kcbrown wrote in post #15085039
Could you expound on this a little more? It sounds like it's more than just an angle of view issue as far as what you're getting for portraiture from your 7D versus your 5D2.
Frankly, if you've got both, you may as well use the 5D2 for portraits as long as you don't find the autofocus system to be limiting in any way. But nobody has been able to explain to me how the 7D falls short for portrait work, even when compared with the 5D2, and that's why I'm wondering how you found it limiting.
I have to wonder, too, if the people who find full frame most appealing for portraits tend to be people who used to shoot film and are really used to the "look and feel" of full frame. There's certainly nothing wrong with that -- everyone has their preferences, after all.
As I said, the 5DII reminds me of my film days. To your question on the 7D and portraiture, I normally shoot with my 70-200 2.8 IS II racked out on my 5DII. Doing so with my 7D requires more room between subject and I, and it takes me several wasted shots to get the same feel of image with the 7D. Had I a narrower but longer studio, the 7D would be my only body. I could do my studio work, and take it to the sports arena and be happy as a clam. It isn't, I don't and therefore I have a FF body as well.
As harsh as this might sound, I normally don't 'leave room for cropping' unless I am doing environmental/outdoor portraits, and then cropping is to remedy a bad background or poor composition. In studio, the model is the only subject, therefore cropping for me isn't necessary. Not saying it is a bad thing to do the neg space thing, but just not my style. I like the compression focal length gives me, and the 5DII knocks it out of the park.
Hope this explains what I mightve have missed earlier. Thanks.