Author Topic: Panasonic Lumix 20mm 1.7 for Portraits ? (Read 4760 times)

asterinex · « **on:** January 30, 2011, 05:51:13 AM »

Yesterday I bought the Pana 20mm for a good price of 309 euros. The lens is very good in low light conditions and focusses very fast. I'm very happy with the results.

I really like taking portraits, especially from my kids. I have read if you get to close to a face, the face gets distorted. The nose and chin looks too large. That is because the lens is wide.

Is the 20mm good for portraits ? Any tips and trics to avoid distortion ? What are your experiences ?

adash · « **Reply #1 on:** January 30, 2011, 06:35:24 AM »

Stay at least 1 meter away from your subject and try to hold the camera at or slightly above his/her eye level. Avoid steep angles (That is looking down with the camera or looking up) or you will distort proportions.
I don't have the 20mm but I hope that the advices above will go fine with you.
Congrats on your purchase, btw.

gareth · « **Reply #2 on:** January 30, 2011, 07:39:34 AM »

To me, Lumix 20/1.7 is a very versatile prime lens for many different shooting themes an subjects.
Google "Lumix 20/1.7" or search the keywords in Flickr and I'm sure one will find lots of nice portraits and candids on people.
Not sure to what extent of distortion you're referring to.
Keep a distance, shoot and crop tight afterwards may help.

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #3 on:** January 30, 2011, 10:32:03 AM »

For close ups, not really, but for full length or so, it's fine.
I don't know if the E-P1 has a digital 2x zoom feature like the Pany G1, If, it does, you may have to have it on "P" mode to access it. That would give you an 80mm fov... much better for close-up portraits..
If it doesn't... A cheap 50mm f/1.8 (Canon FD/FL, Nikon E series, Pentax Pk mount, Olympus OM, Minolta MD, Konica EE/AE), with an adapter will work very nicely... if you don't mind manual focus.

popo · « **Reply #4 on:** January 30, 2011, 11:20:30 AM »

I'm not a people photographer other than once taking my own passport photo...

Don't forget that this is 40mm equiv. in 35mm terms, which is a slightly wider standard lens. It isn't really wide angle, so you can use it pretty much for what you see. Significant distortion effects don't seem to kick in until very wide angles.

The digital zoom mentioned by M5-User isn't anything special. Just take a photo from further away and crop it for the same effect.

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #5 on:** January 30, 2011, 11:25:53 AM »

Quote from: popo on January 30, 2011, 11:20:30 AM

I'm not a people photographer other than once taking my own passport photo...

Don't forget that this is 40mm equiv. in 35mm terms, which is a slightly wider standard lens. It isn't really wide angle, so you can use it pretty much for what you see. Significant distortion effects don't seem to kick in until very wide angles.

The digital zoom mentioned by M5-User isn't anything special. Just take a photo from further away and crop it for the same effect.

With better results too.....
BTW, congrats on the 500 Post.... you are now a complete m4/3 photographer

asterinex · « **Reply #6 on:** January 30, 2011, 12:46:26 PM »

thx for the usefull input ! I will add some portraits soon

asterinex · « **Reply #7 on:** January 30, 2011, 01:07:13 PM »

Quote

Just take a photo from further away and crop it for the same effect.[/u][/b]

Don't you loose detail ?

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #8 on:** January 30, 2011, 01:26:45 PM »

Quote from: asterinex on January 30, 2011, 01:07:13 PM

Quote
Just take a photo from further away and crop it for the same effect.[/u][/b]

Don't you loose detail ?

You can, but, not having a longer lens than 40mm fov is a disadvantage for close up portraits without getting a little face distortion.
If, you can't afford a faster lens, (only 1 to choose from AFAIK), the next best thing to do is buy a MF older lens that are quite cheap compared to m4/3 fast 50's (Oly E series 50mm f/2 is the only one I know of, and you need an adapter for that too.

On the Pentax Forum is a 50mm f/1.4 for $85.00, add a $25.00 adapter, and you have a very nice 100mm f/1.4 fov that has great IQ from f/1.4 and smaller.

lisandra · « **Reply #9 on:** February 01, 2011, 01:14:38 AM »

On 4/3 the minimum I consider a portrait lens is 35mm. I consider the 20mm, sharp as it may be, an oddball focal length

A Brit in Euroland · « **Reply #10 on:** May 21, 2011, 09:14:32 AM »

I have an EP1, and the 20mm Pany 1.7f. The lens is really great, and very light. Perfect for the average shot, and when you want to carry the camera "anywhere". BUT for portraits I use an old Zuiko 50mm 1.4f from my old, and now no longer used OM1. It is PERFECT, except that you have to have an adapter (I bought a Cirrus adapter which gives a very positive "click". I use the lens open to a max of f2, cause otherwise things look a bit vague. But I really an satisfied with that combination, now that I've got used to everything being manual.

ratobuhler · « **Reply #11 on:** May 21, 2011, 09:27:06 AM »

Quote from: asterinex on January 30, 2011, 01:07:13 PM

Quote
Just take a photo from further away and crop it for the same effect.[/u][/b]

Don't you loose detail ?

Don't worry about loosing detail. On a portrait you really don't want to see every pore and blemish. You may want sharpen the eyes a bit.

voyager · « **Reply #12 on:** May 22, 2011, 12:42:29 AM »

It's actually better for portraits to be mostly softer, as most sharp skin detail makes for a much more gritty and unattractive photo.

asterinex · « **Reply #13 on:** May 22, 2011, 08:07:21 AM »

The panny is damn sharp !
But the old Zuiko are also great for portraits !

cosinaphile · « **Reply #14 on:** June 01, 2011, 07:56:06 AM »

a 50 1.4 is a great portrait lens
thats great advice above
but i use the 20 1.7 for the occasional portrait when its not extremely tight
its fine , but as was said a very sharp lens

jap · « **Reply #15 on:** June 13, 2011, 05:19:15 PM »

Traditionally, the lenses employed for facial portraits are 1.5x to 2x the focal length of the normal/standard lens for a given platform. For the m4:3 platform this translates to a lens range of 32.5mm to 50mm plus or minus a few. A lens in the 20-25mm focal range would present too much distortion if used close enough to fill the screen with a face.

Still, a 20-25mm lens, like the 20/1.7, is great for head to waist portraits of a single individual and is the professional portrait photographer's first choice for modest-sized group shots. This lens is generally the best for environmental portraits---that is, portraits showcasing a subject in his|her environment (e.g., a chef in his|her kitchen, a mechanic in his|her autoshop, an executive in his|her office). Such a lens can depict a chef while being wide enough to present a sweep of his|her culinary-ware. It can present the executive in his|her office while illustrating a grand sweep of the ornate desk and nameplate, the certificates on the wall and other office accoutrements. Held a few feet from a mechanic/plumber's hands, it can emphasize their strength while still being wide enough to encompass his|her face.

Although it is better to use a longer lens for traditional full face portraits, the 20-25mm is a venerable lens when properly used within its limitations.

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #16 on:** June 13, 2011, 05:48:38 PM »

I tend to agree also with this assessment. I like the 20mm for this type of portrait with MFT gear. With my Film RF, I use a 45mm, I has a 50mm, but, 5mm made a difference for with some tighter quarters with me anyway.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #17 on:** June 13, 2011, 07:24:43 PM »

has anyone considered mounting a tele adapter on the panny 20? like a 1.8x to 2.2x it could serve two purposes

turning the 40mm fov to appx 75 or 90mm equiv
softening the optics allowing a less crisp portrait

a 52mm optic with a 46mm step ring on the panny 20 ...is this crazy? for 25 bucks im thinking about it

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #18 on:** June 13, 2011, 08:35:31 PM »

Quote from: cosinaphile on June 13, 2011, 07:24:43 PM

has anyone considered mounting a tele adapter on the panny 20? like a 1.8x to 2.2x it could serve two purposes

turning the 40mm fov to appx 75 or 90mm equiv
softening the optics allowing a less crisp portrait

a 52mm optic with a 46mm step ring on the panny 20 ...is this crazy? for 25 bucks im thinking about it

The Panny's have a 2x and 4x digital in JPG mode. the IQ is OK, So you can have a "40" or a "80", but it just crops the sensor, so I sometimes use the 2x with my O/14-42ED, like for the pool photos of my Son from last week.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #19 on:** June 13, 2011, 09:44:05 PM »

Quote from: M5-User on June 13, 2011, 08:35:31 PM

Quote from: cosinaphile on June 13, 2011, 07:24:43 PM
has anyone considered mounting a tele adapter on the panny 20? like a 1.8x to 2.2x it could serve two purposes

turning the 40mm fov to appx 75 or 90mm equiv
softening the optics allowing a less crisp portrait

a 52mm optic with a 46mm step ring on the panny 20 ...is this crazy? for 25 bucks im thinking about it

The Panny's have a 2x and 4x digital in JPG mode. the IQ is OK, So you can have a "40" or a "80", but it just crops the sensor, so I sometimes use the 2x with my O/14-42ED, like for the pool photos of my Son from last week.

but an adapter would permit full res images while giving short tele fov

lisandra · « **Reply #20 on:** June 13, 2011, 09:49:38 PM »

Quote from: M5-User on June 13, 2011, 08:35:31 PM

Quote from: cosinaphile on June 13, 2011, 07:24:43 PM
has anyone considered mounting a tele adapter on the panny 20? like a 1.8x to 2.2x it could serve two purposes

turning the 40mm fov to appx 75 or 90mm equiv
softening the optics allowing a less crisp portrait

a 52mm optic with a 46mm step ring on the panny 20 ...is this crazy? for 25 bucks im thinking about it

The Panny's have a 2x and 4x digital in JPG mode. the IQ is OK, So you can have a "40" or a "80", but it just crops the sensor, so I sometimes use the 2x with my O/14-42ED, like for the pool photos of my Son from last week.

are to talking about digital zoom or pannys extra optical zoom? With extra optical zoom there's no quality loss, if there is its unnoticeable.with digital zoom you start to.see weird artifacts and blurriness

adash · « **Reply #21 on:** June 14, 2011, 03:24:19 AM »

Quote

Still, a 20-25mm lens, like the 20/1.7, is great for head to waist portraits of a single individual and is the professional portrait photographer's first choice for modest-sized group shots. This lens is generally the best for environmental portraits---that is, portraits showcasing a subject in his|her environment (e.g., a chef in his|her kitchen, a mechanic in his|her autoshop, an executive in his|her office). Such a lens can depict a chef while being wide enough to present a sweep of his|her culinary-ware. It can present the executive in his|her office while illustrating a grand sweep of the ornate desk and nameplate, the certificates on the wall and other office accoutrements. Held a few feet from a mechanic/plumber's hands, it can emphasize their strength while still being wide enough to encompass his|her face.

These are portraits that are much more difficult to accomplish compositionally, but make a lot more sense in describing one's personality than the classic head and shoulders portrait.
I agree with you that 35 to probably 45mm equiv FOV is perfect for these shots, as they are both wide enough in order to include the whole scene, and not too wide to distort the perspective too much (for example disproportionately big noses/hands/etc.)

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #22 on:** June 14, 2011, 05:10:52 AM »

Quote from: lisandra on June 13, 2011, 09:49:38 PM

Quote from: M5-User on June 13, 2011, 08:35:31 PM
Quote from: cosinaphile on June 13, 2011, 07:24:43 PM
has anyone considered mounting a tele adapter on the panny 20? like a 1.8x to 2.2x it could serve two purposes

turning the 40mm fov to appx 75 or 90mm equiv
softening the optics allowing a less crisp portrait

a 52mm optic with a 46mm step ring on the panny 20 ...is this crazy? for 25 bucks im thinking about it

The Panny's have a 2x and 4x digital in JPG mode. the IQ is OK, So you can have a "40" or a "80", but it just crops the sensor, so I sometimes use the 2x with my O/14-42ED, like for the pool photos of my Son from last week.
are to talking about digital zoom or pannys extra optical zoom? With extra optical zoom there's no quality loss, if there is its unnoticeable.with digital zoom you start to.see weird artifacts and blurriness

Believe or Not: I haven't tried the Optical Zoom... [Bang head against a wall], I will have to try this...
But, I prefer the 55mm Nikkor for portraits anyway.

Author Topic: Panasonic Lumix 20mm 1.7 for Portraits ? (Read 4760 times)

Related Topics

Recent Topics

Recent Gallery