What's Your Prime Perspective?
One of the first lessons in almost any photography course will probably have a section about perspective.
This is done for an obvious reason, perspective is one of the tool we, as photographers have to control on how our photographs look.
Though this is a well chewed subject and is familiar to all, some photographers tend to forget it in the passion of shooting. The solution to that problem is prime lenses.
How Deep Would You Like Your Image?
Just to get everyone on the same line, let's go over the basics: I am going to assume that you've already figured out that your images (at least the conventional ones) only have two dimensions. You can't really pull a Mary Poppins and walk into the picture. That said, some photographs look more three dimensional than others, they seem to have more depth.
This is an illusion, of course, and it is created by converging lines. All those line are converging towards what's called a vanishing point. It is this convergence that supplies the illusion of depth.
So why some photographs seem deep while others seem flat? What controls this perspective?
The answers sums up to one word: distance. The distance between the camera and the subject has a tremendous impact on the illusion of depth. The closer the camera is to the subject the illusion of depth becomes more apparent, the further away the camera is from the subject the "flatter" the image would be.
Simple, isn't it? Want deep perspective, get closer, want it flat. take a few steps back. Check the first image in the post and you could see how it works. The only difference between the two images at the top of the post is the lens used to take them. The image on the left was taken with a super wide lens, and the image on the right was taken using a 35mm lens which forced me to take a few steps back for a similar framing.
OK, so we agree that perspective is crucial and easy to control. SO the question must be asked, why so many photographers tend to forget perspective when shooting? I think the blame is on zoom lenses.
The Solution: Prime Lenses
When the camera is mounted with a zoom lens it is very tempting to change the focal length by sliding the zoom ring rather than taking a few steps, by doing so you may have changed the frame, but since the camera-subject distance did not change, the perspective did not change too.
Using a prime lens solves this "problem" for one simple reason, it does not have a zoom ring. So a prime lens forces you to change perspective with each change of framing. In order to re-frame you must get closer or further from your subject and in doing do change the perspective of the photograph.
I am using three prime lenses which provides the flexibility with the three type of portraiture: Full body, Half a Body and Close ups. Data below refers to DX sensors (1.5 crop factor)
(I'm using Nikon but the general guide lines stand for Canon, Sony, and the other folks as well).
The Nikkor 85mm 1.8
This is a perfect lens which allows me stand 4-5 meters from the subject and frame the head and shoulders. Distance-wise 4-5 meters is considered flattering when comes to facial perspective. Using a shorter (wider) focal length with most probably distort the subject faces and give them a big nice nose.
Also, putting perspective issues aside, the Nikon 85mm 1.8 (which I use) gives pretty good value for money. I have never regretted putting it in the bag, or taking it out on a shoot.
The Nikkor 50mm 1.8
Also called the Nifty Fifty, this is (by far) the best value for money lens out there. About $100 will win you a great lens which lots of photographers I know would take on a deserted island. It is great for half-a-body composition in terms is the "right" perspective. (Statistically going over my lightroom files, this is my most used lens).
The Nikkor 35mm f2.0
That another focal length I am very fond of. I find it perfect for almost any whole body shot. Taking that image of the 20 years old Bat-El with a shorter focal length (say 20mm) would have cost me a whopping distorted body and a very unflattering perspective.
Actually, this is my second 35mm prime. The first one that I had was the Nikkor 35 1.8 which I traded for the more expensive/better quality snobbish sister.
I also find this a perfect focal length for indoor family portraits done in house, where the option of backing off is limited.
Recently Nikon released a new f/1.4 version for this focal length which is said to be really great, but I have just about 1639 reasons to avoid even considering it.
Once You Know The Rules, Break Them
It's a cliche in the photographic world that every once in a while rules have to be broken, and the laws of perspective are not different.
Some subjects would be far more interesting shot "too" close or "too" far, like this photograph shot at a distance of only a few centimeters, with the Sigma 10-20mm.
About The Author
This post is by Tomer Jacobson, a freelance on location photographer based in Israel. Tomer runs a lighting intensive Hebrew blog, luckily you can read it using google translate (if you dont mind the mechanical English sound :)
Get the DIYP greatness via RSS, newsletter and Twitter
Connect with the community: Facebook Page, Discussions
Share Ideas, Setups, Images and Projects on DIYP's Flickr, visit Readers Photos
Comments
Great recap
I've been using my 50mm f/1.4 for a few years now and its easily the best lens in my collection in terms of sharpness. The crop factor on my DX Nikon D7000 makes it a bit inflexible at times, but takes terrific photos. Saving up for my 35mm...
using primes in place of
using primes in place of zooms for controlling the perspective is much like chopping one's leg just to practice one-legged hopping, don't you think? all this bull shit about primes is extremely annoying. you shuld just read a decent book on perspective and ditch the primes. personal favorite - The Visual Story. costs $20 and save a fortune on primes :)
The equivalent zoom to the
The equivalent zoom to the primes I have is the 24-70mm 2.8G and the price difference is staggering.
Plus NO ZOOM compares to my 85mm 1.4D.
Well said.
Great article and I recommend it wholeheartedly.
What I would love to have is
What I would love to have is a pseudo zoom lens,with only 3 focal stops : 35, 50 and 85 I don't need 36, 37, 38,....47,48,49 or 51,52,53 etc
but dragging around 3 lenses to get these instead of one zoom is fairly painful :(
Dragging 3 lenses around... painful..
It's not painful at all. That's what we had to do during our "analog times" on a regular base. Besides, when shooting 'available light' at low light conditions, those lenses with an (max open) aperture of 2.8 are just the minimum.
Those with a wider aperture of 2.0 or even 1.4 are often essential. Not a chance to do this with a zoom lens.
Digital shooters (mostly beginners) are just too complacent nowadays and want to have it all without any effort.
I agree. I'm usually carrying
I agree. I'm usually carrying a few primes with me. I'm not lazy. :)
Your point is juvenile...
Ouch! Harshness Mr. Anonymous! I think you need a time out or something...
I agree with Mr. Jacobson. I know way too many new photographers as well as many pros who use zooms all the time and forget to move their feet more often. Although your humerous comparison to the whole, "one-legged hopping" thing is true, there are a lot more reasons why to use primes. Sure, you have multiple lenses, and the possible annoyance of taking time to change said lens...as well as needing a way to carry all of them with you. And sure, taking one really good zoom with you, and keeping your head out of the routine and changing your perspective would solve this. However, really good primes just simply cannot be surpassed by the best of zooms. Period.
If I were ever in the position of teaching a serious photography/cinematography class, I would make it a requirement to ditch the zooms and have a prime only class. THEN, after everyone is use to moving their feet and using their heads, zooms would be acceptable.
focal length and perspective
Just one important note -
Focal length have nothing to do with perspective.
Focal length controls the field of view.
Perspective is controled only by the lens position related to the objects.
If you include "compression"
If you include "compression" as part of perspective, then yes.
Compression is controled by
Compression is controled by subject to background distance vs. camera to subject distance.
It's not a life-time decission
Last summer holidays I deliberately decided only to take my 50mm1.8. The less weight is of course a greate bonus when hiking, but the main reason was I wanted to learn to see 50mm. Moreover, limitiation in my experience is a better motor for creativity than possibilities. I am quite happy with the results. OK, I took a few (surprisingly few) obligatory, sweeping landscapes as stitchings, but generally I walked or took the frame I had at my disposal. I became much more aware of composition in these three weeks than in the preceeding years together.
I still often use the zoom as it is unsurpassed in flexibility and response time. But when I go for quality, it's the $100 prime.
Feet to meters
Hold up. You can frame a tight head and shoulders from thirteen/sixteen feet away with an 85?
85mm from 15 feet away...
Yes, you can Budzilla. Don't forget that the lens can be used on cameras with both, full size sensor and cropped sensor. On a full size sensor it's a REAL 85mm while it converts on a cropped sensor (Nikon =1.5 factor) to roughly 127mm !
Used the older AI lens 85mm/1.4 on my analog Nikons for a long time and favored the 85mm real range quite a bit for documentary shots.
-hm
"When the camera is mounted
"When the camera is mounted with a zoom lens it is very tempting to change the focal length by sliding the zoom ring rather than taking a few steps, by doing so you may have changed the frame, but since the camera-subject distance did not change, the perspective did not change too."
Exactly, but I use this in the opposite way as suggested by the article. I find the perspective I want without even raising the camera to my eye, because perspective has little to do with the lens, and everything to do with where the camera is located in relationship to the subject/scene. Then by choosing focal length I can more efficiently crop in camera. A zoom allows me to crop in camera. With a prime I may have to crop out of camera. With today's big megapixel counts that may not be much of a problem, but I still like to crop in camera as efficently as possible.
Primes have several advantages over zooms, but perspective control is not one of them. They may encourage people to compose by field of view rather than perspective. I think perspective is a better way to compose. The important thing is to understand how the tools are effecting the finished image, but not let them lead the way there.
quality
When it comes to image quality ibwill always prefer primes over zooms. Not only are they sharper than zooms but i have noticed that they also have much better color reproduction.
I learned so much more...
...when I bought my first prime and used the natural zoom again. You get different pictures when you use a prime.
The nifty fifty is the cheapest Prime out there (it doesn't matter if Canon or Nikon) and it changed the way to see the world: Perspective, DOF, ISO, Aperture, Time - it all made more sense once the zoom was gone.
Interesting article. One
Interesting article. One thing I would like to add is that you should explicitly state what sensor size you are using. DX in this case. For full frame numbers will be different.
Thanks guys
Hey there and thanks for your detailed feedback. @BEK - You are 100% right. The fact that I use a small sensor with these focal length should have been mentioned in the article. This makes the POV I get from the 35mm eqvilant to 50mm, the 50mm = 72 and the 85mm =127mm
All the best - Tomer Jacobson
Perspective
In the article you say "The only difference between the two images at the top of the post is the lens used to take them. The image on the left was taken with a super wide lens, and the image on the right was taken using a 35mm lens which forced me to take a few steps back for a similar framing."
There is a contradiction there, you changed the lens AND took a few steps.
By taking "a few steps" you have changed the perspective.
I use the same technique as Matt Needham, his second paragraph sums it up nicely.
Very nice photos, but accuracy about perspective is a bit flawed
Hi,
As you've correctly cited, perspective changes when one moves the camera in relation to the subject for the purpose of keeping the ratio of the subject to the frame constant.
The mere movement of the camera/subject distance is the one causing the perspective shift, NOT the lens, especially not the TYPE of lens.
What difference is there if I use a 24-70 at 24mm vs. a 24mm prime? Nothing. So there's no difference at all in field-of-view.
Perspective doesn't change when you zoom in and out either, it's totally irrelevant to focal length UNTIL YOU MOVE the subject-to-camera distance.
I wrote the same topic of perspective and focal length (http://reviews.davidleetong.com/tutorials/basic-photography-photography/relation-between-focal-lenth-and-perspective-2/) in the past, and using a small point-and-shoot, we can clearly see that perspective doesn't change with focal length (let alone the type of lens) if the camera-to-subject distance remains constant.
Cheers
Dave from DSP
http://reviews.davidleetong.com
Answer to dave
Hey dave and thanks for your detailed feedback. Your point is 100% right but that's whats writen in the article. It didnt say that the prespective changes ifnyou are using a prime lens it said that people with zoom lenses tend to change the focal length without moving which effect the Pov but not the prespective. By using prime lenses you need to move and change the prespective and thats an advantage Imo. Hope it clear now yours tomer
Ahh, thanks for the explanation...
Hi Tomer,
Ah, based on that premise (zoom users tend to not move), then you're correct.
In summary, I guess you're trying to tell us (your readers) that:
Zooming with feet changes perspective, zooming with lens does not - that's definitely true.
Cheers!
Dave from DSP
http://reviews.davidleetong.com
Post new comment