Crop Dslr portraits thread

Just like it says, lets see if the crop cameras can do as good as the ff, I'll start

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …n-done-before/6202742307/

While the 1.6x bodies are quite capable of taking excellent portraits, the FF bodies are better suited for that specific type of photography. I've shot with FF, 1.3x and 1.6x bodies and for portraits I would rank the files from the 1.6x bodies as the ones needing the most post processing.

Here is one taken with the 7D/50mm f/1.8

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/rickzphoto/7296​804298/

Crops suck in portraits... Exif intact!

May you guys please justify why crops ''suck'' for portraits and why do they need more processing? As far as i know the only difference is that you will get a more pleasing background blur

boerewors wrote in post #15725952
May you guys please justify why crops ''suck'' for portraits and why do they need more processing? As far as i know the only difference is that you will get a more pleasing background blur

The 1.6x bodies don't "suck" for portraits, they're just not as well suited as the full frame cameras for that type of photography.

jaomul wrote in post #15724920
Just like it says, lets see if the crop cameras can do as good as the ff, I'll start

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …n-done-before/6202742307/
Wow by jaomul, on Flickr

Well, here you have proven that with tight framing it is possible to have inadequate DOF, just like you can do with a 35mm format camera. In this photo the far eye is clearly OOF, even at small web size. The only thing that would change in this picture with a 35mm format is that it would have needed to have been stopped down even more.

Also as a quibble, the thread subject line is 'portraits' and I undestand that this could pretty much mean any shot of people. But I have absolutely got to assume that this 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind' expression on the subject (who is clearly viewing the alien spacecraft) is not a posed portrait. To me it would be better described as a 'candid' as the subject is engaged in something else.

What is the point of this thread? The posted images are not selling me any kind of story here. Well....any story other than the alien spacecraft visit.

edit - sorry if that seemed overly harsh, but this kind of thread has a silly premise at its heart. 1.6X format cameras are quite usable and people take very good photos with them in all kinds of genres. 35mm format cameras have a format that is a bit bigger, and just as has always been the case a bigger format makes for certain differences.

The feeling I get sometimes is that people who have more affordable cameras feel as though they are being made out to be lessor photographers with lessor gear, and these kinds of threads are some kind of retaliaton. Overall maybe it is better to just not try and engage in this tit for tat. As I said, there are differences in the formats, but lots of great pictures can be made with either and certainly one great shot from one of the two formats isn't going to prove anything.

boerewors wrote in post #15725952
May you guys please justify why crops ''suck'' for portraits and why do they need more processing? As far as i know the only difference is that you will get a more pleasing background blur

I am being totally sarcastic.

Once people get over the idea that portraits should be paper thin DOF where the eyelashes of one eye are sharp and in the other they are fading away, then you realize you don't need the FF for your composition.

That's why I said Exif intact. All photos were done with the 18-200 'superzoom' on the 60D. A combination that according to the gurus can't shoot straight, it's not sharp, the DOF is no good (I am shooting at f5.6 and above). Pffft...

I've owned both APS-C as well as 35mm digital format, and I belive both do just as well with portraits.

Seems to me the OP's been reading too much into folks saying, so called "full frame", is better than APS-C when it comes to portraits.

boerewors wrote in post #15725952
May you guys please justify why crops ''suck'' for portraits and why do they need more processing? As far as i know the only difference is that you will get a more pleasing background blur

As far as that statement goes.... It's the lens that produces either pleasing or harsh bokeh, and not the format.

Maybe you meant to say -- 35mm digital format, in certain situations (not all), can provide a more diffused, out of focus, backgrounds/foreground​s?

WOW- To davidc502 and JeffreyG, no measuring going on here. I have posted portraits in the 1ds thread and know the difference between the two formats. I thought it might be good idea for a post so we could see the type of look that a certain camera gives for certain subject. If you don't like it that is great, there are thousands of other threads to look at. You can of course add to the thread or indeed if you prefer make condescending comments. All is allowed

Great shots-keep them coming

My favorite portrait to date

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …erydaygetaway/8​419049392/

IMO everydaygetaway has the best picture in this thread so far. I agree with jeffreyg. What's the point of this thread? We all know that ff and crop are good. Iono just a weird topic.

^Thank you, I'm flattered! I'll admit, I agree with you and merely posted the pic because it's one of my favorites

davidc502 wrote in post #15726510
As far as that statement goes.... It's the lens that produces either pleasing or harsh bokeh, and not the format.

Maybe you meant to say -- 35mm digital format, in certain situations (not all), can provide a more diffused, out of focus, backgrounds/foreground​s?

ya you found better words to explain what i was meant to say. Other than that i dont see what else makes FF any better for portraits? I have made some portraits with my 70-200L lens at 200mm on my 60D where the backgrounds look like cream theyre so diffused. It depends on the distance to the background, but you can get that FF look from a crop camera. I wish i could post an example but my internet connection has been restricted. Hopefully i can post images again one of these days.