Portrait question

[mhm]

I love to take portraits where the person's face is in focus and the background blurry. However, I have not been able to do that with my current camera, an Olympus C5060, even with the smallest aperature. Any suggestions, or do I need to shop for a new camera?

 

[GrumpyOne]

I love to take portraits where the person's face is in focus and the background blurry. However, I have not been able to do that with my current camera, an Olympus C5060, even with the smallest aperature. Any suggestions, or do I need to shop for a new camera?

By smallest aperture, are you referring to the smallest hole or the smallest number? The way you phrased it, you've gone the wrong direction. You want a wide open aperture for shallow depth of field and to do that, you want to use the smaller numbers. If you make it a small aperture, you're using a higher number and smaller apertures will have a greater depth of field, keeping more in focus (the depth part).

f/2 = wide open
f/8 = smaller hole
f/22 = tiny hole

 

[photo_chick]

Also remember that focal length affects depth of field as well.

 

[mhm]

By smallest aperture, are you referring to the smallest hole or the smallest number? The way you phrased it, you've gone the wrong direction. You want a wide open aperture for shallow depth of field and to do that, you want to use the smaller numbers. If you make it a small aperture, you're using a higher number and smaller apertures will have a greater depth of field, keeping more in focus (the depth part).

f/2 = wide open
f/8 = smaller hole
f/22 = tiny hole

Smallest number is what I meant.

 

[0bli0]

also, the size of the sensor greatly affects dof, due to circle of confusion behaviour. it's very difficult to get a nice bokeh (out of focus area) with a small sensor unless you're printing very large. this is due to incident light from items in front of and behind the focal plane and where they fall (or should fall) in relation to the imaging sensor/piece of film.

there is no hard edge border between sharp and unsharp. the amount that something needs to be blurred in order to appear unsharp within this 'circle of confusion' is then out of the DOF. the smaller the sensor, the larger something has to be printed to perceive this unsharpness.

 

[photo_chick]

also, the size of the sensor greatly affects dof, due to circle of confusion behaviour. it's very difficult to get a nice bokeh (out of focus area) with a small sensor unless you're printing very large. this is due to incident light from items in front of and behind the focal plane and where they fall (or should fall) in relation to the imaging sensor/piece of film.

there is no hard edge border between sharp and unsharp. the amount that something needs to be blurred in order to appear unsharp within this 'circle of confusion' is then out of the DOF. the smaller the sensor, the larger something has to be printed to perceive this unsharpness.

I did not realize this! So would there be a lot of DOF difference between an APS-C sensor and a FF sensor? That might be another point in my reasoning to DH about getting a 5D!!!

 

[mhm]

Okay, so I think it sounds like I'm not going to get this type of portrait out of the C5060. I'd purchased the camera more for it's wide-angle capabilities for underwater photography, and I'm pleased with it for that, but most of what I shoot these days are my kids, and it's not serving me well for that. I don't really want to spend SLR amounts of money, but I like having some control (even full manual mode, although I could get by if it has at least aperture priority setting), and I like having a non-LCD viewfinder (my hands tend to shake). Stabilization would be nice, but I've gotten by without it in the past. Any suggestions?

 

[tinksdad]

Okay, so I think it sounds like I'm not going to get this type of portrait out of the C5060. I'd purchased the camera more for it's wide-angle capabilities for underwater photography, and I'm pleased with it for that, but most of what I shoot these days are my kids, and it's not serving me well for that. I don't really want to spend SLR amounts of money, but I like having some control (even full manual mode, although I could get by if it has at least aperture priority setting), and I like having a non-LCD viewfinder (my hands tend to shake). Stabilization would be nice, but I've gotten by without it in the past. Any suggestions?

I've had a C-4040 and a C-7070 (not the 5060) but both of those did allow aperture change in the manual mode and aperture priority as well. Try reducing the aperture to the smallest number which will reduce the depth of field. Position your subject approximately 6-10' in front of your background that you want blurred and then zoom in to get the shot you want, it "should" work.

 

[LPZ_Stitch!]

Okay, so I think it sounds like I'm not going to get this type of portrait out of the C5060. I'd purchased the camera more for it's wide-angle capabilities for underwater photography, and I'm pleased with it for that, but most of what I shoot these days are my kids, and it's not serving me well for that. I don't really want to spend SLR amounts of money, but I like having some control (even full manual mode, although I could get by if it has at least aperture priority setting), and I like having a non-LCD viewfinder (my hands tend to shake). Stabilization would be nice, but I've gotten by without it in the past. Any suggestions?

Some good P&S cameras with plenty of manual control (all between about $300 and $500):

Canon Powershot S3 IS
Canon Powershot G7
Fuji S6000fd
Fuji F30
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H5 (or H7 or H9)

Check out reviews for these cameras: Digital Camera Resource Page

None of them will give you that sort of DSLR shallow DOF without a little work, but they can do pretty good. Using wide apertures (2.7/2.8 is about as wide as any of these will go) and using the zoom (standing further from your subject) tends to look pretty good.

Check out Granite State Heidi's bird pics on the S3 thread for an example of the kind of DOF you can get with these sorts of camera (just ignore the water drop! ). Great focus on the birds and feeder, lovely bokeh....

 

[jann1033]

you might want to try a portrait or maybe even macro( if it would focus far enough back) if you have those auto settings...they probably give you a decent background blur.

 

[LPZ_Stitch!]

you might want to try a portrait or maybe even macro( if it would focus far enough back) if you have those auto settings...they probably give you a decent background blur.

Absolutely! If you can get the whole subject in-frame while shooting macro with a P&S, you can get a background blur like this: Flowering Almond.

You can also see the shallow DOF in the violet picture, but the bokeh isn't as pronounced 'cause it's only about 2" from the flower!

 

[mhm]

you might want to try a portrait or maybe even macro( if it would focus far enough back) if you have those auto settings...they probably give you a decent background blur.

I actually woke up at about 3 am this morning with the macro idea--I got up to check it out (since I couldn't go back to sleep) and discovered the C5060 doesn't have macro! (I've since remembered that it does, just not where I thought it was, so I'll try that tonight.)

I've tried the Portrait setting--not much blur, if any.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Here's everything I can think of to get the greatest focus difference between your subject and your background:

1) Open the aperture as wide as possible (smallest f-stop number)
2) Extend your zoom as far as possible (greatest magnification)
3) Position your subject as far from the background as possible
4) Get as close to your subject as possible

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I actually woke up at about 3 am this morning with the macro idea--I got up to check it out (since I couldn't go back to sleep) and discovered the C5060 doesn't have macro! (I've since remembered that it does, just not where I thought it was, so I'll try that tonight.)

I've tried the Portrait setting--not much blur, if any.

There's no magic to the Portrait or Macro settings. They just adjust things like the aperture, shutter speed, flash, etc to help with typical "portrait" or "macro" photos. If you know how to make the appropriate adjustments on your own, you won't have any use for a "macro" or "portrait" mode on your camera.

 

[mhm]

Just to make sure I hadn't forgotten how to take this kind of picture, I borrowed my BIL's Rebel XT, put one of my old zoom lens on it, and snapped a few pictures of my daughter playing out back (between flipping chicken on the bbq, so not much time or thought into it), and got some of the best pictures I've gotten with a digital camera, using Av setting. I will try out a couple super zooms in the store, but I think I will probably go with the Rebel XTi. I'd rather have something smaller and less $$, but I have a feeling I won't be satisfied with anything less. I love my Canon Eos Elan 2E, but I miss the instant gratification of digital. Thanks for all the input!

 

[Groucho]

You can also try knocking out the background in Photoshop, blurring that some more, and putting the sharper foreground back in. Not as good since you won't get different bokeh depending on the distance of the background objects, but an option.

The cheaper DSLR option is a Pentax K110D for just under $400 w/kit lens, or the K100D (with image stabilization for all lenses) for around $450 after rebate (or about $575 for kit + 50-200mm lens.) You can also pick up a lens that's really good for portraits like the 50mm F1.4 for around $200. Here's a shot that I took with the 50mm soon after I got it:

That's only at F3.5, but you can see the very smooth bokeh in the (messy) background. Here's one with some blur in the foreground (old small tripod) and the background, again at F3.5.

Unfortunately, you're not really going to get that look as well with any PnS due to the much, much smaller sensor, plus lenses that aren't really designed for such things.

 

[mhm]

I'd rather not be spending too much time in Photoshop right now, as I'd rather be enjoying my kids instead of editing photos of them. What prompted this whole search was having to edit my dd4 dancing in her underwear in the background out of a really cute picture of my 5 month old dd.

I've thought about the Pentax (my first 35 mm SLR was a Pentax), but I gave all my old Pentax lenses (all 2 of them) to my brother when I got my Canon, and I already have several Canon lenses. By the time I pick up the extra lenses for a Pentax, I think I would be spending more than I would with a Rebel XT or XTi, since I'd only need the body.

I think I'm coming to terms with spending the money on the Rebel XTi. I have tried a few more P&S's in stores, and I'm having to work alot harder at getting shots I'm pleased with (given the subject, anyway) than what I did with my BIL's Rebel. My Elan was the same way. I know a good photographer can take good shots with anything, but I guess I'm not good (yet).

I'll post some of my weekend shots if my BIL will ever download them!! (I knew I should have downloaded them while he was here.)