The lens you choose doesn't just affect background blur or how much of a scene fits in the frame. It physically changes how your subject's face looks, and if you're picking focal lengths based on habit rather than intention, you may be getting results that don't match what you're seeing in real life.
Coming to you from Julia Trotti, this detailed side-by-side comparison video runs through every major prime focal length from 14mm to 135mm, showing exactly what each one does to a portrait when the framing is kept consistent. Trotti starts at the wide end, explaining why ultra-wide lenses like the 14mm are popular for vlogging and astrophotography but a genuine problem for portraits. Because you have to stand so close to your subject to fill the frame, the distortion becomes extreme. She shoots a headshot at 14mm and the results speak for themselves: the subject's chin elongates, facial features compress toward the center, and the nose appears larger than it actually is. It's a stark demonstration of something that's easy to forget when you're out on a shoot and reaching for whatever lens is on hand.
As Trotti moves through 24mm and 35mm, the image quality improves significantly for portrait work, especially for what she calls environmental portraits, where the location is as much a part of the image as the subject. Shooting wide open at f/1.4, the background is still clearly readable even with separation, which makes these focal lengths strong choices when context matters, like in travel or wedding photography. The 50mm sits in an interesting middle position. It gives you enough background separation to feel intentional without requiring you to back so far away from your subject that you lose the ability to direct them or work in a tight space. Trotti also makes a point that often gets overlooked: the right focal length isn't just a creative preference, it's also personal to each subject's face shape.
That last point is where the video gets genuinely useful in a way most focal length comparisons skip. Trotti explains that even longer lenses like the 85mm cause their own kind of distortion by compressing the face and making it look flatter or wider than it does in person. She uses herself as an example, saying she personally prefers being photographed on a 50mm because her face reads more naturally at that focal length than it does on an 85mm. The close-up headshot comparisons with her subject Maya make this visible in a way that's hard to ignore. The Sigma 105mm and 135mm comparisons, along with how the background behaves differently in each shot, are covered in full in the video and are worth seeing directly rather than reading about. Check out the video above for the full breakdown from Trotti.
9 Comments
As a 45 year portrait photographer I am astounded that I did not know there was a right focal length for portraits. Hopefully my clients, students and assistants will forgive me.
Ha, true words here, Glen. One of those times where the lens fits the scene over approaching it with an attitude correctness beforehand.
As a 46 year old photographer I am astounded that there were portrait photographers who used all focal lengths for portraits.
I love/like to see these comparing of different MM lenses, not seen very often! NOT portrait photographer BUT you never know when the need or opportunity may come around and to grab the right lens or even use the proper MM setting on a multi MM telephoto.
I can see just keeping the 24-105mm on your camera can be a blessing in a portrait time, i did like that out come. but a lens that has been on my walkabouts or just there in case of something is the FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3mm OSS that can also use in APS-C at 36-360mm (in camera like crop, this is like being ready for anything near or far. I can hear it now!!! Ok key is learning what each MM selection to use. The next thing I hear is What about the Bokeh??? This is something else that was not really covered and the thing that everyone puts out the big $'s for the fastest glass. From what I have seen is it is all about the focus point vs the far away point. That point is for another video that you may never ever see for the money that photographers will pay for the f/0.9 lens in all MM's.
It is right that the widest of lenses have been used for astro landscapes like the newest 10mm f/2.8 from the early favorite 12mm f/2.8 or even the 14mm f/1.8 even the 24mm f/1.4 even with these you can get super close to a foreground subject like a driftwood and still have that sky above with plenty of room for both, think a sky full of stars and you subject in frame all in focus!! Just to let these fast glass images when focused on the far away at night all will be in focus both near and far, just info, the other part is also even the Galactic center and the Pegasus get real small so yes also far away looking.
What I find from this is FOV being more compressed the longer the MM and narrower side to side getting that bokeh blur not as wide as the wider lenses a reason the 24-105mm might be best for a street capture with person close.
This is a great lesson for the non portrait photographer to learn the close focus point and the bokeh balls either at night or even day time background blur.
1.The image of the Donkey is with the FE 24-240mm at APS-C 360mm and the f/6.3 you can see the Bokeh behind and some in front, point is focus point not so much Fast Glass.
2. The walk to heaven is a reason for the wide 14mm for the two story capture but all things are in focus due to focus point.
3. families on a night of fishing a 30s capture with a 16mm f/4 at infinity focus and NO Flash used!
4. A beach group portrait without bokeh with a 20mm f/1.8 at f/1.8 and yes the moon is a blend in but is what the eye sees been done since the film days it was just so small to be apart of the story!
I learned a lot form this video thanks for posting because I do have the new FE 100mm f/2.8 OSS portrait/macro lens just waiting, but I wounder why it was not a 105 or 135?
I do like the 105 image most!
That camera bag looks very heavy! That's why I mostly use zooms.
Doh! That's perspective 101, and it's subject distance that causes an apparent change in facial shape, not the lens focal length.
A closer subject distance is also the reason that more (mostly distracting) background gets included when using a wide lens. For example; try finding a studio backdrop large enough to allow full-length portraits while shooting with an 18mm lens!
Some people need to get things in perspective.
Sorry to bring up the elephant in the room, but everything you describe in this article is quite literally, an illusion.
There is no difference at all in the shape of the face using a fish eye lens compared to a medium telephto.
The distortion you observe and believe in is caused by an incorrect viewing distance.
Take a print of a photo taken using a fish eye lens and hold it right up close to your eye. Hey presto! No distortion. Everything is perfect.
Take the telephoto image and view it from 20 metres away and the same thing happens; perspective compression is no longer visible.
When you use a non standard focal length lens, it is effectively moving you to a different point of observation. To view the image correctly you must respect that.
Crazy but true.
But who views images like that? It's not an illusion if when viewed in a typical manner they exhibit distortion.
Great review and thoroughly covered the effects of focal length and distance to subject on subject distortion. I've a more complete understanding of how to select focal lengths that support a camera-subject distance that produces a flattering portrait after watching. Thank you.