Best Portrait Combo?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Just another Canon shooter
Senior MemberPosts: 3,241Gear list
Like?
Re: Best Portrait Combo?
In reply to Moti, 2 months ago

Moti wrote:

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

Chikoo wrote:

daggah wrote:

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

Choose a sentence.

You're the one that claimed he is wrong, so the burden is on you to expound on that. Quit being evasive. It seems that you're not interested in dialog, but rather you're only interested in trolling.

There is too much to write, that is why I asked for one sentence that I can refute.

Start with the first one.

Full frame adds what you think it will add.

Theoretically, based on figures, all this is true. In practical real world photography, it doesn't always work like this because there are sometimes different considerations that can no be measured.

I have shot with APS-C for years before FF. I know something about practical.

So this is how I see it.

Wrong. It adds better tonality when you can shoot at base ISO which is important for portraits;

The most important tonality issue for portraits is skin tones.

Tones and tonality are different things.

Better tonality can be important for OOC, but in practice most of the serious portrait photographers would shoot raw and process, in which case, difference in tonality is not significant.

It is, if you are paying attention.

it adds better resolution.

it doesn't add better resolution; it may add more resolution, weather it is better or not depends on you large you point. Not everyone really needs it.

Better or more, semantics. The only way to get close to 135/2 on FF with crop is to shoot at 85/1.2. Then you get LoCA, softness, etc. BTW, I have experience/own those lenses, the charts are for you.

you shoot with longer FL and those lenses tend to be better -

They don't tend to be better, the tend to be different. As a matter of fact, contemporary portrait photographers would use any FL from WA to tele lenses and it is a matter of personal choice and taste more than anything else. Most existing lenses can very successfully be used for portraits, with most formats, if you know what you are doing.

You missed the point. A 50mm lens at f/2.2 on FF is MUCH better than 35/1.4 on crop for several reasons. 85/2.0 on FF is MUCH better than 50/1.2 on crop, etc. Not only because you stop down but because lenses become better when they get longer, and you use a longer one on FF. Also, bokeh improves with FL.

better bokeh,

Bokeh is the quality of the blur and not the quantity, therefore it depends on the lens character and not on the sensor size.

Longer lenses tend to have better bokeh. Something that you are missing: when you crop the image, you are using more of the transition area, blown, which is the worse for every lens. Lenses designed form crop bodies would change that a bit but there are very few such primes.

better sharpness;

During over 50 years of photography experience, I havven't seen many lenses that do not have good sharpness for portrait photography. As a matter if fact, lens sharpness isn't one of the most important considerations for portrait photography.

Portrait photography outside of the studio is a different thing. Sharpness can and often is a factor. You are missing the point again - I am talking about lens/format combos, not just lenses. I would gladly use my 50L on FF wide open, and do it all the time, but on crop, that gives me too much blur.

you can do better background separation when needed

Well, not necessarily. There are plenty of ways to separate a subject from the background, using blur is only one of them and not always the best.

Everything else equal, you do get a better separation. Just because there might be other factors, does not negate this one.

(135/2 on FF really shines);

Indeed. It was one of my preferred lens when I used Canon. But now with M4/3, my 75mm f1.8 comes very close to it but it needs a different technique to work with.

You are kidding.

if you shoot Canon, for example, you get better colors;

that was not my experience. I shot Canon FF for many years and by my own comparison, I find the colors from my E-M1 to be better OOC, but as I shoot RAW, it is irrelevant.

A missed point, again. Canon FF has substantially better colors than Canon crop.

more accurate AF, too.

Only for fast moving objects. Irrelevant for portrait photography.

Wrong. For static objects, FF is far more accurate at eq. apertures. FoCal has some statistical data to support this but I am basing this on experiences with several bodies and ~20 lenses.

 Just another Canon shooter's gear list:Just another Canon shooter's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow