# can anyone advise me what are the lens suitable for model shooting?



## junqi (Mar 23, 2015)

Dear all,

can anyone advise me what are the lens suitable for model shooting?

currently i own a kit lens *EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM *and *EF50mm f/1.8 II.
*
i am deciding to buy *EF100mm f/2 USM*.

what you guys think?

kindly advise.

thank you.


----------



## qleak (Mar 23, 2015)

junqi said:


> Dear all,
> 
> can anyone advise me what are the lens suitable for model shooting?
> 
> ...



Your camera can be important in this decision since the format determines how each lens behaves both in field of view and depth of field. 

Also it would be helpful to know what sort of shots you are planning and how much space you have to work.


----------



## jaomul (Mar 23, 2015)

For inside studio, or for outside?, with controlled lighting or natural lights.
Your existing 18-135 is ok for studio with flash as you'll probably be at f8 anyway so it should be very sharp etc.

100 is very long on a crop, so you'll need big working distance. You'll have to expand uses to get better informed


----------



## junqi (Mar 23, 2015)

jaomul said:


> For inside studio, or for outside?, with controlled lighting or natural lights.
> Your existing 18-135 is ok for studio with flash as you'll probably be at f8 anyway so it should be very sharp etc.
> 
> 100 is very long on a crop, so you'll need big working distance. You'll have to expand uses to get better informed



how about in studio and outside? with controlled lighting.

what do you mean by big working distance ?


----------



## junqi (Mar 23, 2015)

qleak said:


> junqi said:
> 
> 
> > Dear all,
> ...



i using canon 70d. prefer portrait shot.

thank you.


----------



## fjrabon (Mar 23, 2015)

60mm in a crop body is my favorite head portrait shot length. 

If you're working with lights, the kit lens you have is probably fine. The studio I used to work in used 28-135 kit lenses for the inside photos that used strobes. Where you may need a lens upgrade is if you're working outside without flash.


----------



## jaomul (Mar 23, 2015)

Put your existing lens to 100. See how far you now need to be to get a headshot or a half body shot. Are you likely to be this far in general. 

If you have or are controlling lighting you don't really need more than you have where lenses are concerned. You could of course add the 100 due when required getting smaller dof that your zooms won't allow. I would however recommend the 85mm f1.8 over the 100 due the crop factors etc. Just my opinion


----------



## qleak (Mar 23, 2015)

jaomul said:


> Put your existing lens to 100. See how far you now need to be to get a headshot or a half body shot. Are you likely to be this far in general.
> 
> If you have or are controlling lighting you don't really need more than you have where lenses are concerned. You could of course add the 100 due when required getting smaller dof that your zooms won't allow. I would however recommend the 85mm f1.8 over the 100 due the crop factors etc. Just my opinion



I'd say you're unrepresented your opinion.  It is fairly agreed upon for honest head shots on full frame between 70-135 mm is ideal. 

On a 70d this is equivalent to approximately 44-85mm.

Of course if you're not doing head shots this needs to be adjusted.  Also if you don't care if the photo looks like the model you can go longer to flatten out the face more. 

I also agree 100 mm on the 70d is too long for most portraits.


----------



## junqi (Mar 23, 2015)

qleak said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > Put your existing lens to 100. See how far you now need to be to get a headshot or a half body shot. Are you likely to be this far in general.
> ...



how do you calculate that 70-135 is equivalent to 44-85mm base on my camera.

so it would be the best to choose 85mm 1.8 instead of 100mm?


----------



## qleak (Mar 23, 2015)

junqi said:


> qleak said:
> 
> 
> > jaomul said:
> ...



This link has the background info, and then some:

Digital Camera Sensor Sizes How it Influences Your Photography

The focal length multiplier for Canon cropped sensor cameras is 1.6.  So to convert to the equivalent focal length from full frame you divide by 1.6. 

If you want to convert f-stops for equivalent Depth of Field you'd need to multiply by 1.6

So the 85mm f1.8 gives you the equivalent of 136mm f/2.9 on full frame. 

The reason you may want to actually convert the preferred focal lengths to your equivalent is most of the guides use full frame sensors. Like the following:

Stephen Eastwood Beauty and Fashion Photographer Tutorials


----------



## Derrel (Mar 23, 2015)

The Canon 100mm f/2 looks beautiful when shot on the 5D series cameras. Dirk Vermierre used to do absolutely gorgeous work with the Canon 100mm f/2 on the original 5D...just beautiful,beautiful people pictures,indoors and out, at cafes and the beach, and so on. It is a really overlooked Canon lens...it gets very little recognition, despite its beautiful results.

But honestly, on a 1.6x body, a 100mm lens is just...too long, too narrow in its angle of view to give much versatility...but, it does do what it does, its one, single length, pretty well. I would rather have a 70-200 f/4 Canon zoom if I had just one lens choice.


----------



## junqi (Mar 23, 2015)

qleak said:


> junqi said:
> 
> 
> > qleak said:
> ...



Thanks for the info. i think i will go for 85mm 1.8. do you think is good for shooting portrait ? or 100mm?


----------



## qleak (Mar 23, 2015)

junqi said:


> Thanks for the info. i think i will go for 85mm 1.8. do you think is good for shooting portrait ? or 100mm?



I'm with Derrel on this one, I'd much rather have a zoom than a fixed focal length. 

If I were to pick a prime lens for a crop sensor camera, I think I'd be tempted by the 60mm since I tend to prefer the equivalent look of approximately 100mm.

But if you must chose one of those 2 I'd go with the 85mm but that is just pure preference.


----------



## jaomul (Mar 23, 2015)

If you are still not sure after above explanations and recommendations I would say to keep shooting with what you have. After a while it will become apparent if any more gear is necessary. Put differently, don't waste your money until you know what you need for your style of shooting


----------



## qleak (Mar 23, 2015)

jaomul said:


> If you are still not sure after above explanations and recommendations I would say to keep shooting with what you have. After a while it will become apparent if any more gear is necessary. Put differently, don't waste your money until you know what you need for your style of shooting



I very much agree with this. If it's not clear what you need, learn what the limitations are of your current gear and then upgrade.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 23, 2015)

Much model work will be done between 7 feet to 25 feet away. Getting closer than 7 feet tends to cause unwanted perspective distortion on the nose, and any limbs that extend away from the body. Standing back a little ways, 7 feet to 10,11,12,13,14,15 feet, ensures that the nose, arms, shoulders, legs, and feet are rendered without unusual or unpleasant distortion of the relative size of the various body parts.

When the camera is placed closer than around 7 feet, the NOSE, especially, starts to be rendered a bit larger than it should be; by five feet, the nose looks weird; by three feet, the nose has grown significantly in size, and will look "funny"; from 10 inches or so with an ultra-wide-angle, the nose will be rendered comically huge, the face very small and oddly shaped. At distances closer than 7 feet, the arms and shoulders will begin to appear unnaturally larger than they should; if an arm is extended toward the camera, it will appear notably larger than in "real life". Yes, this can be used creatively, sure, but it can also ruin shots if the distorted limbs or body parts begin to look exaggerated when a natural,elegant look was desired.

On the other end, beyond about 20 feet, and certainly at 30 feet, the background becomes more and more difficult to render out of focus. As the camera-to-subject distance on an APS-C sized sensor approaches the 30 foot distance, even with a telephoto lens, at normal outdoor apertures of say f/5.6, the background is fairly recognizable. On full-length photos with a 100mm lens on a 1.6x body, the camera MUST BE 37.5 feet distant, in order to frame a six foot tall person within an 8.44 foot field of view with the camera turned to portrait orientation. Here is a screen capture I made of my calculations.
.




Field of View Calculator - Rectilinear and Fisheye lenses - Bob Atkins Photography


----------



## goodguy (Mar 26, 2015)

Derrel said:


> I would rather have a 70-200 f/4 Canon zoom if I had just one lens choice.


Another vote for a 70-200mm lens.
I use my Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VC for portraits and MAN its just amazing for that!!!
70-200mm F4 will also be good because it will mean smaller and lighter lens, the flexibility that a 70-200mm lenses bring makes them so suitable for portraits plus the fact that most of the 70-200mm are top notch optics which gives you impressive image quality.


----------



## zeds (Mar 26, 2015)

qleak said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > If you are still not sure after above explanations and recommendations I would say to keep shooting with what you have. After a while it will become apparent if any more gear is necessary. Put differently, don't waste your money until you know what you need for your style of shooting
> ...


I agree with this. you must know what do you want.heheh


----------

