Timeline for Is an entry level DSLR going to shoot nice portrait pictures?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 7, 2019 at 14:09 | comment | added | James_pic | @StianYttervik Hollow bokeh is typically related to spherical aberration - where the outer parts of the lens focus at a slightly different distance than the centre. If the background has hollow bokeh, it probably means that the outside of the lens focuses slightly further back than the inside, and that the foreground will have diffuse bokeh - and vice versa for diffuse background bokeh and hollow foreground bokeh. | |
| Jun 7, 2019 at 0:56 | comment | added | JonathanReez | @AlexandervonWernherr sure, but you could realistically create a neural network that would convert your inexperienced guitar output into a world-class performance. "AI" changes everything when it comes to equipment :) | |
| Jun 7, 2019 at 0:54 | comment | added | JonathanReez | "The camera can't propel you forward" -> sure it can. A modern phone running "AI" camera software can often take better photos in the hands of an inexperienced person than most people ever could with a "dumb" point-and-shoot camera. | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 22:00 | comment | added | Tim Campbell | @StianYttervik is the lens (hollow sphere) a 'mirror' lens? These lenses typically produce a 'donut' shaped bokeh (round ring which is black in the center). The black spot in the center of those lenses is the shadow of the secondary mirror obstruction. | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 18:22 | comment | added | Stian | Regarding the bokeh, one of my lenses produce "hollow sphere" bokeh, which look horrible although they are, I guess, nicely shaped. My favourite portrait lens makes more, how to say... diffuse spheres - which is a part of why it is my favourite. I never quite understood what the difference is and how I can tell from a lens' specification this nature. Do you know anything about that? | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 14:07 | comment | added | J... | Also - post processing. Half the magic is getting the shot, the other half, especially for portraits, is good work in post. If you can't develop/retouch a shot in Lightroom, etc, then even a great photographer with great lighting and great technique won't necessarily produce the best shot if they're hopeless at turning the RAW file into a proper image. | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 12:06 | comment | added | Belle | The 50mm f/1.8 will give you an advantage on point 3 of Tim's excellent answer. It's definitely better for portraits than the kit lens. But your kit lens would probably be more useful for landscapes and pictures of whole rooms for say the housing market. When to get the 50mm f/1.8? That's up to you. Consider why you don't want to get it now and why you do. And maybe look into the 50mm f/1.4 or even f/1.2. That would be an upgrade over the f/1.8. Or one of the 85mm ones. Those may also pair well with your kit lens, which probably has 50mm in its reach. | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 11:59 | comment | added | Belle | @someone12321 About that. I wouldn't call getting a 50mm f/1.8 an upgrade. Well, it's not a replacement. It's definitely a good lens, probably better quality and better for portraits than your kit lens. But not a replacement. I personally still use my kit lens. I've got a 50-140mm f/2.8 lens that cost me more than a grand. Beautiful portrait lens, that one. I've also got my 18-55mm f/2.8-4 kit lens. I use that for landscapes. It's aperture is not as great as the 50-140mm, but that doesn't matter for landscapes, which I should at f/5.6 minimum anyway. | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 11:16 | comment | added | someone12321 | Thank you for your answer. One more thing that I would like to know. Is it better to start with kit lens and then after some time upgrade maybe to the 50mm f/1.8 lens or to go straight to the 50mm lens as many people on youtube say that it is lens suitable for everything? | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 7:45 | comment | added | Alexander von Wernherr | And Peter Frampton with a beginner guitar will still sound better than a noob (like me) on a 60k Les Paul. | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 3:58 | comment | added | Michael C | ... the same position, the perspective of both will be identical. See also this answer and Is there a difference between taking a far shot on a 50mm lens and a close shot on a 35mm lens? | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 3:54 | comment | added | Michael C | Overall I find your answer very helpful. Re: point 3 of the 'My personal thoughts' section: Focal length/AoV does not determine perspective (stretch vs. compression), only shooting distance affects that. The reason wider angle lenses usually stretch a scene is because we move closer to the subject and the ratio between subject and background is increased. The reason longer lenses compress a scene is because we usually move back and the ratio between the subject and background distances is reduced. If you shoot with a wide lens and crop it to the same AoV as a telephoto lens used from... | |
| Jun 5, 2019 at 16:11 | history | answered | Tim Campbell | CC BY-SA 4.0 |