Indoor portrait photography

J

Janjan

Messages
15
Name
Jan
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi can anyone help with the basics of taking portraits indoors. I've never done portraits before having a baby last year and now I'm obsessed with photographing her. I want to take good indoor photographs but without flash if that is possible. I'm looking into buying a new lens and am not sure what to get. I currently have a Canon 450D with an 18-270mm Tamron 1: 3.5-6.3 lens.

Any help would be appreciated.
 
The better the light the better the photo will be.

Unless you have a lot of natural light it will be hard.You could use reflectors which will help a little.

If you have a try with lets say F4 or F5.6 ISO 400 and see what sutter speed you get. Remembering you will need focal length* 1.6 to stop any camera shake and see what you think......
 
Firstly, portraiture is about people, after people skills the important things are lighting and posing.

You can set up a natural light studio quite easily, try some googling - you can do awesome stuff with a window and a reflector.

All that said, your lens is woefully inadequate for this purpose, if you're short of funds, get a 50mm 1.8, if you have a few quid spare get an 85mm 1.8.
 
Thanks for the suggestion of the reflector and trying F4 to check the shutter speed.

I've been into urban landscape photography before having my baby so I do want to buy a new lens for doing portraite. I have a few quid to spend on one. As my baby is only 10 months old I think I would have a problem with being far enough away to use the 85mm. Would you recommend using a zoom lens. I know prime lenses are better quality but I'm not used to restriction of only having one focal length and think it could be tricky with a baby.
 
Forget the 'restrictions' I'll be blunt:

You bought your current lens for it's 'versatility' (versatile being the opposite of restrictive) and it's crap, it's suitable for taking OK pictures of a variety of thongs in fairly restrictive circumstances.

Superzooms are designed for consumers who only get their cameras out on high days and holidays and use P mode.

Buy yourself a prime lens, have a look yourself now, stick your lens at 85mm and see how easy it is to get a variety with shots without masses of moving about.

A short 2.8 zoom will be an improvement on what you have, but a fast prime lens will give you something you can't get any other way.
 
Phil V said:
it's suitable for taking OK pictures of a variety of thongs in fairly restrictive circumstances.
Click to expand...

LOL at the typo.
Agree with the point though. My first lens was a Tamron 18-200 and I knew that due to the great zoom range the quality was going to suffer elsewhere.
 
LOL at the typo also.

Have just had a play with my lens at 85mm as suggested, had to use my partner as my target as baby is in bed. I understand where you're coming from about the Tamron but believe it or not I have got some pretty good urban landscape photos from it and I do use it on M mode.

Got some good head and upper body shots of my partner but I would have to be a fair distance away from baby to get all of her in frame and surely the flash would not work if I am so far away. As my camera has a 1.6 crop factor the 85mm would make the focal length more like 135mm. I was under the impression 50mm was the ideal prime for portraits
 
Janjan said:
LOL at the typo also.

Have just had a play with my lens at 85mm as suggested, had to use my partner as my target as baby is in bed. I understand where you're coming from about the Tamron but believe it or not I have got some pretty good urban landscape photos from it and I do use it on M mode.

Got some good head and upper body shots of my partner but I would have to be a fair distance away from baby to get all of her in frame and surely the flash would not work if I am so far away. As my camera has a 1.6 crop factor the 85mm would make the focal length more like 135mm. I was under the impression 50mm was the ideal prime for portraits
Click to expand...

Shooting Urban landscapes in daylight isn't comparable to shooting babies indoors as far as a suitable lens goes. I did say the lens was suitable for some things. You can get great pictures from an Iphone as long as you work within it's limitations.

So we're beyond the limitations of your current lens and we need a new one. I mentioned the 50 and the 85 in my original post, my favourite lens on film was indeed a 135mm. And I love my 85mm, for the perspective.

If you're worrying about your onboard flash with an 85mm for portraits, I'm sorry, you ignored the important part f my post. On camera flash isn't a good plan for great portraits.
 
There are plenty of prime lenses that you could use if you agree with you have to have a prime. 24mm 35mm 50mm. I have a friend that loves to use a 16-35 zoom lens for the weddings he shoots. He likes the versatility it gives him over the primes. You don't have to go with a prime and surely don't have to go with 85mm if it doesn't work for you. If I were you I would rent a few and see what works for you. An 85 is a great lens but there are a plenty of choices for you if that doesn't work out.
 
It's supposed to be a nice sunny day today. Get the baby in the garden and shoot away to see what you get. Give her things to keep her interested. Bubbles are always good. If you haven't a reflector and think you need one to provide fill light then improvise, any light object will reflect light.

Don't try and do too long, perhaps try for short periods many times and see what you get.

For indoors, large windows a great light sources or patio doors. Net curtains diffuse the light nicely.
 
I know what I'm doing with my landscape stuff but am at a loss with indoor photography. Still unsure about a prime or zoom but know I need a wider maximum F stop. Would you say F4 is wide enough or do I need wider. I was talking to an events photographer a few weeks ago when I was out and about with my camera and he suggested the Canon 24-105 F4 L lens. He said L lens are the way to go but I'm unsure if F4 is good enough. Don't know enough about flashes either I do have a Metz 36 AF-4C flash but I suppose that isn't very good for this.

I have bought studio lighting to do proper portraits of her and I've got some pretty good pictures of her after a few tweaks in photoshop. That was up until a few weeks ago when she won't sit still long enough and crawls off!

Great idea about renting lenses, I didn't know you could do that.

Not sunny here today :( I live in rainy Lancashire lol. We tried bubbles with her outside (when the sun was shining) and she loved them and kept still. I have to use indoors quite a lot because the sun doesn't shine all that much. I suppose I really want to be able to take more candid shots of her as well when she's doing something cute or falls asleep in the middle of the room and she's not necessarily in the right position by a window with a lot of light. I'm so aware that I'm not capturing these precious moments properly because I don't have the right lens.

I haven't really picked the easiest portraits and indoor stuff to do first have I - an on the move fidgety baby!
 
Janjan said:
... Still unsure about a prime or zoom but know I need a wider maximum F stop. Would you say F4 is wide enough or do I need wider. I was talking to an events photographer a few weeks ago when I was out and about with my camera and he suggested the Canon 24-105 F4 L lens. He said L lens are the way to go but I'm unsure if F4 is good enough. ...
Click to expand...
Sorry if I'm teaching you to suck eggs, but F stops work like this.
F4 requires twice as much light as F2.8
F2.8 requires twice as much light as F2
F2 requires twice as much light as F1.4

So a 50mm 1.4 will give you 1/125 in the same conditions that the 24-105 will give you 1/15. Even with the great IS only one of those shots will work for a living creature without motion blur.

Janjan said:
...I suppose I really want to be able to take more candid shots of her as well when she's doing something cute or falls asleep in the middle of the room and she's not necessarily in the right position by a window with a lot of light. I'm so aware that I'm not capturing these precious moments properly because I don't have the right lens.

I haven't really picked the easiest portraits and indoor stuff to do first have I - an on the move fidgety baby!
Click to expand...

You appear to be at the stage where you're thinking about light as a quantity, you need to start looking at it from a quality perspective if your photography is to improve. But before that you have to fully understand the exposure triangle.

If you really have the budget for the 24-105, then you should get a 2.8 zoom from Tamron or Sigma and a fast prime too.
 
Thanks Phil for your posts. I do basically understand the exposure triangle I just struggle sometimes putting it into practice. I'm not used to doing indoor photography and as you say on camera flash doesn't give good results.

Would you say Tamron and Sigma lenses are as good as Canon or would you get a canon (finances permitting)
 
I am currently looking to purchase a good quality prime lens myself for indoor portraits on my 60D. On a crop camera like yourself I am looking for a 30 / 35mm prime to give an equivalent focal range of around 50mm on FF format. I have played with a mates cheap 50mm 1.8 which is a good lens for the money, but doesn't perform as well as I would want and is slow to focus etc. But even the 50mm is too long on a crop for indoor portraits IMO.

Top of my list at the moment is the new Sigma 30mm 1.4 DC HSM Art series lens. It's not quite up to the standards of the new 35mm in the range, but it's only around £300 from the likes of DigitalRev and is still highly rated.

I totally agree with the above with regards to lighting. This is the most important factor for good indoor shots. I would suggest a couple of softbox lights (around £100 all in) and a fast prime lens. Pin a nice backdrop to the wall, subject set 6ft in front with a softbox either side of camera and shoot away all day long at 1.4-2.8 and I'm sure you'll be well happy with the results with a bit of practice and experimenting!

Then for outside portraits something like an 85mm to give around 135mm equivalent focal range would be ideal, but that's not what you're asking.

Just my opinion of course, there are far more experienced guys on here than me!
 
Last edited:
I use the Tamron 2.8vc and find it to be a very nice lens.
If you go to my gallery and look at the photo called gold test (Not for work photo) this was taken with window light and 2 gold reflectors....
Settings was Tamron 17-50 f2.8 vc @ f2.8-1/60-ISO 1600-33mm
 
Janjan said:
Thanks Phil for your posts. I do basically understand the exposure triangle I just struggle sometimes putting it into practice. I'm not used to doing indoor photography and as you say on camera flash doesn't give good results.

Would you say Tamron and Sigma lenses are as good as Canon or would you get a canon (finances permitting)
Click to expand...

Finances permitting, the only std zoom I would buy for a Canon crop is the 17-55. If I didn't have the money for that it's be the Tamron equivalent.

But, the light is much more important to learn to manipulate. Using the built in flash, your photographs will almost certainly look like ****. There are tricks you can do with sticky tape and milk bottles, but frankly, they're not worth the effort. If you have money to spend get your flash off camera and into a decent softbox, get a reflector and get a lighting book or 2.

Meanwhile, with the right lens, you can take advantage of windowlight, it's free, it's gorgeous and it's nearly always there. But you need to learn to work with it. I wrote a post for a member once that I'll send you if you're interested.
 
Phil V said:
Sorry if I'm teaching you to suck eggs, but F stops work like this.
F4 requires twice as much light as F2.8
F2.8 requires twice as much light as F2
F2 requires twice as much light as F1.4

So a 50mm 1.4 will give you 1/125 in the same conditions that the 24-105 will give you 1/15. Even with the great IS only one of those shots will work for a living creature without motion blur.

You appear to be at the stage where you're thinking about light as a quantity, you need to start looking at it from a quality perspective if your photography is to improve. But before that you have to fully understand the exposure triangle.

If you really have the budget for the 24-105, then you should get a 2.8 zoom from Tamron or Sigma and a fast prime too.
Click to expand...

Or as us simple minded see it, the smaller the f stop number the bigger the opening in the lens, thus allowing more light to enter.

* I was not implying that anyone but myself was simple minded. Lol
 
dellydel said:
I am currently looking to purchase a good quality prime lens myself for indoor portraits on my 60D. On a crop camera like yourself I am looking for a 30 / 35mm prime to give an equivalent focal range of around 50mm on FF format. I have played with a mates cheap 50mm 1.8 which is a good lens for the money, but doesn't perform as well as I would want and is slow to focus etc. But even the 50mm is too long on a crop for indoor portraits IMO.

Top of my list at the moment is the new Sigma 30mm 1.4 DC HSM Art series lens. It's not quite up to the standards of the new 35mm in the range, but it's only around £300 from the likes of DigitalRev and is still highly rated.
Click to expand...

I just bought the new Sigma 30mm from Digital Rev and like it a lot. There is a brief review and some early shots in the review section on here somewhere. Still, while its better for groups and wide shots indoors, my canon 50mm 1.4 is still better for portraits on my 7d and I have done baby shots with it quite happily.

J
 
I opted for the 35mm and the 85 for my people work and they work wonders in low light.
Indoors the 35mm is just fine hunts a little when light is really bad but can't have it all when it's only an EF lens. 85mm I use more outside or more space when working inside. I normally use this as a sneak and peek lens as you will need some distance from you and the subject...

Or just look at the 17-55 2.8 lens…but it’s crop only and you would have to sell if you ever think you might go full-frame.

As for bad light....half the challenge in photography is to find the light, in any possible way.....if they are in a dark room guide them to an area that’s has light ....
 
I have just brought the Tamron 17-50 vc as a replacement for my kit lens, and it is excellent and will be very suitable for the indoor portrait photography you are after. Your studio lighting kit will mean the 2.8 max aperture should not be an issue photographing your moving target, and the IQ is excellent.

If your budget does not stretch, the 50m 1.8 is an excellent starter prime, very fast, great quality optics for the price and a good lens to learn how to use your natural zoom (I.e. feet).
 
Thanks so much for all your posts it's certainly given me a lot to think about. The lens I'm favouring most at the moment is the 50mm 1.4 so I can get a fast shutter speed. It would be my first prime lens - love the comment about me using my natural zoom ha ha. I certainly do that chasing after a baby all day. I think an 85mm would be great for outdoors but I don't have the space indoors to get far enough away from my little target.

Going to read some reviews on some of the zooms recommended as well though before I make a final decision. I like using my studio lighting kit but unfortunately my house isn't big enough to have is set up all the time and I don't have enough room to sit her 6 feet away from the backdrop so I'm going to try using natural light as well.

Phil - would be really interested in seeing the post you wrote for another member on window light. Thanks
 
if your indoors on a crop sensor, the 30mm ish is a ok length for a prime, 50mm is more of a head/torso length indoors imo.

depending on the home, and weather and time of day, you may need to look into flash, boucing it around, its real powerful tool to get the pictures you want. if you cant afford a proper flash, then get a popup flash defuser off ebay for £3quid or whatever, thatll help some.

if you go reflectors get 2, cos kids are like omg shiny! and want to play with it :D
 
if your indoors on a crop sensor, the 30mm ish is a ok length for a prime, 50mm is more of a head/torso length indoors imo.

depending on the home, and weather and time of day, you may need to look into flash, boucing it around, its real powerful tool to get the pictures you want. if you cant afford a proper flash, then get a popup flash defuser off ebay for £3quid or whatever, thatll help some.

if you go reflectors get 2, cos kids are like omg shiny! and want to play with it :D
 
Pingu666 - Thanks for the pop up flash defuser idea. I've got a Metz 36 AF-4C flash.
Does a 30mm prime not distort faces or would it be ok as I'm not doing full face photos

I've been reading a lot of reviews on lens and I'm still undecided. I'm thinking of getting the Canon 17-55 f2.8. I can just about afford this but then I'm thinking is it worth the extra cash or should I get the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 which is a lot cheaper and lighter. Would the canon be too heavy for a 450D.

I would like to get a 50 1.4 or 50 1.8 prime as well as everyone says quality is so much better than zoom but would that be a waste of money if I've already got that covered with the zoom. If I get the canon 17-55 I can't afford a prime as well at the moment apart from the cheap Canon 50mm 1.8 or would that be no better than the zoom.

I only want to use it to take photos of my 11 month old baby and I want full photos of her not just head shots so will I be too restricted with the 50mm and not get the shots I want, yes it will be good for low light but there's not much point if I can't get all of her in the shot (my house isn't a mansion so I can't always back up far enough away). Also will the 1.4 aperture be too soft, I would like all of her in focus. But background blur would also be nice when I don't have my backdrop set up.

I just keep going round in circles, I make a decision and then change my mind again. I know no-one can make the decision but me but does anyone have any final words of wisdom.
 
Janjan said:
...

I just keep going round in circles, I make a decision and then change my mind again. I know no-one can make the decision but me but does anyone have any final words of wisdom.
Click to expand...

You're confusing yourself by throwing too much into the mix and forcing yourself into compromises.

The Tamron is optically not that far from the Canon, but the focus speed suffers (what's that worth to you?)

A cheap 50mm 1.8 is optically superior to either of those at f2 ;) It's actually probably better at 50mm at all the large apertures (although no use at the other focal lengths:D).

You won't be using the 50mm all the time, but it'll be great for the occasions it suits your needs(y)

You don't always want all your shots to be full baby shots (the pictures will be boring) Have a look through some pro sites of baby pictures - it's that kind of variety you want and it might be that the 50mm becomes too short for capturing some details.

On the occasions you're not shooting with lights and a background - bokeh will help to 'clean up' the background (it can't work miracles - but used carefully it's great)

And Yes; for what it costs the nifty is a no brainer, but as with all things in life getting a 'good' picture out of it still requires you to work.

Buy the Tamron zoom, the Sigma 30mm, 1.4 the nifty 50 and explore the light.
 
The Tamron is optically not that far from the Canon, but the focus speed suffers (what's that worth to you?)

Do you mean the focus speed suffers compared to the Canon zoom or it suffers compared to a prime?
 
Janjan said:
The Tamron is optically not that far from the Canon, but the focus speed suffers (what's that worth to you?)

Do you mean the focus speed suffers compared to the Canon zoom or it suffers compared to a prime?
Click to expand...

Compared to the zoom!
Neither of those primes I recommended will focus like a top end Canon lens either (none of the Canon 50mm lenses will focus as fast as the 17-55 even the 1.2L)
 
Now you've gone and confused me again!! Just when I was weighing up the Tamron, Sigma and nifty 50 option ...... If only I had more money to spend. It's hard to justify the amount of money when photography is only a hobby.
 
It's not that they focus badly, but that the Canon lens is awesome. I'd stand by my recommendation. A great everyday zoom and a couple of fast primes is a much more sensible buy than just a slightly better focussing everyday zoom.

The Canon 50mm 1.2L is well over a grand but doesn't focus as fast as a Canon 2.8 zoom, due to the size of the glass it's shifting about, in case you'd not got the significance of me saying all of the 50s.
 
I don't know about an 85mm on a crop body for indoor work. I would suggest the 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 (ver 1 used). Or possibly the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 which is a "standard" lens on your camera (~45* FOV) if you're more confined on space.

But IMO, your problem is going to be lighting more than anything else. The wide aperture will help get a usable SS but at the cost of DOF. An 85mm at f/1.4 and 5ft will have a DOF of under 1". The 35mm with the same settings would have a DOF over 2" which is still thin.... of course the FOV change would be headshot vs full body. And I wouldn't generally choose to use 35mm from under ~10ft due to the perspective shift.

When you buy gear to make up for a lack of light it's always a tradeoff and comes with new "issues."
When you add light it "fixes everything"...it will even make your kit lens *sharper.* (not really, but it will seem that way). Of course, there's expense and a whole new subject area to learn.

IMHO, forget the lens. Get an OEM flash, a stand, and a ~30" softbox and learn to add/control light. Very little else will make as much of a difference in your photography long term. It solves all sorts of issues in all sorts of situations.
 
Thanks for everyone's advice. Wilkinson cameras hire out the canon 2.8 zoom so I'm going to rent that this week and see what I think and then make a decision on the zoom and prime combination.
 
Babies move. Sometimes pretty damn quick once they get going. I don't think a softbox/studio type set up would be of any use. I'd prefer an E-TTL flash as a first investment followed by a prime of which ever focal length suits you - You're talking budget so 35/2, 50/1.8....... I have a 430EX & just stick it on the camera, angle it to bounce at +1 EV & you can't go wrong IMO You're not after shots with professional lighting in them, just nice softly lit shots of your little one.
 
LeeRatters said:
Babies move. Sometimes pretty damn quick once they get going. I don't think a softbox/studio type set up would be of any use. .......
Click to expand...
Light is light, and a TTL flash on camera/bounced isn't going to be any better than any other lighting setup for stopping motion (it *can be*, but not typically).
If you mean that they will likely move out of the lighting setup; oK, I'll buy that....
 
Yes that was what I meant hence I said about babies moving, sometimes pretty quickly & the flash being on camera so you can move/adjust/chase & still have reasonable & adequate lighting.
 
yeah on camera flash (with a proper flash gun), or a hammerhead? style where you have a bar under the camera and the flash to one side, that would give you best mobility with a flash. id recommend a battery grip if you stick flash on top, i find it really "tippy" with my camera
 
canon 17-55mm 2.8 is the lens I'm picking up today to hire over the weekend. The guys in the shop recommended the canon 50mm 1.4 prime.

I've got a metz mecablitz 36 AF-4C flash
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top