Recommend a wide angle for F mount

[big_lan]

I'm using a 50mm 1.8 and i'm pretty ok with it less the fact it can't really go for full body potraits in a confined space/studio


can someone recommend me a good wide angle lens?

[Hobbesyeo]

Landscape: 12-24mm

Portraits: I'm not sure but the 17-55 works for me.

[advrider]

must it be OEM? why not try tokina?

[catchlights]

Nikon 18~70mm kit lens is good enough.

do note using a wide angle lens to take full length portraits need to pay a lot of attentions.
most of the time it is not advisable unless you know what effect you want to create.

and if a studio can't use a 50mm on DSLR to shoot full length even the subject have to stand against the background, the shooting area is too small, should drop the idea of doing full length instead.

[ortega]

i agree with Catchlights

1. the 18-70 is good for studio work, you need to stop down for the strobes
2. WA in confined space - full lenght portraits gives you interesting effects

solution look for a different studio
shoot film
buy D3

[jnet6]

Originally Posted by ortega i agree with Catchlights 1. the 18-70 is good for studio work, you need to stop down for the strobes 2. WA in confined space - full lenght portraits gives you interesting effects solution look for a different studio shoot film buy D3

maybe can plus the new 24-70 too

[Scaglietti]

Originally Posted by big_lan I'm using a 50mm 1.8 and i'm pretty ok with it less the fact it can't really go for full body potraits in a confined space/studio can someone recommend me a good wide angle lens?

Wide angles ara usually not suitable for normal portraits shot. The proportion of the body will be out due to perspective distortion. Don't use wideangles, unless, distortion is what you deliberatly wanted.

General rule for me, the shooting distance should be at least 2 times the height of the subject as a bare minimum. If you want to shoot full body of 1.6m, you should be more than 3m away. (That would work out to be the angle of view of a lens with focal length >45mm on DX format.) If you want do 1/2 body (say 0.6m), you should be at least 1.2m away.

Therefore, 45mm or 50mm is probably the shortest you can go on the DX format for full body shot without significant distortion of the human proportion.

If you want to do a proper portrait and your studio size is too small, don't do full body shot or get a larger studio.

BC

[Scaglietti]

Originally Posted by ortega i agree with Catchlights 1. the 18-70 is good for studio work, you need to stop down for the strobes 2. WA in confined space - full lenght portraits gives you interesting effects solution look for a different studio shoot film buy D3

Ehhh... film and D3 does not solve perspective distortion problem. Perspective distortion is a function of distance and not the FOV.

BC

[ortega]

Originally Posted by Scaglietti Ehhh... film and D3 does not solve perspective distortion problem. Perspective distortion is a function of distance and not the FOV. BC

using film or FX, the 50mm might be able to get the full lenght shot that the TS is looking for in his studio.

thus minimising the interesting effect from using a WA lens

btw i did not mention anything about perspective distortion, so maybe we are not on the same wavelenght

[Scaglietti]

Originally Posted by ortega using film or FX, the 50mm might be able to get the full lenght shot that the TS is looking for in his studio. thus minimising the interesting effect from using a WA lens btw i did not mention anything about perspective distortion, so maybe we are not on the same wavelenght

I see...

But geting a 35mm lens on the DX format will be cheaper leh... gives about the same FOV as the 50mm on FX and same perspective distortion too. Lens distortion should not be too bad with the 35mm.

BC

[ortega]

Originally Posted by Scaglietti I see... But geting a 35mm lens on the DX format will be cheaper leh... gives about the same FOV as the 50mm on FX and same perspective distortion too. Lens distortion should not be too bad with the 35mm. BC

actually the distortion of the 35mm on DX or FX is the same, since the lens is the same.
just that on DX some of it is cropped off.

so 35mm on DX does not equal 50mm on FX

[Scaglietti]

Originally Posted by ortega actually the distortion of the 35mm on DX or FX is the same, since the lens is the same. just that on DX some of it is cropped off. so 35mm on DX does not equal 50mm on FX

Yup, you've got a point with cropping off the distortion at peripheral, but doesn't that make using DX format better?

FOV is the same (or almost the same) with 35mm and 50mm. When shooting distance is the same (the same studio size), the perspective distortion is the same (whether using 35mm or 50mm) . What is different is maybe the DOF and other lens properties.

BC

[ortega]

Originally Posted by Scaglietti Yup, you've got a point with cropping off the distortion at peripheral, but doesn't that make using DX format better? FOV is the same (or almost the same) with 35mm and 50mm. When shooting distance is the same (the same studio size), the perspective distortion is the same (whether using 35mm or 50mm) . What is different is maybe the DOF and other lens properties. BC

yes and no, it depends on what the photographer wants

I am not a technical photographer, so i cannot really give you answers on technicalities, sorry

i just know my equipment and what it can and cannot do, then apply it to my images.
so from my limited knowledge, the 50mm is somewhat close to the FOV of the human eye
and 35mm is wider and with slight distortion due to camera to subject distance, as you have already mentioned.

normally people do not want to look fatter and prefer to look slimmer
so less distortion (up to a point) would be better, no?

on DX or FX, the lens will display the same properties
just that on DX the edges will be cropped off.
(good for tele or macro shots, as it is easier to fill the frame)

[Scaglietti]

Originally Posted by ortega i just know my equipment and what it can and cannot do, then apply it to my images. so from my limited knowledge, the 50mm is somewhat close to the FOV of the human eye and 35mm is wider and with slight distortion due to camera to subject distance, as you have already mentioned.

I am not trying to be technical, but it helps me understand the problems with my picture.

The perpective distortion is not dependent on the lens. As long as you maintain the subject distance, you will control the perspective distortion. Let's say you use a 50mm to take a full body shot filling the whole frame. If you stay at the same position, but switch to a wide angle, say 20mm. Now you get the subject smaller in the centre of the frame. If you were to crop and blow up the photo to like what you have shot with the 50mm, you will get exactly the same proportion and perspective distortion.

Therefore, if shooting from the same distance, a shot with 50mm on the FX cropped to DX format will have the same proportion and perspective distortion as using a 35mm lens(or 33mm to be exact) on DX format.

Therefore, I control my shooting distance rather than the lens focal length.

BC

[ortega]

i don't think it works that way, but i'll do a test on the weekend

[Scaglietti]

Originally Posted by ortega i don't think it works that way, but i'll do a test on the weekend

It does... I thought about it and tested it myself. Try it out...

Wide angles can be use for portraits. For me, it is used usually when I want to include the background and surrounding into the photo. To control the distortion of the human proportion, I will maintain the shooting distance of 2 times the height of the subject to be captured (be half length or full length).


BC

[ortega]

won't that mean a lot of cropping to get the image bigger?
i'll do a simple test with an object this weekend

[Scaglietti]

Originally Posted by ortega won't that mean a lot of cropping to get the image bigger? i'll do a simple test with an object this weekend

If you use the extreme ends of teh 18-70mm, it is almost 4x. A 996x667 crop of the 18mm image should be equivalent to the 70mm full 10mp image from the D80.

BC

[Viewpoint]

I think it is true -- perspective is only dependent on camera to subject distance. I myself find this a very confusing topic (especially so with all these DX lenses) -- zac08 has kindly pointed me to this long thread/discussion in nikonians.org (ref: see post in this same forum on nyquist resolution).

http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCF...202/21219.html

The above thread is worth a read.

Rgds,

[ortega]

Originally Posted by Viewpoint I think it is true -- perspective is only dependent on camera to subject distance. I myself find this a very confusing topic (especially so with all these DX lenses) -- zac08 has kindly pointed me to this long thread/discussion in nikonians.org (ref: see post in this same forum on nyquist resolution). http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCF...202/21219.html The above thread is worth a read. Rgds,

wah, too log, i think i test better

use my 18-70 to test

camera to subject remains the same, camera mounted on tripod
stationary subject, say maybe a can drink

zoom to 70mm, focus, snap a picture, crop picture to just the can
zoom to 50mm, focus, snap a picture, crop picture to just the can
zoom to 35mm, focus, snap a picture, crop picture to just the can
zoom to 18mm, focus, snap a picture, crop picture to just the can

then post the results, after that we will know

only looking for perspective and distortion, don't expect nice composition, bokeh and lighting