Was this taken with a DSLR?

[Gala]

This DOF is impossible with a normal phone camera, so i suspect DSRL or some semi-DSRL?

[TheKDub]

Maybe?

 

I'm sure it's not impossible with a phone camera, just requires a good enough camera.

 

Though probably was a DSLR.

[Evident]

I mean, maybe. Some phones actually have some pretty good depth of field, you just have to really mess with it. Most likely a DSLR or similar camera with manual control.

[xQubeZx]

Looks like a terrible photoshop edit. Like some guassian blur in the background and then a cut in  picture of the lady. Looks terrible. And if it was taken by a DSLR they one who took it probably didn't know what he/she was doing. Or maybe tried to be artistic donno but I think it looks bad.

[Jimbillroo Digital]

I think it's a phone.

[FIXXX]

The bokeh isn't good - it's annoying rather than redirecting attention to the subject. And there doesn't seem to be that much detail in the shadows. I'd say it's not a DSLR - can be a phone or small dedicated camera.

[LiamApex]

the galaxy s5 has this feature

[xQubeZx]

Like look at the size of the kids and then the lady. And the DoF looks more like its unfocused or something since some stuff seems kind of in focus wich probably shouldn't be.

[ALwin]

snip

 

Maybe, maybe not.  Can't tell exactly as the metadata has been wiped clean, but looking at the file name it looks like you took the photo from Facebook.  So statistically speaking it was likely taken with a phone camera, or a compact camera.  This level of DOF is not impossible with a phone, the subject has to be close and the background just has to be far enough.

 

If I'm wrong and it was taken with a DSLR, the tog is a complete amateur.

[Gala]

Looks like a terrible photoshop edit. Like some guassian blur in the background and then a cut in  picture of the lady. Looks terrible. And if it was taken by a DSLR they one who took it probably didn't know what he/she was doing. Or maybe tried to be artistic donno but I think it looks bad.

Girl to stupid for any Photoshop work.

[Gala]

Maybe a Galaxy S4? Thats the only one i can think in her range.

[xQubeZx]

Girl to stupid for any Photoshop work.

Haha it would have been like a 5 min photoshop work to achive something better.

[EliasNM]

I doubt that is DSLR, I also doubt fake DOF done in PS, for someone faking it there would be a rather great amount of feathering around the girl, I want to say a smartphone or some compact camera.

[Gala]

Haha it would have been like a 5 min photoshop work to achive something better.

"Instructions unclear, tit stuck in celling fan"

[Gale]

... it looks like you took the photo from Facebook.

 

That would explain the horrible compression.

[xQubeZx]

I doubt that is DSLR, I also doubt fake DOF done in PS, for someone faking it there would be a rather great amount of feathering around the girl, I want to say a smartphone or some compact camera.

Well yeah but the lady seems so big compared to the kids and really the image is too low quality to really see, since there is some feathering like effect around the lady. Especially around the hair and bottom of the blue shirt and the jeans. Its hard to tell. But probably isn't but I would like to think there is a possibility for it.

[Thebman712]

it i likely a newer phone, i mean i got a shot with some nice depth on my zenfone 2

[ALwin]

Well yeah but the lady seems so big compared to the kids and really the image is too low quality to really see, since there is some feathering like effect around the lady. Especially around the hair and bottom of the blue shirt and the jeans. Its hard to tell. But probably isn't but I would like to think there is a possibility for it.

 

That's because of perspective.  She is standing closer to the photographer than those kids who appear to be at least 10m away in the background.  And that's not feathering, that's image noise and poor color tone reproduced by the camera.

[.spider.]

Like some guassian blur in the background and then a cut in  picture of the lady.

It's definitely not gaussian blur just look at the highlights between the leaves

[Minzo]

I think it's a phone.

Dude, that's a girl.

[.spider.]

it i likely a newer phone, i mean i got a shot with some nice depth on my zenfone 2

The subject in your picture is much closer.

[EliasNM]

Well yeah but the lady seems so big compared to the kids and really the image is too low quality to really see, since there is some feathering like effect around the lady. Especially around the hair and bottom of the blue shirt and the jeans. Its hard to tell. But probably isn't but I would like to think there is a possibility for it.

The reason why I doubt the PS job done to it is the hair strands are still there if you know what I mean, for a fake DOF you need to "overlap" the girl with it to fake it well. Apart from size comparison with the rest of the image I am starting to notice the tones of her do not match those of the rest of the image, she is too "bright" for a cloudy sky. The only other solution I can see is if the background was pre-blurred and she was added in with minimal blur added to her overall "cut in", it could be studio work after noticing that.

[Thebman712]

The subject in your picture is much closer.

yeah, but still  significant ammount of depth

[xQubeZx]

That's because of perspective.  She is standing closer to the photographer than those kids who appear to be at least 10m away in the background.  And that's not feathering, that's image noise and poor color tone reproduced by the camera.

Okey guess I was wrong haha. But the perspecive looks so weird, but might just be me that thinks so.

[ALwin]

It's definitely not gaussian blur just look at the highlights between the leaves

 

There's probably little to zero photoshop being used here.  This photo appears to have been taken with a good phone camera or a compact camera.  The OP can always ask what camera was used to the person who uploaded the photo wherever he/she got it from.

 

The people who are talking about gaussian blur, fake DOF in photoshop, etc. are all idiots.