Is a 50mm lens worth it for portraits?

[Vtec44]

I use my 50mm f1.4 on a full frame 98.76% of the time for. It's very versatile. I also have a 35 f1.4, 85 f1.4, 105 f2.8, and a 70-200 f2.8 VR2 but always come back to my 50mm.

 

[Frank F.]

My point earlier was:

If you want to keep a good geometry in a portrait, keep your distance of 2 to 3 meters independent of you focal length.
A wide angle lens can tempt you to get much nearer to the person which then accounts for "big nose syndrom". A long tele can tempt you to go far far back which results in a "flat nose syndrom".

Also the idea of a portrait seems to differ:

Head and shoulders(business portrait)? Then you need a small to medium angle of view like in a 58mm on DX or 85mm on FX.

Environmental (guy at piano, keyboard and face)? 24mm on DX or 35mm on FX are you friend.

Extemly Environmetal (Onassis sitting on a container stowed on a huge container ship, person size 3 cm in a newspaper double spread)? Go far back & high, take a large format camera and a light wide angle, say 120mm on 4x5 qinch.

 

[OGsPhotography]

Welcome back Derrel.

 

[photo1x1.com]

My point earlier was:

If you want to keep a good geometry in a portrait, keep your distance of 2 to 3 meters independent of you focal length.
A wide angle lens can tempt you to get much nearer to the person which then accounts for "big nose syndrom". A long tele can tempt you to go far far back which results in a "flat nose syndrom".

Also the idea of a portrait seems to differ:

Head and shoulders(business portrait)? Then you need a small to medium angle of view like in a 58mm on DX or 85mm on FX.

Environmental (guy at piano, keyboard and face)? 24mm on DX or 35mm on FX are you friend.

Extemly Environmetal (Onassis sitting on a container stowed on a huge container ship, person size 3 cm in a newspaper double spread)? Go far back & high, take a large format camera and a light wide angle, say 120mm on 4x5 qinch.

You make a valid point! I guess it is time to make it even more complicated, when talking about lenses and portraiture (to make it easy in the end) .
I think there is no real portrait focal length that works for every portrait. When talking about "big nose syndrome", etc.. Some people have a big nose, others big ears, some are bold, some have hairs not so beautiful hair. Every little aspect of a face sometimes asks for a different focal length, if you want to make emphasize one part of the face (well, or get the attantion away from another part). Sometimes it is better to get a bigger nose rather than getting even more attention to ears, or missing hair. But I hardly ever think photographers are that critical, because more often than not you are limited by the space you can photograph in.
So in the end every lens between 50mm and 200mm is perfect. That said, 50mm 1.8 is usually the cheapest really good lens you can get from any manufacturer.
The crop factor will keep you at a distance to the "model" which some models prefer, but that depends on your skills to talk and communicate with your customers. The latter is one of the most important things in portrait photography, maybe even more than any lens - make them feel comfortable and you nail the shot, no matter how near or far away you are. The majority of people enters the room, telling you that they are not photogenic and how bad they look on images. This is usually where the fun starts, and you can raise their first smile.
AND: it is much easier to get comfortable with your clients when you work as a team with an assistant (usually NOT somebody of their surrounding because people usually don´t like to be photographed when somebody is present that they know).

 

[Frank F.]

I tell them that there are no unphotogenic people, only bad photographers and that my aim is to not be one of those.

My Highlight moment was in a 4 days consecutive portrait job an elderly lady came up to me and said: "It needed 74 years till someone took a picture of me that I like. Thank you."

Yes, model interaction is it, but keeping your distance for good proportions is also important.

Perspective and Geometrical distortion are 0% lens dependend. That is what most people really do not understand.

Lenses make up for lens disortion, crop and drawing including bokeh.

Now that we have confused the TO enough, I will show some real world examples of what the 1.8/50G can do, from dreamy macro shots to architecture. The 163 Euros I paid for it have been a real bargain.

 

[Frank F.]

Now that we have confused the TO enough, I will show some real world examples of what the 1.8/50G can do, from dreamy macro shots to architecture. The 163 Euros I paid for it have been a real bargain.

All were taken with a D600 (currently used for 750 Euro @ebay) and the AF-S 1.8/50G (currently 200 Euros new @amazon)

1) dreamy rendering in the near field for flowers etc @f=2.0

2) Highly detailed rendering @f=4.0

3) Bokeh, yes, but not smashing @f=2.0

Overall this is a very sharp lens with highly detailed, soft rendering that can later be edited to high contrast if wished for.

In portraiture the highly detailed softness can be a real winner.

 

[Frank F.]

And last but not least. A portrait and a group shot both with 1.8/50G...

Technical: Nikon D3 (current used price at 800 Euros)

 

[JonA_CT]

Since the OP mentioned getting pictures of his family, I'll throw my two cents in too, since a majority of what I use my camera for that purpose.

When I had an cropped sensor camera, I used my 50mm lens a lot, especially outside. It was fast and sharp. When it came time to move inside though, at least in my house, I found the working distances quite limiting, and I ended up using something else most of time (either a 24mm F2.8 or my standard zoom), even with bad lighting. I've convinced a couple friends to throw down the cash on a nice camera after showing them how much nicer the photos are than with a phone, and I've always recommended to them the 35mm DX lens just because I think it is far easier to use.

I also have a young child (my daughter is 15 months), and even with my full frame camera, I find myself going wider a lot of the time just because of how close she wants to be to me. But I also don't mind the perspective distortion from a wide-angle lens close up with kids...to me it makes them look bigger than life, which certainly fits my daughter.

 

[Tbehl1214]

...the 50mm lens would be the equivalent of 75mm...

As a point of order, this is not totally correct. The 50mm lens will give you the same field of view as that of a 75mm on an FF sensor, but it will still render the image as a 50mm lens. Focal length is focal length and doesn't change regardless of the camera's sensor size. The advantage of an FF lens on a DX body is that the smaller sensor will only use less of the edges of the lens (the area where distortion and softness is most noticeable).

Distortion in portaits is caused by to close a subject distance, not by focal length...

Yes and no. A shorter focal length will impart less distortion when used at greater subject-to-camera distances, but the problem is that the greater the subject-to-camera distance, smaller the subject is in the frame. A 24mm lens used at 3m is going to provide a MUCH smaller subject in the frame than a 50 or greater.

I would suggest not buying anything at the moment. I think what you need to do first is actually determine WHY you're experiencing issues with your current kit. The two lenses you have are both verycapable, especially when used at middle apertures and focal lengths. Post some of your images here along with full EXIF data and let's see if we can't see where the cause of the problem lays.

Thank you. I have another post on here trying to figure out why my photos are not clear. They look clear, but when I zoom in they are very blurry. I've been practicing a lot and trying to incorporate everyone advice. Here are a few I took of my sons early this morning. (I have not edited them in any way...these are just RAW files from my camera that I saved to a software so they would compress a bit for uploading purposes. As can see, they are a bit dark.)


Okay so the information for Jamisen B is:
(it won't let me copy/paste...grrr)
Focal length: 55mm
Exposure time: 0.005s (1/200)
F number: f/4.5
ISO: 200
White balance: Auto
There are a few more categories, but not sure those are helpful or not? Thought I would check since I have to type all this out.

I did not see anything about focus, but I do remember trying to get the focus point in my screen on one of their eyes.

 

[Designer]

It would be nice if we could see where the focus was. I could not read the EXIF data either.

Maybe try an uncompressed JPG file.

Or if someone wants to see the Raw file, you can send it via e-mail or put it in dropbox or some site that supports full size raw files.

 

[photo1x1.com]

...the 50mm lens would be the equivalent of 75mm...

As a point of order, this is not totally correct. The 50mm lens will give you the same field of view as that of a 75mm on an FF sensor, but it will still render the image as a 50mm lens. Focal length is focal length and doesn't change regardless of the camera's sensor size. The advantage of an FF lens on a DX body is that the smaller sensor will only use less of the edges of the lens (the area where distortion and softness is most noticeable).

Distortion in portaits is caused by to close a subject distance, not by focal length...

Yes and no. A shorter focal length will impart less distortion when used at greater subject-to-camera distances, but the problem is that the greater the subject-to-camera distance, smaller the subject is in the frame. A 24mm lens used at 3m is going to provide a MUCH smaller subject in the frame than a 50 or greater.

I would suggest not buying anything at the moment. I think what you need to do first is actually determine WHY you're experiencing issues with your current kit. The two lenses you have are both verycapable, especially when used at middle apertures and focal lengths. Post some of your images here along with full EXIF data and let's see if we can't see where the cause of the problem lays.

Thank you. I have another post on here trying to figure out why my photos are not clear. They look clear, but when I zoom in they are very blurry. I've been practicing a lot and trying to incorporate everyone advice. Here are a few I took of my sons early this morning. (I have not edited them in any way...these are just RAW files from my camera that I saved to a software so they would compress a bit for uploading purposes. As you can see, they are a bit dark.)

Are you using a specific focus point, or are you letting the camera decide?
I'm on an iPad right now, so not the best to judge, but in the first ime the focus is on the door left to your son, on the darkest image, it is the left (rear) eye, and in the third it seems to be on the front shoulder. It doesn't look like a clear front or back focus issue of your camera/lens, that's why I ask for the focus point.

 

[tirediron]

Thank you. I have another post on here trying to figure out why my photos are not clear. They look clear, but when I zoom in they are very blurry. I've been practicing a lot and trying to incorporate everyone advice. Here are a few I took of my sons early this morning. (I have not edited them in any way...these are just RAW files from my camera that I saved to a software so they would compress a bit for uploading purposes. As you can see, they are a bit dark.)

These are all missed focus. Nothing more. You've been shooting at larger apertures and/or longer focal lengths and it's caught up with you. In 'Jamisen_B' the child's face is soft, but the red boards behind him are [relatively] sharp. In Grayson_B1 you an see that parts of the child's shirt are sharper than the face. In 'Grayson_B2' you can clearly see the fall-off of focus from the child's left shoulder to the tip of his right finger.

When doing this sort of work, I prefer to use a single AF point and place it over the nearest eye. As well, use an aperture that will provide sufficient depth-of-field to allow for a bit movement. I would probably want to be at f5.6-8 on an 85mm lens for this.

 

[chuasam]

I use my 50mm f1.4 on a full frame 98.76% of the time for. It's very versatile. I also have a 35 f1.4, 85 f1.4, 105 f2.8, and a 70-200 f2.8 VR2 but always come back to my 50mm.

I have the Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.4G, honestly I think it is barely adequate. I use it lots though. I'm deciding whether to sell it and get the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART or sell my 85mm f/1.8G and get the 105mm f/1.4E

 

[Peeb]

I use my 50mm f1.4 on a full frame 98.76% of the time for. It's very versatile. I also have a 35 f1.4, 85 f1.4, 105 f2.8, and a 70-200 f2.8 VR2 but always come back to my 50mm.

I have the Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.4G, honestly I think it is barely adequate. I use it lots though. I'm deciding whether to sell it and get the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART or sell my 85mm f/1.8G and get the 105mm f/1.4E

Barely adequate in what way?

What are you seeking to improve?

 

[Frank F.]

I have the Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.4G, honestly I think it is barely adequate. I use it lots though. I'm deciding whether to sell it and get the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART or sell my 85mm f/1.8G and get the 105mm f/1.4E

I sold mine after ~ 100.000+ clicks because it was not adequate for HiRes (very good on the D3 though) and got myself the 1.8/50G ... much better. Now I am waiting for a used 1.4/58G to replace it.