If you leave that stock zoom lens on... yeah, it’s not great. Now put a light-sensitive prime on it and put it wide-open. Instant great pictures that even a novice will notice “its a nice picture”.
I use a Sony A-6000 with a 30mm F1.8 prime.
If you leave that stock zoom lens on... yeah, it’s not great. Now put a light-sensitive prime on it and put it wide-open. Instant great pictures that even a novice will notice “its a nice picture”.
I use a Sony A-6000 with a 30mm F1.8 prime.
One of the hardest things in photography is successfully incorporating the background in the composition. And if you fail, the results are devastating: the background will not only look bad, but also distract from the one thing that might look nice, i.e. the subject.
A big aperture lets you sidestep that difficulty, making it easier to take "good pictures".
Those are scare quotes because successfully incorporating the background might have yielded an even better image. Remember that in the cameras infancy and quite some time after, DoF blur was considered a technical flaw.
When I look back at my photos, I cringe.
These days I generally prefer more depth of field as opposed to less. Unless I have to, I prefer to shoot stopped down a little, at around f2.8 or f4. I also use flash (preferably off camera) when I can.
Probably an unpopular preference, but I also prefer to use smaller sensors, like 1" and 4/3. I can shoot wide open but get more DOF, and my cameras+lens combinations are much more portable.
When I shot portraits I like to shoot more open and blur the background. (I typically used about 100mm).
I have a series of artists in their work spaces. When I shoot those I don't blur the background and shoot wide to get as much of the space.
Even at small sizes, the difference in dynamic range is insane, which makes a huge difference when photographing people indoors in particular. And of course when you look at the photo full size, the terrible watercolor effects on cell phone photos can't be ignored.
By the way, you should get the Sigma 56mm f1.4 for your Sony; that's the lens of mine that most makes people's jaws drop.
My old DSLR was just to bulky so I left it home more often than not, the mirrorless is just that little more compact and light (especially with a pancake lens, it almost becomes a compact).
And good prima doesn't have to be new and expensive btw. You can buy adapters to fit almost any old lens to any modern camera (especially with mirrorless). Only thing you will be missing is the autofocus and auto aperture control. But for me this adds to the experience, since you must really be engaged with taking the picture (eg, thinking about exposure, zooming with your feet, predicting when a moving object will be in focus), instead of having the camera do it's best (or worst) for you and fixing it in post with software.
I have settled on a Fuji as their controls connect more to that feeling of manual photography, making the experience more fun for me. For everything else, my phone camera with cracked lens is good enough.
Shooting at 1.8, too much of the picture is out of focus in my experience.
I’m just a hobbyist. Never actually compared sharpness at stops.
I now have an iPhone 11 Pro but unless I uses portrait mode the photos just don't come close. And when I do use portrait mode it feels like augmented reality, not real life.
This is what I'm after: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkEq2u_E1VU
So I'm considering an X100V but I am not sure if I can develop the diligence to carry the thing all the time. Especially with family, which is of course when I want it most.
I imagine many others feel the same way.