Remember, an 80mm MF lens is a wide angle lens. .
The 80 should get plenty close enough for portraits, I'd think an extension tube, even a short one would have you doing portraits of the sitter's nose or eyes.
Thanks for the replies, much appreciated.
I'm not so interested in having the face fill the screen, but rather fitting head and hair in the frame as well as the upper part of the shoulders. I guess there's a correlation between the amount of distortion (with an 80 plus tube) and the working distance and the tube used. From the various examples I've seen on Flickr many portraits with 80 plus the 10 or 16 tubes will result in normal-looking faces.
br
Philip
Thanks for the replies, much appreciated.
I'm not so interested in having the face fill the screen, but rather fitting head and hair in the frame as well as the upper part of the shoulders. I guess there's a correlation between the amount of distortion (with an 80 plus tube) and the working distance and the tube used. From the various examples I've seen on Flickr many portraits with 80 plus the 10 or 16 tubes will result in normal-looking faces.
br
Philip
Most people wrongly assume that changing focal length changes perspective,because,yhey've been told this fallacyso many times by so many different sources.Still,That is not at all true.only changing the viewpoint changes perspective.So, unless you and your camera move,changing focal length just changessubject magnification.Using an extensionringmoves you and your cameracloser to the subject,whichchanges perspective indeed!Moving the viewpoint closer to the faceThis is not very flattering for a portraitThe nose appears larger than it reallyisand the ears seem further awayand smaller than they are.Changing to a 150mm on the other hand,enlarges the entire subject uniformly and thereforemore natuarally. Consequently, a 150 ispreferred over an 80mm with extension tubes.Hello everybody
I have a 80mm Planar FE (and 203FE) and am considering adding an extension tube as a birthday present to myself.
I've shot SLRs for years (EOS) but never used extension tubes. I've read that an 80mm with extension tubes is not recommended for closer/tighter (but not really tight head shot) portraits because the perspective will look distorted. It is said that a 150mm would be better. Could someone explain this, perhaps with example images?
I know the 150mm range (or roughly 90mm in 135) is a very nice portrait focal length but I am trying to understand why an 80mm with extension tube would be less ideal for tighter portraits.
If it is possible to shoot such portraits with an 80mm, should I go for the 16 or 21 tube?
I can't buy a 150mm at the moment so if the above tubes are bad ideas for natural-looking tighter portraits, then I might instead get a 56 to shoot quasi-macro (which I am also interested in) and extend my close-portrait equipment later when funds allow.
Very grateful for any advice
Philip
Isn't an 80 on MF a standard lens?
A normal lens equals the diagonal of the negative, thats 79mm on a 6x6 that makes a 80mm a normal lens on Hasselblad. What i think momus is think about is that a diagonal on 35mm is a 43mm lens.
So compared to a 50mm normal lens, a 80mm feels slightly wide.
I use a similar rule for all film formats35mm to 4x5:With all due respect, there is too much discussion of equipment options in this thread.
The issue isn't which focal length or accessory to use - it is which working distance will result in the most flattering perspective.
If you are too close to your subject, their nose may look too large, their ears too small, and their heads and upper bodies will appear to be too "three dimensional" (i.e. too deep).
If you are too far from your subject, their various parts may look to be of appropriate relative size, but they may look too "flat" - i.e. they won't appear sufficiently three dimensional.
The experience of many photographers over many years leads to the conclusion that a good working distance will be achieved by filling the frame with a lens of a focal length that is approximately twice the length of a "standard" lens.
In some cases, however, those lenses don't focus close enough to do that. IIRC, the Hasselblad 150mm lenses are in that group. So sometimes it is necessary to add some close focusing capability. Close-up filters are often a good option for portraits.
Another excellent option is to use an 80mm lens, shoot from a bit farther away (more of a one third-length portrait), and crop in the darkroom. What you gain in flattering perspective will often offset the slight loss in technical quality that results from the crop.
The Proxar filters are interesting. This thread has caused me to look for portraits taken with such filters. I'm actually quite impressed with the quality I've seen at Flickr. Perhas that's a good middle way for now.
Perhaps there's no way getting around buying a longer lens.
.
Not true.
There are countless examples of 6x6 portraits done with 80mm lenses that look perfectly normal.
Your 80mm lens is a very useable tool for portraits.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?