"Hey, everybody has their own preference in their art. If he can make an amazing 35mm portrait (which I have seen) good for him!"
Yes, you are right Addison, if one can do so then it works, however from a commercial point of view, getting a tool that is most suitable for the majority of potential work becomes more significant, especially when one is starting out.. Which is why I ask the question as to the logic for our OP.
I totally agree with your comment about the OP's lack of clarity on what genre or market space they intend to work within. Now that could be a simple lack of clarity of expression or, more worringly, a lack of clarity of purpose and strategy and that can be very harmful to a budding career.
I am not here to criticize, but to help the OP by questioning the context and logic so they make the best start to their career.
Conventional wisdom and physics says that if one wants a portrait lens for the majority of situations, then a moderate, fast telephoto lens (85mm up to, say 200mm) is best because:
1. A smaller aperture and longer focal length will contribute to a shallower depth of field, to isolate a person from the potential for a distracting environment. A shorter FL will keep much more of the background in focus, thus undermining any benefit of a smaller f/stop.
2. Distance from the subject is usually more comfortable for the subject, so if one wants to dominate the frame with the person's face then a longer FL is desirable. Now, there are instances of photographers getting up close and personal with a wide-angle or normal lens, but as Kevin alluded to, that can lead to somewhat unflattering distortion of features which is not usually welcomed by the subject, thus especially for a starter professional kit, the viability of that choice deserves examination for the benefit of the OP.
Alternatively, one could stand off and have a viable portrait within which the subject is a component of their particular environment - which can be very effective, but again, that is not a common perspective and to start off one wants to cover the most bases possible for the most likely scenarios.
3. I am aware of the impact of equivalence (I have written technical articles on the subject), but the resultant FoV of combining a 35mm lens with a Canon APS-C sensor is going to be about 55mm, which is essentially a normal field of view. Furthermore, the equivalent aperture of the 35mm f/1.8 macro will be about f/2.8.
I started working in the business over 40 years ago, when the world was very different and the competition was much less. Today, the world is awash with people offering excellent images, so more than ever one must have a niche, or something to say that is distinctive and helps to differentiate a professional from the rest. I chose wildlife and scenic and stuck with that the majority of my career. These days there are multiple platforms on which to engage commercially, but that also means there is much more competition - and a lot of people at the lower end of the market a lot of people think they can take their own images for events. It's a challenging market out there.
cheers, TREVOR
"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris
