i shoot as wide as 14mm and everything in between i would go as far as to say there isnt an evert or form of photography you cant do on a 50mm it is the king of versatility and as such you can spend as little or as much as you like on one and create some stunning work and a lot of my more intimate portfolio work is taken on 50mm
it's actually insane how much you can do with a 50, feels like cheating sometimes hahaha
“The fun of photography is doing it.” Amen, amen, amen!!
Exactly!
My main photograph type that can make money is portrait
Then I choose to use Sigma 10-20 F3.5(APSC) lens people around me call me a ediot but when on the field I was the one guy who dont have a small area problem that really nice and when we are in the studio who need blurry background?
I really wonder that 10-20 should be a landscape lens but most thing I shoot on this lens is portrait and macro lol
If it works, and you think it looks good - go for it!
I also use the 10-20 but @ 20 with 1.3x crop on apsc. It works for me too but its better for environmental portraits and the background blur feels not enough.
Great points! Thank you!
Glad you enjoyed it!
✨ Creative Juice Machine ✨
That's the key
24mm stays on my camera, 50 in the bag, recently got a 28-105
Very nice
there is no such thing as a portrait, landscape or street photography lens
but there is always a wildlife lens lol
not me hopping off the safari to "zoom with my feet" 💀
Thank you
You're welcome!
Hi
Hey
@@huntercreatesthings I’m in your walls
Hey Bro Please Make a content about street photography
Friday next week 👀
@@huntercreatesthings Thanks I Really appreciated your works,