Help re: Canon 50mm f1.4

[Deillub]

Just got my Canon 50mm f1.4 lens and started some expermenting.
My first big surprise was that the DOF did not seem to be reduced significantly at f1.4.
Am I wrong in thinking that at f1.4 the DOF should be significantly less that at say f16.

[5Dmaniac]

Can you post a picture? At f1.4 the DOF should be VERY shallow - of course if you take a picture of distant objects the difference in DOF will be less noticable.

[Deillub]

Can you post a picture? At f1.4 the DOF should be VERY shallow - of course if you take a picture of distant objects the difference in DOF will be less noticable.

Thanks for your consideration.
Probably I was too far away. I will try some more, and if still having trouble will post examples.

[Deillub]

Can you post a picture? At f1.4 the DOF should be VERY shallow - of course if you take a picture of distant objects the difference in DOF will be less noticable.

I am posting 2 pics using my canon 50mm lens at f 1.4
In the first the 2 objects are placed 3ft. and 6ft from the lens
In the second the objects are placed 2ft and 5 ft, from the lens

My concern is that unless great care is taken in selecting the background.
The background must be a significant distance behind the object and ....
the photographer will be in the models face.

Am I expecting too much? How do others take these wonderful portraits were the background is virtually non-existent.

Are there rules of thumb that one can employ with the 50 mm lens that dictate the distance between camera ... model and backgound?

Many thanks.....

319968

319969

[krb]

Take a closer look at the stool in your pictures. Notice how the fabric is in focus by the can but is out of focus at the front and rear edges? In fact, in the last picture it is actually the top edge of the can and a narrow strips of fabric that is at the same distance that are in focus and the bottom of the can is actually out of focus. If that were a models face you could easily find yourself with the eyes and nose in focus but the ears looking soft. If you or she shift position a little and you don't refocus then it might be her ears that are in focus and her eyes and nose that are soft.

As for the background, the rule of thumb is very simple: If the background sucks then you and/or the model need to move so that a better background is available.

[Deillub]

Take a closer look at the stool in your pictures. Notice how the fabric is in focus by the can but is out of focus at the front and rear edges? In fact, in the last picture it is actually the top edge of the can and a narrow strips of fabric that is at the same distance that are in focus and the bottom of the can is actually out of focus. If that were a models face you could easily find yourself with the eyes and nose in focus but the ears looking soft. If you or she shift position a little and you don't refocus then it might be her ears that are in focus and her eyes and nose that are soft.

As for the background, the rule of thumb is very simple: If the background sucks then you and/or the model need to move so that a better background is available.


You can appreciate this is all new to me and I'm simply trying to understand the process....

1. At 2 ft. from the model DOF is merely inches allowing absolutely no wiggle room..... but background is still quite distracting.
2. At 3 ft. DOF has improved but background is more distracting.
4. At 4 ft etc. etc.....

Therefore if I move back farther from the model I improve the DOF but not the distracting background.

So.... my choices are to move model further away from the background (how much is still somewhat of an experiment... unless there are some charts available)

AND ... as you said REPLACE the backgound... if possible.

Do I have the principals down ??

Many thanks for any suggestions and advice.

[rc13k]

Yes, just move the model further from the background. It will give you a less distracting background. Set aperture to around 2.8 so all the facial features will be in focus.

[krb]

So.... my choices are to move model further away from the background (how much is still somewhat of an experiment... unless there are some charts available)

AND ... as you said REPLACE the backgound... if possible.

Do I have the principals down ??

Yep. As for a chart, there's no way to make one and youre pics are perfect example of why.

The reason your background is so distracting is that you have a worst case scenario. The background consists of a single brightly lit and light colored object in the middle a dimly lit and dark colored area so of course it is going to be obvious. The distance required to push such a high contrast background out of focus enough that you don't notice the easel is likely to be far more than what you'll have avaialable indoors.

Move the easel out of the way and the rest of the background won't be noticable. Throw a dark colored sheet over the easel and it'll blend in to the backgruond.

Or try reducing the amount of contast between the easel and the rest of the background. Less light the easel and/or more light on the wall. Add some other objects to the background that are as bright as the easel so that it becomes one of several things rather than that one obvious item.

Or you could just use the shot as-is and darken the easel in post-processing.

Whatever you choose, what you need to understand is that this is not something you can realistically expect to fix simply by getting the background further out of focus. Distance will help but for your sample distance alone will not likely be enough.

[Deillub]

Yep. As for a chart, there's no way to make one and youre pics are perfect example of why.

The reason your background is so distracting is that you have a worst case scenario. The background consists of a single brightly lit and light colored object in the middle a dimly lit and dark colored area so of course it is going to be obvious. The distance required to push such a high contrast background out of focus enough that you don't notice the easel is likely to be far more than what you'll have avaialable indoors.

Move the easel out of the way and the rest of the background won't be noticable. Throw a dark colored sheet over the easel and it'll blend in to the backgruond.

Or try reducing the amount of contast between the easel and the rest of the background. Less light the easel and/or more light on the wall. Add some other objects to the background that are as bright as the easel so that it becomes one of several things rather than that one obvious item.

Or you could just use the shot as-is and darken the easel in post-processing.

Whatever you choose, what you need to understand is that this is not something you can realistically expect to fix simply by getting the background further out of focus. Distance will help but for your sample distance alone will not likely be enough.


Ken - thanks for your input.
The pictures I included were only shot to experiment with the new lens and because of the background it was a poor choice.
I have since expanded my experimentation and am beginning to feel quite comfortable with the 50mm lens.
Soon I may have enough courage to show some of my novice work.

[mkuriger]

a 50mm lens will probably have you "in the models face" as you put it, try a lens with more reach. I generally use my 24-70 or 70-200. The only time I use my 50mm is when I'm in close quarters.

[ded007]

DOF is a product of more than just the aperture.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Here's a shot with the 50 1.4 @ f/1.6 that demonstrates how shallow it can get.