>>4016508>>4016590These and the other comments triggered me so bad, I'm taking the bait. The biggest difference in how someone's face looks is going to down to subject distance, not focal length. A 24mm and 200mm are going have the same amount of distortion on a subject's face, provided they have the same camera to subject distance. Obviously you have to end up cropping a ton with the 24mm to match the 200mm framing, and as a result certain focal lengths lend themselves better for different types of portraits. This is also ignoring entirely that there's more to "portraits" than just headshots, and even then, for fatter people, the effect of shooting closer with wider lenses can help with a slimming effect of their face.
Here is 50mm on APS-C and 75mm on FF. The bottom is a difference mask, where pure black = exact match, and pure white = 100% different. None of my FF cameras have an APS-C crop, and I'm too lazy to crop properly in my editor (or use an APS-C camera + adjust the tripod height accordingly to match), so it was cropped to match by hand. The inaccuracy of this, coupled with the difference in optical qualities between the two lenses (distortion, vignetting), can pretty much explain the minor differences. There is certainly not difference that would visibly manifest itself in a headshot type portrait.
>>401662085mm on APS-C is essentially the same as a 135mm on FF, which are very common and popular portrait options.
>>4016667>The way a face looks at 50mm vs 85mm50mm on FF and 75mm on FF, with the same subject distance will yield the same face, but framing will be different. 50mm on APS-C and 75mm on FF will frame the same at the same subject distance, and also give you the same face. The only way it's a different "face" is when you change the subject distance.
