Olympus 17 mm f 1.2 Pro, 45 mm f 1.2 Pro, Voigtlander 17.5 mm f 0.95

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Sbarnaveli Junior Member • Posts: 25
Re: Use longer FL to blur the background, not just by wide aperture

G1Houston wrote:

Long lens can much more effectively blur out the background by "compression." The "degree of blur? between f1.2 and f1.8 is too small to make any difference. For m4/3 for head and shoulder shots, the 56/1.4 from Sigma is ideal.

Keep in mind you want to keep all the facial features in focus, again argue against shooting at f1.2.

The examples you showed are too dark, too underexposed.

Thanks for the suggestions.

Indeed, it is true that long lenses blur more effectively, but they are also too long for environments sometimes. I considered 56mm but that will be too tight for the shots that I am aiming for. And for the situations when I can make use of 56mm, I have 75mm, so I don't think 56mm Sigma would benefit me in the end. Even Olympus 45mm is quite often too tight.

As to the darkness of the examples, I like darkness in the pictures a lot. And the Godfather portraits were meant to be dark and the Director of Photography was called "the Prince of Darkness". So that's just a preference and it also depends on the screens that we're using to look at these pictures.

Edit: Forgot to add that I played with a DoF simulator with fixed face size in frame and 1.8->1.2 makes a significant difference and is easy to see (didn't expect that myself, to be honest, but it is significant)

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow