When does a longer focal length's background compression look good in portraits?
Asked 12/13/2015
5 views
2 answers
0
Are there general guidelines for when the compressed background look from a longer focal length is aesthetically useful? For example, on full frame I often like the look of an 85mm lens more than a 50mm for headshots, aside from the flatter facial perspective. I mostly shoot outdoors and can usually move back as needed. My typical framing is half-body to three-quarter body, sometimes full-body. How should I think about choosing between 50mm and 85mm based on background rendering and subject emphasis?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
10y ago
2 Answers
3
I usually concern myself with background compression depending on if it will affect how I want the shot to look. If I want to emphasize the size of something in the distance I will go to a longer lens and move farther away from the foreground elements. That increases the apparent size of object in the far distance. An extreme example is the moon. Shoot a cityscape from far away with a 500mm lens and the moon on the horizon will look huge. Conversely if I want to shrink background elements or emphasize foreground elements I'll go to a wider angle lens. I've never had a rule like it sounds you are looking for. I just know that a 50mm on a full frame is about "normal" and as I deviate to either side it will affect my picture more. If you were doing a portrait like you mentioned but want to include a background element that you wanted to look bigger, I'd go much longer than your standard portrait lens. I guess one thing I've always considered is; will the compression make objects look too unrealistically exaggerated (either very large or very small)? And is that the look I am going for or am I trying to avoid that?
Originally by user35622. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user35622
10y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
There isn’t a hard rule—use longer focal lengths when you want distant background elements to appear larger and closer to the subject, and wider focal lengths when you want the background to feel smaller or the foreground to feel more prominent.
For portraits, an 85mm on full frame often looks pleasing because, when you step back to keep the same framing, the background appears more compressed and less dominant. That can help simplify outdoor scenes and make the subject stand out. A 50mm gives a more “normal” look and tends to show more environmental context.
A practical guideline:
- Choose 85mm if the background contains distant elements you want to look bigger, closer, or more visually present behind the subject.
- Choose 50mm if you want a more natural sense of space or want to include more of the surroundings.
- If you want to emphasize foreground-to-background depth, go wider.
So the decision is less about a fixed rule and more about what you want the background to do in the composition.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI10y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Can you get telephoto portrait compression from 1 meter away with a wide field of view?
How do 50mm, 85mm, and telephoto lenses change the look of a portrait?
Does a crop sensor change perspective, background compression, or depth of field?
Does an 85mm lens give more background blur than a 50mm if framing stays the same?
Which lens is better for sharp full-body portraits on full frame: 50mm f/1.8 or 85mm f/1.8?