I started attending photography classes with a successful photographer and there's couple of things I was apparently doing very, very wrong. I do not want to question the photographer knowledge, but more so just to ask for "2nd opinion".
1.Studio portraits should only be taken with aperture of 5.6 or higher.
Is this true and does the same apply for outdoor portraits? Most of my outdoor portraits were taken with aperture 1.4 to 2.8, mostly because of less than optimal lighting conditions and I just love this beautiful bokeh.
- I am apparently supposed to use viewfinder only and not camera screen to frame the pictures, with both eyes open to see the model. Also taping the screen to correct the focus is a no-no.
I was usually only using the screen since I lack the mobility (really bad knees injuries), so I preferred moving the camera around instead of my entire body to frame the pictures, having eye contact with the model is also easier this way for me. The focus on camera is also often not perfect and being able to quickly "correct it" by telling camera where to focus is very, very useful.
- Using tons of lights and equipment to get desired results. The photographer that leads the lectures is very fixated on complicating the scene by using multiple of expensive lights and giant reflectors.
Personally I don't own a ton of equipment, so I always look a ways to achieve things without resorting to that many lights and reflectors and usually I can find people being able to achieve those results with two or even one light, simply by adjusting the angle, distance or power of the light.
I absolutely understand that more equipment offers more possibilities, but I just feel like it's sometimes unnecessarily complicated by some photographers.
- Having a large team of assistants. Last lesson we were split us into groups and had role assigned to each of us. Two people responsible for lights, director, photographer and so on. According to our teacher and the way he teaches us, having group of assistants is necessary or at least highly advised.
As someone who only ever worked alone (excluding the models of course) and plans to work alone in foreseeable future, I am not sure what to think of that.
- DSLR are better because they are more stable due to their heavier weight, compared to lighter mirrorless cameras. Also apparently information displayed on mirrorless cameras is lagging behind compared to DSLR, but I am not exactly sure what he was talking about.
Obviously can't answer for your tutor, but my opinion on your points:
You're in a studio, you control the light so you should be able to perfectly expose for f/5.6 in this light controlled environment. Depending on focal length and distance to subject, the narrower f/stops could result in a depth of field that doesn't encompass your subject, such as nose and ear tips going out of focus if you've nailed the eye at f/1.4 (which will give you around a centimetre of focus if you were a metre away with an 85mm lens getting a head shot - f/5.6 is over four centimetres, which is still not enough for this scenario, but the effects will be less exaggerated and the soft more useful).
But this is a generalisation, you may want that absolutely crushing small depth of field for some artistic reason in a shot. So, don't take it as a hard rule, more of a guidance to think about what you're trying to get out of this shot and to, typically, get a pleasing shot of the subject before the depth of field starts to drop off.
Even if they're a metre from the background, it's still going to be pleasingly out of focus in this scenario, and many similar.
I've had this from a course I've been on, I think this comes from people who primarily used DSLR's where the viewfinder differs to the liveview of the rear screen, with EVF's they're starting to get more in aligment, though magnification and resolution will still differ, giving benefits to the EVF over the rear screen.
So I can see where they're coming from here, but, personally, I feel it's restrictive in artistic expression as your shots are all going to come from eye level, or where you can get your eye level. I use a TLR camera as my every day carry as I like it's kitsch old fashioned style and being film makes me slow down and consider the shot more, but being TLR also means I take shots from waist level as I'm looking down in to the top of it, rather than holding it up to eye level and this change in perspective also has an impact of the outcome.
So if you're really using your rear screen, and can tip it out, flip it etc.. to get some really good angles, unusual angels that will help with your artistry, then go for it, but also, don't overlook the benefits of the EVF and the assistance that can give you with nailing focus (as what's a great shot that's missed focus? - that's rhetorical rest of reddit..)
May be you're in a class a bit more advanced than you're at in your journey - don't take this as a slight, it isn't, we're all progressing and you'll come to understand better why this complexity is being used. Here I would say your tutor is possibly failing in not explaining the reasoning for all these lights, but, again, a studio environment is a light controlled environment and this is why you're using so many lights and reflectors, to absolutely control all the light, overpower any ambient and light the subject as you intend, not how it might come out - though it's a bit outside the scope of a reddit post to really get in to this topic to explain it, or, perhaps outside my scope to be able to condense it in a way that would be accessible.
The course isn't just for you, there may be some tailored aspects from questions you've posed or discussions at the start, but other people on the course may be on a different journey to you, they may want to head in to a more professional setting where this is the norm and they deserve the opportunity to have exposure to the process and know what's expected when they get there so they don't feel so out of place when the day comes.
nah mate..a dSLR has a huge mirror moving out the way and slapping back down when you take a shot - though that is less of an issue than the way most approach pushing the shutter button and rock the body as they do so (even on a tripod, this is why you find astro guess use remotes or delayed shutter firings).
Information wise, I'm not sure what bodies they've used, but you get more information on a mirrorless than a dSLR - settings like ISO / Aperture / Shutter Speed are equal, you'll probably have things like vertical balance on both (though I've only seen it on mirrorless personally), but only a mirrorless will give you focus peaking (highlighting areas in focus - as you simply can't do that with an optical viewfinder..).
Using the EVF you'll get a more detailed image than any rear screen so when reviewing and punching in to check focus will be a benefit on a mirrorless (hell, you can punch in with focus zoom on most mirrorless through the EVF before you've taken the picture - dSLR will let you do that on the rear screen, but, as said, less detailed, and, you're supposed to be using the viewfinder right? ; ) ).
Haven't read the other replies as yet to not bias my responses above, will read through now as the biggest takeaway you should get from this is there's no right answer.
Everyone has their preferences, experiences that've driven an idea and how they feel things should be, but that might not be what you're after or work for you. Take what you like from the course, try another course with someone else in the future, get a wide range of opinions, pick what works with what you're aiming to achieve, keep your mind open to the fact that some of your pre-conceptions, or what sounded like wise words from a great teacher, may actually, not be. It's all a guide.
(except for my responses above, they're cold hard immutable facts.. = p )