Just to refute the argument that only pro bodies can produce that famed "3-D Effect", would you care to post some of your images that make the subject "pop", taken using non-pro (Rebels, xxD) bodies? I'd like to see if there's any truth to this or if it's all in the head of the people who keep saying such things. Not to diss any pro or pro body, but crop bodies need defending, IMHO. Please mention the lens used as well.
Recently, I read someone's post in another thread that 1 series bodies produce an image that has an "almost 3-d effect" and is unmatched by any crop. I asked whether that has more to do with the lens or the body and I posted a photo I took with my lowly 30D, which I think kinda shows this so-called "makes the subject pop" effect. His reply was "yeah, that's why the 30D is the top model picked by pros". While that is funny, I believe a good lens and a capable person can produce equally good photos with even a D30. That's why I'm curious to see if anyone else thinks that a pro body has a different quality that makes subjects "pop" or gives an "almost 3-D effect" or if it is just a matter of the lens, the DOF and the subject-background distance, etc?
Kolor-Pikker wrote:
Don't we photogs just love nose shots? ... I had a 500D attached to the lens and was shooting flowers when this puppy grew curious and came over to check out the lens. Your camel shot .. where was that taken @?
There is no such thing as a 3D effect. If there is, somebody could actually define it.
I agree. All it is, is subject stands out ... given the right lens, the right lighting and proper subject to background distance, any DSLR can produce this so-called "pop". But, I've read many-a-times about only pro bodies having this quality and this is confusing because I don't see how.
There is no such thing as a 3D effect. If there is, somebody could actually define it.
I think he means subject-background separation. obviously, it's possible to do with any-format camera, but I guess someone just felt the need to show off.
Your camel shot .. where was that taken @?
An amusement park in Moscow.
paulfeng wrote:
Huh... I didn't realize this claim was made about bodies; I thought it was usually about lenses.
Format size influences depth of field. a medium-format camera has (about) the same DOF with an 80mm lens @ f/2.8 & 1m subject distance, as a 35mm camera does with a 50mm lens @ f/1.1
Since DoF is usually a factor in subject isolation, a camera with a small sensor would be at a disadvantage.
That second camel photo .. if that's taken with the 70-200 f/4 IS .. that lens is so sharp then. Wow.
paulfeng wrote:
Huh... I didn't realize this claim was made about bodies; I thought it was usually about lenses.
I thought so too, but I've seen this said many times here and on other forums, that the 1d series photos just have this "3d feel" to them, or "just seem to stand out", etc. And while I know very well that the 1D series is a totally different beast and no D60 or 30D can come close to the quality of that series, I have seen so many images from non-pro bodies that are equally "subject-popping" so to speak.
saaketham wrote:
That second camel photo .. if that's taken with the 70-200 f/4 IS .. that lens is so sharp then. Wow.
I cropped the right half off of that photo, and yeah, the 70-200 holds up well against prime lenses at equivalent apertures. Edit: oh yeah, and I didn't use sharpening either.
DavidP wrote:
Since it's just a limited DOF thing, why not call it that, rather than 3D-effect?
Once again, I agree .. this is what I've read some people call the "feel" of photos from pro bodies.
saaketham wrote:
Just to refute the argument that only pro bodies can produce that famed "3-D Effect", would you care to post some of your images that make the subject "pop", taken using non-pro (Rebels, xxD) bodies? I'd like to see if there's any truth to this or if it's all in the head of the people who keep saying such things. Not to diss any pro or pro body, but crop bodies need defending, IMHO. Please mention the lens used as well. Thanks.
Who ever made such an argument?
There would be no truth to such a claim if it were made.
imo only the first photo and the camel eye really show the 3d effect. The rest are just background/subject isolation. (not saying they are bad photos in any wasy... just not good examples)
The so called 3d effect is NOT just subject background isolation. It is also a product of strong midtone contrast/microcontrast. Hang out in the alt lens forum and you will hear the zeiss junkies waxing eloquent about it. lol.
Ok, here is ultimate proof that not only is a pro body unnessary but that you also do not need an expensive lens.
Please mention the lens used as well. 
While that is funny, I believe a good lens and a capable person can produce equally good photos with even a D30. That's why I'm curious to see if anyone else thinks that a pro body has a different quality that makes subjects "pop" or gives an "almost 3-D effect" or if it is just a matter of the lens, the DOF and the subject-background distance, etc?