Originally posted by Harmonica ''the question was asked "would i get better portrait shots from a 31ltd", my answer to that is "no", proper portraits made from longer focal lengths results in better pictures, on average''
One stupid question more (mainly because english is no my native language)...does the portrait photography only mean to take photos from people faces or also to take the whole body photos? If it means the last one too then I have seen very good photos by taking with 31mm...and that was what I tried to ask.
well people will argue over the definition of "portrait".
personaly i consider a "portrait" a head or head + upper body image, other people would consider anything with a person in it a portrait.
having said that, using a larger focal length over a shorter focal length will result in flatter (geometricaly) images, that means the least amount of distortion of both the image (no barrel or stretching) and as a result the persons features are not distorted.
most people are however accutomed to seeing portraits and what not with normal lenses, but if you go out and shoot more telephoto stuff you will realize how the perspective has an effect on the feel of the photo
a portrait taken at 200mm really takes you out of the picture and creates a sense of individual space, because you really are standing like 50 feet away.
most often the problem is simply raw space, ie, you dont have it, taking a full body shot of someone in a small studio with a 85mm lens is hard, let alone 135 or 200.
but again, this is just my take on the matter. the 31 is a sharp lens that delivers in every aspect, but again if you are after portraits, you already have a very very very good lens for that sort of thing.