How far back for studio and prom/Spring Dance?

[HiFiGuy1]

I have been experimenting with full-height portrait framing with my infinitely patient wife. My setup right now is as follows:


Painter's tape on floor for target location = 8' 9" from image sensor to focus point (nearer eye)


40D, portrait orientation (center of image sensor = 57" AFF)


Slight (5 degrees?) downward angle of camera body


17-40 mm set to 24mm/38.4mm EFL (seems to provide full body through the viewfinder)





My questions are many, but first I want to know if this is a typical physical distance for this kind of work. If not, I want to know what is generally acceptable and what others use who do this for a living or side money. I want to make sure, especially with a wide angle, not to over-emphasize features resulting in an unflattering picture. I am guessing that means not getting much closer than I am in my setup.


I asked earlier in another thread what additions or changes would be useful for my current kit in order to help go forward with this kind of work, and got feedback that a 24-70 would be a great choice, but based on my trials so far, I am running into difficulty from this distance getting a full body shot if I zoom tighter than 24-26mm.


I know some reference test shots would give more perspective and I am working on that. I will post them as soon as possible. My one and only battery is charging right now! I am working on that. I figured out today that the first two things I need are an L-bracket and an extra battery. And a flash. And a modifier of some sort. And.....

[Keith B]

On my 40D I use to like to shoot full body shots with my 24 1.4L. On my 5DII I usually use my 24-70 anywhere between 24-35mm. I'll probably start using the 35L since I just recently got it.


I never really give much thought to distances. As far as angles I let the subjects physical features and mood of the shot dictate that.

[HiFiGuy1]

Keith,


Thank you for the reply. It seems like I'm coming up with that same data empirically. As I originally posted, I am at 24mm on my 17-40 when I get the framing I think I want with my 40D. It sort of makes me think I should get the 24mm f/1.4, because I know it is a terrific lens and very sharp, with a very shallow minimum DOF. OTOH, I am kind of scared to get a prime, because it isn't as flexible, but it certainly seems like a 24mm would be exactly what I need in this case. Of course, as composition changes, I'd like the option of re-framing without changing lenses, so that puts me back onto the 24-70. If I had unlimited funds, I'd get both, but I need to be careful until I start bringing in income from this.

[Keith B]

The 24-70 is a really good option. It is really sharp and just about any Annie Leibovitz shot (in lsat few years) is shot with it.


Don't fear the prime though. I loved the 24 1.4L on my 40D. I missed the 1.4 a 2.8 lens in no where near. The sharp images and buttery bokeh you get will make you giggle every time you open up the shot on you screen. It is very liberating to have a fast prime in you kit.