Phone photo better than DSLR? Best lens for bikini?

[DGMPhotography]

Hey folks,

Just wrapped up a swimwear shoot at Virginia Beach, and I'm left thinking I didn't do things the most optimal way possible. I should have made this post before the shoot, but it didn't occur to me.

Anyway, we shot at sunrise, with my lovely model Juliana, and I used my Nikon D750 and Tamron 70-200 G2. I left my lens at about f/2.8 at 200mm. Here are some preview shots:



And below is a photo I took with my new Google Pixel 2 XL in portrait mode.



The phone's camera is the best on the market (which is why I bought it). But looking at these photos side by side made me realize some things, and brought up some questions. I like the lack of distortion in the DSLR shots, but I think I have better context in my Pixel shot. You can see some texture of the background compared to the DSLR where it is just creamy. For the longest time people told me to stop using my 50mm and to use a long lens, which I decided to start doing several months ago. But I think some situations call for the 50mm (or at the very least, a higher f stop). The Pixel shot, which was taken much closer, feels much more intimate, and the context I think creates a more engaging scene. And I realize it's not the phone that made this shot, just the hardware/software the phone happened to have, which I could probably replicate with a DSLR as well. I just need more experience to realize which lenses should be used for what, and not lazily default to my normal setup.

So here are my questions:

1. What do you think of the Pixel camera quality?
2. What do you think of the comparison of shots here?
3. Which lens should be used for swimwear (or similar) shots like this?
4. Random: Is her hair being on the shoulder a bad thing? What about her belly button being half hidden?
5. Other thoughts/insights?

Thanks so much for reading and your responses!

 

[Braineack]

I have the original Pixel -- still blow every other cell phone out of the water. I'm waiting for the 3 later this year to upgrade to.

200mm > 50mm

 

[ClickAddict]

Not knocking the cell phones. (They are amazing at photography these days), but compraing those photos is a bit tricky. The model is turned more towards the sun in the shot done with the cell phone thus you have more light on her chest and her face is light entirely differently because of this. (Her right/our left) cheek is in the light rather than just the cheekbone. That difference in posing alone gives a look to make it more contrasted on the cell as the light is harsher. As for the more detailed background, some photographers would much prefer the creamy background from your DSLR for portraits. (That can depend on the background as well and the look you want to achieve, but you can certainly get a more detailed background with your DSLR if you wanted to.

 

[Donde]

I guess being two piece it could be considered a bikini...You question the visibility of her belly button and my opinion is it should be fully exposed. Whether the background is detailed or completely soft would depend on your goal. If it is a fashion shot where you want the viewers full attention on the garment then defocusing the background would make sense. If it were more of a vacation shot or travel photo showing the environment she's in would be logical. In the first two photos she seems to have sand or something on her legs. Not visible in the third.

 

[zulu42]

In addition to the different lighting, the cell phone shot has a foamy wave in the BG, whereas the DSLR shots only have smooth wet sand. The tiny sensor in the phone will also have increased DOF over a FF DSLR.

 

[Derrel]

One thing that needs to be considered is the camera to subject distance, which determines what is technically called perspective. Secondarily is the focal length used to make the photo, combined with the camera to subject distance. You mentioned better context with the phone. Well, using a long Lens from a greater distance magnifies the size of objects in the background, and makes them appear closer, and also narrows the angle of view;using a shorter lens gives a wider angle of view behind the subject. It is possible to get the same size woman on film, but to have either a narrower or a wider angle of view in the background---this depends on the focal length and the camera to subject distance. I'll try and get back to this later when I'm at the computer I'm on my phone right now

 

[Derrel]

Okay...at home, at the iMac...

You asked us: " So here are my questions:

1. What do you think of the Pixel camera quality?
2. What do you think of the comparison of shots here?
3. Which lens should be used for swimwear (or similar) shots like this?
4. Random: Is her hair being on the shoulder a bad thing? What about her belly button being half hidden?
5. Other thoughts/insights? "
*****
Okay. 1: The Pixel's image quality looks fine,especially on this postcard-sized on-line image. I like the shallow DOF "portrait mode" image processing that it can do. But her figure looks better on the shots done from farther back, with the longer lens...I think there's some very subtle apparent perspective distortion form the camera-to-subject distance being too close with the cellphone (this is the technical term, apparent perspective distortion).

2:The comparison is a very limited sample of two d-slr shots and one cellphone shot...not a lot to go by..different light on the two comparison shots, and different formats. The cell phone shot has the closer-up, more-intimate feel that comes from a shorter lens length shot from close range; the d-slr shots have that telephoto, f/2.8 backdrop look...both are different, neither could be described as being intrinsically "better", but merely "different".

3:Lens for swimwear? Depends on the desired photo result and the scene; anything from 20mm on FX to 400mm on FX can work...depends on the desired type of shot. Interiors? Maybe some shorter focal lengths, from 20mm to 35mm; on the beach, anywhere from 50mm to 400mm; it...just...depends. How much background do you want behind the subject? If you want a wider-angle view _behind_ the subject, you can use a short lens, and get her half-body, as you did here, and show a wide angle of view BEHIND her; if you move way back, and use a longer lens, you could show here at the same half-body height in a tall frame, but have a narrow-angle view BEHIND her. This is where the 70-200mm zoom lens is so,so handy. But, to get the most out of a zoom like that, one has to change the camera-to-subject distance, to see and to evaluate the various focal length options at varying camera-to-subject distances.

4: hair on shoulder....it is what it is...not good, not bad....just...on her shoulder...

5: other thoughts/insights. Well...I would suggest this: open the download in Lightroom, and look at the EXIF tabulated, and see, literally what focal lengths you used. And see what f/stops you used. Look at the pictures. See if there are a few you really,really like the look of, and examine the EXIF data. Take some mental notes.

In line with this...shooting at f/2.8...very much not my favorite thing...a 70-0200 zoom is NOT at its best, in several ways, at f/2.8...try f/3.5 for your wide f/stop, and you'll likely have higher contrast and more sharpness across the frame, esp. at the edges.

Try shooting more varied f/stops: that "f/2.8" look is cliche. I personally can SEE the difference between f/2.8 and f/4 on a lot of lenses. But what about f/5.6? Do you want to blow out the backdrops, all the time? Do you sometimes want to suggest or hint at the location? Then start thinking about f/5.6 sometimes.

Have you thought about shooting with the dials reversed, and moving the f/stop to the REAR command dial, so you can f/stop bracket,and keep the index finger on the trigger? This is a simple Nikon custom setup trick...makes it much faster (in certain exposure modes) to just thumb-click the f/stop, and have the camera pick the shutter speed that's right for the EV level, and thus get different backdrop "looks" due to the DOF change.

With shorter lenses, the difference at close range between f/2.8 (on say the 50/1.8 or the 85/1.8) and f/5.6 is pretty noticeable.

 

[Scoody]

Maybe I am old school but I would never consider taking any shot at all with a cellphone at a shoot I am being paid for. I use my lights, my reflectors, my assistant. The last thing I want a client to think is that they can whip out their cellphones and take the same photos I do because I used a cellphone. I make money because they can in no way take a photo on their own that would look anything like what I did.

 

[Vtec44]

I think it depends on the type of mood that you're trying to convey. Lens compression projects a more formal mood where a bit of lens distortion and perspective exaggeration can be more playful and less formal. I have never been a fan of lens compression so general I use either my 50 or 85 for portraits. IMHO, it's all about the mood and message that you're trying to project.

 

[tirediron]

I'm definitely impressed with the quality of the cell 'phone shot, but as others have said, there are two many differences between it and the DSLR shots to make any comparison valid. The hair? I think it's fine, but what really bothers me are the tan lines... if you're going to use a model for swimwear, make sure she hasn't been tanning in something that covers up more skin recently... for me, that really kills this set.

 

[Derrel]

OTOH....some people find tan lines a turn-on...Me? It depends...sometimes I like them, other times I do not like seeing tanlines.

If you want a more cellphone look, shoot with a semi-wide angle length stopped down quite far.

 

[weepete]

I much prefer the look of the first two shot with the longer lens. Sure, the warmer lighting on the cell phone shot with the deeper shadows give her body more definition, but I can definately see that wide angle, close up distortion in the shot. As for the background I think it's fine in both shots, there's enough in there to give the shot context and tonal variation to keep it interesting. Either would be a good, strong background for this type of shot.

 

[DGMPhotography]

Thanks for the great feedback everyone - very much appreciated!

I will have to give that dial technique a try, @Derrel

@tirediron I don't love tan lines, but I don't hate them. I will probably lessen them with some editing, but not completely remove.

These shots are un-edited, so stay tuned for final images. But everything said here has been very informative

 

[paigew]

In my opinion I don't mind the tan lines, the belly button, or the hair. She looks like a real woman enjoying the beach, and she looks fabulous!

Personally I do not like shooting portraits with a long lens. It has been mentioned that the cell pic gives you an intimate feel, her movements are natural and more candid. I shoot 95% of client work with a 24-70 and have for years. It's extremely versatile and allows for that intimacy and connection when shooting. I do keep a 135 in my bag and try to grab a few shots with that to add more variety in my gallery but definitely a fan of the shorter focal lengths.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[AlanKlein]

Since this is a swimwear shoot, I'm curious how you confirm the colors in the photo match the actual colors? Isn't that something the manufacturer would be concerned with? I've bought and returned products that didn't match the color of what was shown in a catalog.

I'd like to see the results after you clean up the sand, blotches, etc.

I've shot my cellphone in the sun and find it almost impossible to see the screen. How did you see it on the beach? Also, cellphones are so ergonomically uncomfortable to shoot. It's torture to me. Here a sequence of stills and videos clips taken with no adjustments afterwards. WHen I shot them, I basically was guessing as I could see little on the cellphone screen most of the time. I missed the telephone pole going through the fireman's head in the 2nd shot and the first video was at a slight angle. Basically I was shooting blind although it turned out OK. "real" cameras are so much more capable.

I'm not an expert, but I would think 200 mm is too long. 85mm-105mm might be better yet still able to blur the background and compress the subject.