Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 07 Jun 2013 (Friday) 07:03
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Depth of field at wide apertures

 
alann
Goldmember
2,609 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Nov 2007
Location: South Carolina
     
Jun 07, 2013 07:03 |  #1

I see a lot of questions/complaints about lenses between 1.2 and 1.6 having focus issues. Many responses are "it is because of the DOF at that aperture" or something along those lines. To (hopefully) clarify how delicate it can be this for those new to this I have posted a crop showing DOF at 1.2. Look at the distance between the left eye (in focus) and the right eye. If either one of us had moved just a tiny bit the photo would have "focus issues". If you are new to wide apertures give yourself time to lean the lens. Don't get frustrated; these lenses must be tamed. I hope this post will help someone out there really understand shallow DOF with a wide aperture lens.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

20130606-184157_S9A0626-Edit.jpg (external link) by North Artworks (external link), on Flickr

My FLickrPage (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,431 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Jun 07, 2013 07:07 |  #2

I think you got the nose and neither eye. "Wide" apertures is not a term I know.


GEAR LIST
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Goodysgotacuda
Member
Avatar
176 posts
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Texas
     
Jun 07, 2013 07:10 |  #3

I'm associating "wide" as in "wide open" = most light = low f#


Canon + 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS kit | 55mm-250mm f/4-5.6 IS, 50mm f/1.8 | 10-22mm EFS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alann
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,609 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Nov 2007
Location: South Carolina
     
Jun 07, 2013 07:11 |  #4

Yup^^^^ Thanks for making that more clear. :)


My FLickrPage (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,969 posts
Likes: 2155
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jun 07, 2013 07:46 |  #5

This test is a bit misleading as it's showing the DOF at MFD or very close to it. DOF is not just a matter of aperture, that's one component but there are others to take into consideration. In this case the DOF if thin partly due to the the aperture at f/1.2 but partly due to you being a foot or 2 away from the subject. Move back to 5 or 10 feet an do the same test and both eyes should be well within the acceptable DOF range.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommy1957
Goldmember
1,288 posts
Joined Apr 2013
     
Jun 07, 2013 11:23 |  #6

It is not difficult to get millimeter DOF with long focal length plus close subject distance plus wide aperture. Play with this DOF calculator; it is informative.

http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.html (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,499 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 3539
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Jun 07, 2013 12:22 |  #7

gjl711 wrote in post #16008303 (external link)
This test is a bit misleading as it's showing the DOF at MFD or very close to it. DOF is not just a matter of aperture, that's one component but there are others to take into consideration. In this case the DOF if thin partly due to the the aperture at f/1.2 but partly due to you being a foot or 2 away from the subject. Move back to 5 or 10 feet an do the same test and both eyes should be well within the acceptable DOF range.

True, but his example wasn't necessarily at MFD either, he stated pretty clearly that the image was cropped.

alann wrote in post #16008236 (external link)
I see a lot of questions/complaints about lenses between 1.2 and 1.6 having focus issues. Many responses are "it is because of the DOF at that aperture" or something along those lines. To (hopefully) clarify how delicate it can be this for those new to this I have posted a crop showing DOF at 1.2. Look at the distance between the left eye (in focus) and the right eye. If either one of us had moved just a tiny bit the photo would have "focus issues". If you are new to wide apertures give yourself time to lean the lens. Don't get frustrated; these lenses must be tamed. I hope this post will help someone out there really understand shallow DOF with a wide aperture lens.

I think this is a good bit of advice to people new to wide aperture lenses. When I first started shooting at 1.7 with my Yashica DS-M I thought something might have been wrong with the lens. Then when I shot using LV and 10x zoom I realized the lens was actually very sharp, just very hard to get a spot on focus using my T2i. Thankfully that's no longer an issue with the 6D and EG-S screen :)


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alann
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,609 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Nov 2007
Location: South Carolina
     
Jun 07, 2013 12:45 |  #8

It was not my intention to cause a ruckus. :) Just thought that it might help someone understand that these apertures are difficult and don't expect to put on the lens for the first time and get really good results. It just seems that many people are buying these lenses and posting how they have focus issues without realizing there is a learning curve (which I am still in) Here is the un cropped photo

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8408/8978887279_24cd568534_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/northphotos/8​978887279/  (external link)
20130606-184157_S9A0626.jpg (external link) by North Artworks (external link), on Flickr

My FLickrPage (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jun 07, 2013 13:39 |  #9

alann wrote in post #16009154 (external link)
It was not my intention to cause a ruckus. :) Just thought that it might help someone understand that these apertures are difficult and don't expect to put on the lens for the first time and get really good results. It just seems that many people are buying these lenses and posting how they have focus issues without realizing there is a learning curve (which I am still in) Here is the un cropped photo

We understand. You just wanted to show off your 85 1.2 L on a rainy day
well played




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alann
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,609 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Nov 2007
Location: South Carolina
     
Jun 07, 2013 13:54 |  #10

watt100 wrote in post #16009342 (external link)
We understand. You just wanted to show off your 85 1.2 L on a rainy day
well played

No sir. I am sorry I tried to help the newer photographers on this site. :( Not to worry guys it won't happen again. Let the bashing begin.


My FLickrPage (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,499 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 3539
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Jun 07, 2013 15:02 |  #11

alann wrote in post #16009387 (external link)
No sir. I am sorry I tried to help the newer photographers on this site. :( Not to worry guys it won't happen again. Let the bashing begin.

Nonsense! I think it'll definitely be helpful to people learning the ropes, I fully get what you were trying to do. I think this forum could benefit greatly from a number of stickies at the top of the page with simple stuff like this. There's so much to learn with photography that when you're new at it it can certainly be overwhelming and all too often it's just easier to blame your gear (even when you shouldn't).


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommy1957
Goldmember
1,288 posts
Joined Apr 2013
     
Jun 07, 2013 15:15 |  #12

alann wrote in post #16009387 (external link)
No sir. I am sorry I tried to help the newer photographers on this site. :( Not to worry guys it won't happen again. Let the bashing begin.

Hey! Please don't quit. I've been doing this for 40 years, but I am always open to new stuff. I struggle with f/2.8 sometimes. I can't imagine making f/1.2 or f/1.4 work for me. A little teasing never hurt anyone. All you did was provide information, which is never a bad thing. Some folks need it or can use it, some folks don't. Simple as that.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frugivore
Goldmember
Avatar
3,089 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 118
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Jun 07, 2013 15:29 |  #13

Like many beginning photographers, I would shoot my fast primes wide open when I first upgraded from the 18-55mm. With f/1.4 shooting half body portraits on a crop sensor, it worked fine. But when I moved to a larger sensor, I really had trouble getting both eyes in focus. Eventually, I decided that I much prefer that a subject's entire head is in acceptable focus and so began using f/1.4 only for full body shots. For tighter shots, I'll go to f/2.8 or even up to f/5.6 for headshots.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scottsoutter
Member
Avatar
202 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2013
Location: Portland, Oregon
     
Jun 07, 2013 16:35 |  #14

I agree about needing to tame the lens.

I picked up a Minolta Rokkor-x 50mm f/1.2 and had it converted to Canon EF mount. So far, I am mainly playing games with it, doing experimental shots to learn how it behaves, and generally faffing around. I *may* take it out and really use it one of these days, but right now the chance of me getting a good shot wide open in a more relaxed shooting style is pretty low.

It's a beautiful lens, and for its age it is in *perfect* condition, but it ain't easy.


5d ii, 17-40 f/4, 24-105 f/4, 35 f/2.0 ze distagon, 50 f/1.4 ze planar, 50 f/1.8, 70-200 f/4 is, 135 f/3.5 sonnar, 420ex, 430ex ii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scottsoutter
Member
Avatar
202 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2013
Location: Portland, Oregon
     
Jun 07, 2013 16:35 |  #15

PS - thanks for posting the thread alann.


5d ii, 17-40 f/4, 24-105 f/4, 35 f/2.0 ze distagon, 50 f/1.4 ze planar, 50 f/1.8, 70-200 f/4 is, 135 f/3.5 sonnar, 420ex, 430ex ii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,025 views & 0 likes for this thread
Depth of field at wide apertures
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Jakesbird
843 guests, 274 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.