Prime or wide angle for environmental portraits

Hello POTN.

People here always seem to have good advice here, so I have another question for you guys .

I really started to like environmental portraits, but I'm not really sure which lens to use when shooting it. I have a 1.6x crop camera.

I have two options:
Canon 50mm F/1.8 II
Canon 17-40mm F/4 L

I don't think the 50mm will capture enough of the environment, it will just be more like a regular portrait.

But the 17-40mm gives a .24x magnification on 40mm, so people might get a huge nose! .. And also the F/4 is not that good in low light . But the sharpness is great.

But really, any advice is welcome!

Sigma 30mm f/1.4.

why not go for a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8? It should fit your need quite well.

to answer your question, between the 2 lens that you have, I'd go with the 50mm.

Just my two cents!!

N1CK wrote in post #12408000
Hello POTN.

People here always seem to have good advice here, so I have another question for you guys .

I really started to like environmental portraits, but I'm not really sure which lens to use when shooting it. I have a 1.6x crop camera.

I have two options:
Canon 50mm F/1.8 II
Canon 17-40mm F/4 L

I don't think the 50mm will capture enough of the environment, it will just be more like a regular portrait.

But the 17-40mm gives a .24x magnification on 40mm, so people might get a huge nose! .. And also the F/4 is not that good in low light . But the sharpness is great.

But really, any advice is welcome!

Let's make sure there is an understanding of "environmental portrait." An environmental portrait is not just a picture taken outside a studio (otherwise known as "on location"). An environmental portrait is framed to take in a substantial amount of the subject's "natural habitat."

For that reason, "get a huge nose" is not an issue because you're going to be a substantial distance from the subject (it's distance--not focal length--that controls perspective).

In addition, because you want to include the detail of the environment, f/4 is not a handicap because you'd actually want an even smaller aperture so that you can get the detail of the environment. So if you need longer shutter speeds, higher ISOs, or supplemental lighting, then so be it.

Inasmuch as you're using a crop camera, you need at least a "normal" focal length or shorter, which means 30mm or less.

Consider the Sigma 17-50 2.8 EX DC OS HSM

When outside the 50 is perfectly usable for environmental portraits. You just need to step back a little once you've given instructions to your model(s).
If you fear you won't have enough light, get yourself a flash, a lighstand, an umbrella, and a radio trigger if you need it.

I used my 28 1.8 on crop but also on full frame for this a lot. On full frame I especially like it that you can still get some subject isolation on a wide angle shot. Got some wedding couples quite happy with those.

N1CK wrote in post #12408000
Hello POTN.

People here always seem to have good advice here, so I have another question for you guys .

I really started to like environmental portraits, but I'm not really sure which lens to use when shooting it. I have a 1.6x crop camera.

I have two options:
Canon 50mm F/1.8 II
Canon 17-40mm F/4 L

I don't think the 50mm will capture enough of the environment, it will just be more like a regular portrait.

But the 17-40mm gives a .24x magnification on 40mm, so people might get a huge nose! .. And also the F/4 is not that good in low light . But the sharpness is great.

But really, any advice is welcome!

Trust me ! I use the 60D myself and also plan to buy a environmental portrait lens. I also have a 1740L and I don't think you will be satisfied with it cause it is designed as a Scenery lens, which means that you will not get high performance of details of people you shoot. To be honest, the 50 1.8 do better than 1740L for portrait.

I suggest that you can consider about
1. 35L or 35,f2
2. 24L II

reason why:
1. The 35mm is a classic focal lengths for environmental portrait, easy to control and perfect performance. If you don't care how much it will be then the 35L is the best, through which you can get top quality of pics and super Bokeh but this lens is so old that it can't anti water or dust. And 35,f2 also does well at it price.

2.This lens is not as famous as 35L in environmental portrait. If you also plan to shoot views then get this! As one of the REAL "L" lenses, 24L II, it is better for DSLR than 24L.

AND THE FOLLOWING TEXT IS IMPORTANT:
1. Prime Lenses is the best choise for portrait especially environmental portrait cause they bring you top quality of pics and less angledistortion then the zooms.
2. DON'T choose protrait lenses from other brands especially Sigma (sorry to say so)if you use Canon bodies without AF Microadjustment function, or you are likely to meet Focus issues. Try to imagine that: what will the model do to you if you focus on the left eye of the model but finally you get a very clear nose?

RDKirk wrote in post #12410530
Let's make sure there is an understanding of "environmental portrait." An environmental portrait is not just a picture taken outside a studio (otherwise known as "on location"). An environmental portrait is framed to take in a substantial amount of the subject's "natural habitat."

For that reason, "get a huge nose" is not an issue because you're going to be a substantial distance from the subject (it's distance--not focal length--that controls perspective).

In addition, because you want to include the detail of the environment, f/4 is not a handicap because you'd actually want an even smaller aperture so that you can get the detail of the environment. So if you need longer shutter speeds, higher ISOs, or supplemental lighting, then so be it.

Inasmuch as you're using a crop camera, you need at least a "normal" focal length or shorter, which means 30mm or less.

This bears repeating. There should not be any problem with using a 17-40 stopped down a bit.