im so vain, i prolly think this portraits about me... dont i... dont i....
i wanted to do a quick comparison between the sony a7s and its ff sensor and big 70-200/4 lens @200, and my olympus em1 and the itty bitty olympus 45/1.8 lens
i decided my fat face looks much less fat on the oly combo and its shorter focal length, than it does with the stronger compression of a 200mm lens on a ff camera. lol
i also definitely prefer the 3:4 aspect ratio for a vertical portrait. in fact, i dislike 3:2 in general. i wish i could force the sony into 4:3!
i used my neewer ad-360 barebulb flash in a "glow" silver octobox without diffuser for the shots, cameras on my mefoto roadtrip(in perdy blue!) and my heavy duty lightstand that im loving SO much more than the el cheapos i got off amazon to start with. it was definitely worth the price upgrade, while still not being expensive!
lesson of the day: dont buy cheap lightstands! or flash/umbrella holders for that matter!
ok, after obsessively flipping back and forth between the 2 files at a larger size, the sony IS sharper feeling, but do i NEED that sharpness for a portrait?
clearly, what i need is an FE mount zeiss 85/1.4 ;D
so let it be written... so let it be done!
*flippant gesture of dismissal to other 2 lenses*
so i wake up this next morning, and find that Karl Taylor has done a FF vs m43 test for portraits as well!
he was talking about how you can get great shots with cheaper gear, using the entry level olympus omd em10. however, he then uses fancy broncolor lights and softboxes. he DOES manage to mention you can use the softboxes on cheaper lights., tho doesnt say you can use some cheap yongnuo flashes(they even have built in wireless recievers!) with some $30 amazon softboxes and do the same thing for FAR cheaper than his "cheap" kit.