As many already replied a short telephoto is best for headshots but wider is ok for full body and/or environmental. On my APSC DSLR I used mostly a fast 35 or 50. Now on mFT my choice is the Olympus 45 or Sigma 60. Today I used an older 35 macro (equivalent to 70) so that was still short telephoto.
Marked as spam
Posted by Luc Moreau
Answered on 16/10/2016 22:51
Do you find noticeable distortion with the shorter lenses?
For me, it depends on the occasion. When I go for street portraits, I prefer a rather wide lens, sometimes even the 18mm (=28mm equivalent) 1:2 Fujinon is good – but I need to get really close to the subject.
For more “planned” shots, I prefer a manual focus, classical prime lens, the Voightlander Nokton 58mm F1.4 which gives the (slightly strange) 92mm on the APS-C Fujifilm X-E2.
My preference is for a light 85mm Nikkor lens I picked up second-hand a few years ago – although I have a lovely 105mm lens as well. Both are quite flattering to the person being photographed as they are a little longer than 50mm (which is equivalent to normal eyesight vew).
I personally love my Canon EF 40mm f/2.8. It’s a small and light pancake lens, so easy to carry around… but most importantly it has a large aperture which is perfect for portraits. When taking portraits, the lens is comfortable for moving around the model and trying different angles, and in closeups it’s easy to connect with the person which influences the result as well. The lack of zoom is not a bother at all since you can influence the shooting conditions and guide the model, and the photos turn out excellent quality with very little distortions. The lens is very affordable, and when used in a full frame camera, it’s even a good choice for travel photos and in daily use… I often take it for walks.
Do you find noticeable distortion with the shorter lenses?