 Gerald Coppola |
Portraits in Digital Format? I am an amateur photographer interested in trying some digital portraiture. I would like to buy a digital SLR to use for portraiture in the near future. My question is, can I expect to get professional quality results with a DSLR in the $1000-2000 range? Also, any recommendations as to what camera(s) might suit my needs best? I would also like to be able to use the camera for stock photography as well. Am I asking for too much out of a single camera?
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Gerald, I think you will be able to get quite excellent results from the DSLRs now available in the $1000-$2000 price range. Heck, lots of folks shoot wedding, etc., with Nikon's D70 or the Canon equivalent. Some of the differences between these cameras and their more expensive brethren is the chip (though that difference keeps narrowing), and some is the build quality ("pro" level gear is built to withstand a lot more abuse). The real issue is the lens, frankly. If you put a 28-300MM Tamron lens on a $5000 or more DSLR, you are still going to deal with the limitations of the lens itself. And while a lens like that is fine for folks doing vacation shots, etc., it simply is not as sharp (nor as fast) as other lenses that cost more, even with less zoom range. As for deciding what gear to use - before folks throw "buy brand X" at you - I suggest you go to a store and actually hold and sample the DSLRs available in the $1000-ish price range. Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Konica-Minolta and Pentax all make good equipment, though the first two are the brands generally thought of as making "professional" gear. But at the $1000 price point, their differences have much more to do with how a given model balances in your hands, how easy it is for you to focus or understand the viewfinder indicators, etc. In other words, don't get lost in the specification sheets - a 6MP or higher chip should suit you fine. The fact that some companies offer 30+ lenses while others "only" offer 5 lenses is also generally moot - it's quite unlikely that you will need the more exotic glass for a while, at least. So, again - try the various models out. You might find one clumsy in your hands - with the buttons and controls in awkward places. You might find one whose viewfinder is just exactly right for your eyes. You want to make the decision based on these ergonomic factors, since the reality is that, nonsensical status symbol issues aside, the important differences are not things that others can decide for you. I hope that helps.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Gerald Coppola |
Thanks for the insight, Bob, (and quick response). I will certainly take your advice!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Hello Gerald, Bob's advice is right on... and I will echo and reinforce his statement about lenses. Nearly all $1,000 to $2,000 DSLRs have great sensors, good ergonomics and pretty decent build quality. Whatever you choose, I'd resist the temptation to get the "combo" kits that offer one or two lenses with the camera body, as they are generally (I say "generally" so as NOT to start another war) are not that good. Do as Bob recommends, hold them, see if you like the placement of buttons etc. Then, I'd suggest getting the body only and shop for a couple decent lenses. There is tons of info out there on lenses, quality, sharpness, build quality etc. Not to dissuade you, be prepared for sticker shock. Good lenses are not cheap, yet they will make or break any camera.
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
You can get great portraits with almost any camera - digital or film. Well, maybe not a pin hole! It's not the camera, it's the photographer. You need lighting and background. You need a photogenic model! What you don't need, necessarily, is a $1,000-2,000 camera body!
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Of course, John's point is well taken. But good portraits are usually those where the subject stands out from the background - and this entails a shallow depth of field (or post-process blurring in Photoshop, et al). To get the former, you need a fast lens and/or larger format imaging surface, as DOF increases as aperture closes as well as for smaller imaging areas. In addition, while DSLRs have the reaction times of film cameras, the fixed lens cameras (point-and-shoot or prosumer point-and-shoot with 12X zoom lenses) still have an annoying shutter lag - you press the shutter button and it is still a noticeable delay for the shutter to fire. If your portrait subject is sitting still, this may not be an issue. If they are animated (like a child clowning or an adult talking), then this can become a real detriment, as you will press the shutter button when the smile (for example) is just right and a quarter second later when the camera fires the expression is gone. Of course, lighting and subject are obviously key, but if those factors are equal, the shots taken with the more appropriate gear will prove more appealing to most viewers.
|
|
|
|
||
|
anonymous |
In defence of the the lenses that come with the camera (and no definitely not getting my backup etc) I have had no problem what so ever with the stock standard lenses that I have. I have a 18-55mm, 28-90mm, 90-300mm. I love them. Check out my gallery if you want, if you are happy with the clarity of my work - well then, you will be happy with a "stock standard lense". It is all about how you use them and not pushing them to their extremes.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Natalie, I love many of your photos, nice gallery. Just so I am not misunderstood, and this is probably part of my photographic persona; I read a ton of tests done with various lenses..and there IS a difference in good glass quality and poor to average glass quality.. I'm speaking about (low Dispersion) glass and such..especially in the area of "contrast" "sharpness" "ghosting" "flaring" "pincushion" "chromatic abberation" etc... Does it make a difference in an average shooting day or the average scene? Probably not. Any difference with expensive fast glass in closeups and detail work? Most definetly! Color saturation and contrast in portraiture? Oh yes. I try to buy the best glass I can find..or as much as my wallet can tolerate before begging for mercy! LOL There are some lens names you could not give to me for free..I would use them as paper weights..No; I'm not gonna' mention names.;) I think if we could all afford the top stuff, we would buy it. I can't afford it all either...wish I could. Pete
|
|
|
|
||
|
Gerald Coppola |
Thanks to all of you who responded. Just to clarify my original question... assuming I've got adequate studio equipment( i.e. a three strobe set-up, background, etc.), and I'm willing to invest in very good quality 50mm lens, (also assuming my skills are up to par)I can expect to get professional quality portraits with a DSLR such as the Canon digital rebel or the Nikon D70? Does anyone feel that a medium format film camera is a necessity for true professional studio portraits?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Gerald; A 50mm lens is NOT the lens of choice for portraits. Makes peoples noses look big, eye sockets deep and a host of other reasons. ..and no, you don't "need" med format to achieve pro results in portraits. Just look around at many galleries here..very nice portraits in many of them.
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Gerald, Pete's comment is valid...for a film camera or full frame DSLR. Remember to takeinto account the crop factor (as it's often called). The Nikon DSLRs have a 1.5 factor, which means that a 50MM lens on the DSLR behaves like a 75MM lens would on a film camera. So, yes, for portraiture on a DSLR, a 50MM could be quite nice. If you style goes more towards the longer telephotos for portraits, just keep that calculation in mind. Some Canon models have 1.3, others 1.6 crop factors, so base your decision on the particular model you end up deciding to buy.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Larry Larsen |
Go out and rent a camera for the weekend, then you will know for sure. Larry
|
|
|
|
||
|
Larry Larsen |
Go out and rent a camera for the weekend, then you will know for sure. Larry
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
"Does anyone feel that a medium format film camera is a necessity for true professional studio portraits?" Only those of us who shoot with MF film cameras. lol
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||