macro for protraits?

misol · Jul 17, 2009

Anyone using macro lenses for portraits? Could you post some examples?

benhasajeep · Jul 17, 2009

A macro is no different than any other lens at that length. Just a macro allows closer focusing than a normal lens. So if you have a 60mm macro, you will get the same results as a 60mm normal lens (as long as the quality of the lenses are the same). Same goes for a 105mm and 180mm. The differnece lies when you get in very close to say take a picture of just the subjects eye. The macro will allow you to fill the frame with the eye. The normal lens may only allow you to get close enough to fill 3/4 of the frame. But at portrait lengths, there is no difference.

Have to remember with portraits the closer you get the more chance you will get unwanted distortions of prominent features like noses. The longer the lens the less the distortion but deppending on how close you get, it will appear.

JerryPH · Jul 17, 2009

All the time. I use the Sigma 105mm F/2.8 lens.

It's basically just a really sharp 105mm lens that is good for portraits with an awesome macro lens.

This is a macro shot of a memory chip (well as single cell of a memory chip... lol)

I know it's not a macro, but I am not at home, and I do not have any portraits of this lens on flickr. But this at least serves as an idea.

EhJsNe · Jul 17, 2009

I dont see why not!

A macro lens will focus anywhere between 1:1 and infinity....so as long as your subject is somewhere in between, you can get the shot you want!

misol · Jul 17, 2009

thanks. I remember reading somewhere that macros can be really great for portraits because of the versatility they bring. I was wondering if more people found that to be true.

JerryPH · Jul 17, 2009

Macro functionality doesn't define the level of quality that it can take a portrait. Some of the best portrait lenses IN THE WORLD do not have macro capabilities.

A macro can get closer to a face, but like how close does one need to go to get a portrait? With the Sigma 105mm Macro, I can get to within 12 inches and make that zit on the bride's nose look like a volcano... if that is what you want, a macro is for you... lol

What makes a lens a good portrait lens are:

1. it is over 70mm and therefore doesn't introduce visible distortions to the face also known as chipmunk cheeks). 85mm and up make great portrait lenses.

2. it is SHARP

3. it is CLEAR

4. it is CONTRASTY

5. it doesn't introduce distortion or other artifacts like chromatic aberration, pin cushioning and so on

6. it focuses quickly and ACCURATELY

7. it is FAST. It has a constant aperture of F/2.8 or bigger (numerically smaller).

These traits more than anything else define a good portrait lens.

EhJsNe · Jul 18, 2009

JerryPH said:
Macro functionality doesn't define the level of quality that it can take a portrait. Some of the best portrait lenses IN THE WORLD do not have macro capabilities.

A macro can get closer to a face, but like how close does one need to go to get a portrait? With the Sigma 105mm Macro, I can get to within 12 inches and make that zit on the bride's nose look like a volcano... if that is what you want, a macro is for you... lol

What makes a lens a good portrait lens are:

1. it is over 70mm and therefore doesn't introduce visible distortions to the face also known as chipmunk cheeks). 85mm and up make great portrait lenses.

2. it is SHARP

3. it is CLEAR

4. it is CONTRASTY

5. it doesn't introduce distortion or other artifacts like chromatic aberration, pin cushioning and so on

6. it focuses quickly and ACCURATELY

7. it is FAST. It has a constant aperture of F/2.8 or bigger (numerically smaller).

These traits more than anything else define a good portrait lens.

Soft focus is an option for portraits also, unless portrait photographers enjoy paying a lot for lenses that just plain suck :lol:

(those camera companies must have AMAZING people working in marketing, the company design a lens and it doesnt focus to great, so sell it as an amazing "Soft focus" portrait lens and add a few hundred dollars to what its worth

)

Well I guess you would want sharp....then add any softening in PP, or use a soft focus filter....whatever works......most the time you dont want to use soft focus on male portraits....the soft focus gives the picture a "dreamy" look....heres an example I found on google images: http://static-p4.fotolia.com/jpg/00/10/76/17/400_F_10761798_1YMu2XdqC95HrmW3BSSplCaJLgRl7fjz.jpg Ive got a picture of my aunt that uses the soft focus a little better, I can send that to you if you really want a better example.

JerryPH · Jul 18, 2009

One always wants a lens that is sharp. You can take a sharp pic and make it out of focus in post or in camera... but you cannot take an out of focus shot and make it sharp.

Alpha · Jul 18, 2009

You've all forgotten the most important defining characteristic of a Macro lens aside from the ability to focus 1:1 or greater. Macro lenses are designed to flatten perspective. That can be a downside to using them for portraits.

JerryPH · Jul 18, 2009

... only if you are trying to take portraits at macro distances otherwise, that flattening effect is not visible.

Alpha · Jul 18, 2009

What makes you think that?

kundalini · Jul 18, 2009

^^ What makes YOU think that. I mean the Nikkor 105, for instance, is a killer macro lense IMO, but if I'm shooting it as a 105mm prime, why is there a "flattening perspective"? Something I've never noticed. As Ricky often said..... "You got some 'splaining to do".

Garbz · Jul 18, 2009

Alpha the Nikkor 60mm Macro is no different at length than any other 60mm length. I'm not sure what you mean by flattening perspective.

One thing though is Macros are often corrected to be sharpest at 1:1. My Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 AF D is not sharp at all and definitely no where near as sharp as a 70-200 f/2.8 beyond about 6 meters.

Alpha · Jul 18, 2009

The perspective flattening in macro lenses is, by design, not much different than the flatting one would see in, say, an enlarging lens. Is the effect sometimes negligible due to sensor/film size? Yes. But it's there.

Garbz · Jul 19, 2009

The only way I see this happening is through a change of focal length or by a change of tilt of the image. Not sure about all macros but the 105mm macro at 1:1 extends it's focal length when focusing to macro. If this is the perspective flattening you are talking about then it would not be present at normal working distances.