Does subject matter drive lens preference or is it the other way around?

 Throughout my time as a photographer I've had an affinity for short telephoto lenses. I like the idea that a tighter angle of view helps to eliminate clutter and allows me to really zero in on the things about a subject that I want to convey. One of my photographer friends, Will, gravitates to wider angle lenses for his images. His work incorporates much more of the context in which his subjects exist. Neither point of view is the "correct" one but I think the choices we make are part of how we, individually, see the world. 

I notice that when I walk around with a camera in just about any milieu I am always drawn to a single subject which I want to largely separate from the background. If I use too long a focal length the images start to feel unreal, inauthentic. But if I use too short a focal length the images seem to be filled with distractions which, for me, dilute the attention I think should be focused upon the main subject.

I often profess a love for the 50mm focal length on a full frame camera but I know that my real favorite focal length for the way I see things is the 85-90mm focal length. I often choose to use a 50mm because it's easier, a looser framing doesn't require that I control the image to the same extent as I would if I had fewer elements in the frame with which to work.

Rome. On the Spanish Steps.

But if I don't have to work quickly I'll almost always default to a longer focal length because, in most cases, the subject of my photo is far more interesting to me than the relationship of my subject to the background or the environment. Since I find people to be my favorite subjects I have to say that I'm more interested in the mystery each person represents than I am in the greater context of where I've found them. 

B. With her OM-1 film camera. 

There are some who depend on wider angle lenses for their art. Mostly, the images I see made with wide angle lenses are from "street" photographers like Joel Meyerowitz and by the legion of street photographers who display work on YouTube and Instagram. They work with wide angles out of necessity, I think. The photographers aim to capture people and people's expressions and gestures but they do so without the complicity or cooperation of the subjects and so have to work quickly. Since grabbing a shot with a longer lens is complicated by the much more limited depth of field of a longer focal length the shooters gravitate to lenses such as the 35mm and, especially, the 28mm in order to exploit the much greater depth of field. In short, they have a greater chance of getting their subjects in focus but the tradeoff is less control over composition, subject size in the frame, and the ability to control the in or out-of-focus rendering of distracting backgrounds.

In order to effectively shoot on the fly most wide angle street photographers are using 28mm lenses, stopping down to f8.0 or f11, and then zone focusing so that when a subject presents themself to the photographer's attention all that's required is to quickly frame the shot and push the shutter button. And the wider the lens the less rigorous the framing needs to be. But, to my mind, the less impactful each of the images will be. And the more awkward the apparent distortions, caused by close proximity of lens to subject, will be.

Rome. Spanish Steps.

In the two examples of casual street photography I am including just above and just below I did use a 50mm equivalent lens with a medium format Mamiya 6 camera. The lens was a 75mm. I could have used a 50mm MF lens (28mm equivalent) to capture the scene from both angles, on the fly, but in the top image the wide angle's proximity to the row of people on the bottom would have changed the size relationship between their heads and the head size of the young man holding the book. It would have been a "forced" perspective that would have called attention to technique and reduced the reality of the scene. Huge heads in the foreground and small head in the background...

In the scene just below (which is the same group but shot from the opposite angle) a quick "snap" with a wider angle lens would have caused the woman on the right hand side of the frame to look much larger than the people beside her and would have rendered the man on the left side of the frame much smaller. The idea of having an "objective" view of the scene would have been compromised by the obvious signature of a wider lens. Neither of these shots were "set up" or arranged but neither of them were surreptitious either. Working calmly and with no drama makes it possible to take one's time, use the right optic and compose more accurately. Or at least more in line with your own vision. 

Rome. Spanish Steps. Reverse angle.

As I look through decades of photographs the one's that I like best, the ones which describe what I think of as my style are the more considered and less chaotic shots that come from shorter lenses. In the two examples below I've used two different focal length lenses in the same general setting. The image of Lou with the magazine was done with a 50mm lens and includes a certain amount of context. 

Contax RTSiii camera. Tri-X. 50mm lens

Little City Coffee Shop.

The image below was taken in the same location but from a different angle and it was done with an 85mm lens which allowed me to make a close up portrait which, while you can tell it is not a studio portrait, very much eliminates intrusive and unnecessary details. Less of a story, perhaps. More of a "study." More interesting to me, in some regard. Mostly because I was more interested revealing the subject than in showing a scene. 

Contax RTSiii camera. Tri-X. 85mm lens

When it comes to focal lengths longer than 50mm my current favorites are 85 and 90mm. In the film days and in the time when digital cameras had far lower resolutions I would try to match lenses to what I considered would be the final crops. The final presentation. The idea being to maximize quality by using all the available pixels or film detail required longer lenses; like the 135mm. Now that sensors have advanced so far I'm less likely to use longer lenses such as 135mms and default to cropping in post production instead. 

Now I am most likely to work with one of the following lenses for photographing a single subject. Depending on my final use and the prevailing conditions these are: The Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art lens, the Voigtlander 90mm APO lens and the Sigma 90mm f2.8 Contemporary lens. When photographing with the M rangefinder cameras I find I am more drawn to the 75mm focal length and I am more confident now in my ability to crop since all the cameras have at least 24 megapixels of rich detail. 

There is a time and place (and subject matter) for all sorts of lenses but if you want to move from "generalist" to "artist with a style" you will, over time, find your comfort zone in the jungle of available focal lengths through trial and error. Which means you'll need to try various focal lengths to see what resonates with you. The focal length lens you are most comfortable with will usually do the best job elevating your work. And making your eyes happy.

I'd love to say that for me it's the 50mm focal length on a full frame camera but time and self-curation shows me that it's really somewhere "north" of 80mms. And I'm okay with that. 

85mm. 

 Close enough to be able to interact with one's subject.

Long enough to give them a comforting distance.