Thanks Bobby, Yes, I think that I should use lower focal lengths, especially since I'm trying to fit models in a 21mm distagon photo space (the b.g. image).
Since I am using a Canon 1DII with a 1.3 multiplication factor for reduced sensor size compared to full frame, the lenses will behave as if they were x1.3 longer and therefore take in 1/1.3 of the field of view of the same lenses on a full frame camera.
So in practice, for a standard camera to subject difference, the 50mm f2.5 Canon Macro (auto focus) "becomes" a 65mm lens in its reduced angle of view.
I think that to put objects espec humans in a 21mm landscape, I should stick to maybe just 50mm and at most 85mm.
The 18mm, 21mm and 28mm Distagons, espec used for careful architecture and landscape work, cause no big issue with focusing speed. further DOF masks any sins.
People that breathe are the problem, LOL !
For my models, I plan to use shorter lenses as you suggested but even down to 50mm.
A veteran Contax Vendor, Ken Hanson told me that the Zeiss lenses with larger apertures are much easier to focus. so that made me lust for the Zeiss 85 1.4 or the 85 1.2, however, I must see if I can excel with what I have!
I have the 50mm 1.4 Planar which I am going to start practicing focusing on eyes. The extra light might make focusing much easier. The 28-85 (f3.5 I believe), is tough to focus rapidly, but now, i'm doing much better with people since I adjusted the eyepiece diopter with an addon lens.
I would love to keep to Zeiss glass if I can to get the Zeiss lens interpretation of the world present in all picture components.
If it's also a problem with the 50 1.4 Zeiss planar, then I'll use the Canon 50 2.5 Macro which is superb and has the advantage of auto focus and the ability to use off center focus points to correspond to eyes.
I can use my Canon 70-200 f4L or 2.8L IS at about 85mm for the people too.
I fear that longer focal lengths would look too flat compared to the 21 Distagons "3D world".
I wonder if someone has established rules for such image people and b.g. constructions.
I was about to get an 85 1.2L, but now Bobby, you have given me pause. The Zeiss or Canon 85mm 1.8 seems a good alternative. As far as getting the best pics of a model, color, sharpness, contrast, which is the best? I don't think the money is much different in respect to the total cost of projects. It's just a matter of whether or not one is going to be able to get a better image to be great enough to be blown up to 3 up to even 6 feet high?
Someone sell me a 1DsII cheap!!
Asher