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 12 Nov 2013 (Tuesday) 11:45
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

f/2.8 vs f/4 DOF samples?

 
The ­ Dark ­ Knight
Goldmember
1,187 posts
Likes: 48
Joined Apr 2012
     
Nov 12, 2013 11:45 |  #1

Would anyone be so kind as to provide comparisons of an identical subject with identical framing, one shot at f/2.8 and one at f/4? Preferably longer (70-90mm) focal lengths, and portraits would be great, although any subject is fine.

I want to get an idea of how much shallower the DOF is in real world usage at f/2.8. Thanks




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Rush87
Senior Member
Avatar
291 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Qc
     
Nov 12, 2013 12:27 |  #2

The difference between 2.8 and 4 will be exactly the same as the difference between 4 and 5.6. You can test that with your 24-105 or you 70-200.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adam8080
Goldmember
Avatar
2,280 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
     
Nov 12, 2013 12:29 |  #3

Full frame I'm assuming? What lens are you looking at, 70-200?


Housley Photography (external link)
Camera Obscura
Business Card Help!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adam8080
Goldmember
Avatar
2,280 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
     
Nov 12, 2013 12:32 |  #4

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx (external link)

This is a good comparison at 200mm. Look about 1/4 of the way down the page.


Housley Photography (external link)
Camera Obscura
Business Card Help!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Dark ­ Knight
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,187 posts
Likes: 48
Joined Apr 2012
     
Nov 12, 2013 13:19 |  #5

adam8080 wrote in post #16445650 (external link)
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx (external link)

This is a good comparison at 200mm. Look about 1/4 of the way down the page.

Thanks, this is exactly what I was looking for! The site also had similar comparisons made with the 70-200 f/2.8.

This would be full-frame, yes. I've been holding off on purchases as my ultimate lens goal/dream was to replace my f/4 zooms with their f/2.8 Mark II counterparts. That's going to get expensive so I've been saving money. I don't need the extra stop of light, I wanted to get a better look at the DOF comparisons. Debating whether to keep the f/4 zooms and instead add more higher quality primes, or just save for the f/2.8 zooms.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,408 posts
Gallery: 1737 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 11009
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Nov 12, 2013 13:28 |  #6

Heya,

Sure, why not. I'll play.

85mm F1.8

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5536/10824492504_ff05a0f09a_b.jpg

85mm f2.0
IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5499/10824490184_e043978020_b.jpg

85mm f2.2
IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7425/10824378836_c3554feabf_b.jpg

85mm f2.8
IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7434/10824649853_2fcf157e94_b.jpg

85mm f4.0
IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7373/10824339795_c8fb5becab_b.jpg

Very best,

My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adam8080
Goldmember
Avatar
2,280 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
     
Nov 12, 2013 13:29 |  #7

I sold my 70-200 f/2.8 IS II for a 85 1.2 and a 135 2.0 a couple of years ago. I realized I only used the 70-200 at 70mm or 200mm and 2.8 wasn't fast enough for me even with the IS.

The 85mm 1.8 is also a great lens at a fraction of the cost.


Housley Photography (external link)
Camera Obscura
Business Card Help!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
whmeltonjr
Goldmember
Avatar
1,363 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Houston
     
Nov 12, 2013 13:31 |  #8

The Dark Knight wrote in post #16445781 (external link)
Thanks, this is exactly what I was looking for! The site also had similar comparisons made with the 70-200 f/2.8.

This would be full-frame, yes. I've been holding off on purchases as my ultimate lens goal/dream was to replace my f/4 zooms with their f/2.8 Mark II counterparts. That's going to get expensive so I've been saving money. I don't need the extra stop of light, I wanted to get a better look at the DOF comparisons. Debating whether to keep the f/4 zooms and instead add more higher quality primes, or just save for the f/2.8 zooms.

If you don't need the extra light, get a prime in that range instead.


William | Fuji X-E1 | Fuji X100S | Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Dark ­ Knight
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,187 posts
Likes: 48
Joined Apr 2012
     
Nov 12, 2013 14:00 |  #9

whmeltonjr wrote in post #16445814 (external link)
If you don't need the extra light, get a prime in that range instead.

I am certainly leaning that way at this moment. I can keep the two cheapie primes I have, and add the 35mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8 for less cost than upgrading to the zooms. So that might be another "upgrade" path I pursue.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tdragone
Goldmember
Avatar
2,188 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2004
Location: San Diego, California
     
Nov 21, 2013 19:19 |  #10

for what its worth... I've had every iteration of the 70-200 group except the F4 IS, and by far the new 2.8 IS ii version is THE most amazing lens of the group. I know it's costly... but it IS amazing. Both in focus speed and image quality/color.


-Tom Dragonetti
Spyder Holster + 1Dmk IV, 50D, G11
10-22, 16-35 2.8Lii, , 24-70 2.8Lii, 50mm 1.4,
70-200 2.8Lii IS, 100-400L IS
1.4x TC, 580EX ii, ST-E2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smorter
Goldmember
Avatar
4,506 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Nov 22, 2013 09:07 |  #11

f/2.8 is not always the same

Check this out:

IMAGE: http://galleries.clartephoto.com/img/s1/v46/p478409871.jpg
IMAGE: http://galleries.clartephoto.com/img/s2/v51/p496093926.jpg

Wedding Photography Melbourneexternal link
Reviews: 85LII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,722 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
Nov 22, 2013 16:29 |  #12

Horses for courses. I would not be without a 70-200. Occasionally there better options. If you have plenty of dough you can own the best lens for every situation.


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Nov 22, 2013 16:31 |  #13

Just compare f4 vs F5.6 on your own lenses. The degree of difference will be the same.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clarnibass
Senior Member
793 posts
Likes: 9
Joined May 2011
     
Nov 23, 2013 01:01 |  #14

It looks like the reason the 200mm prime at f/2.8 looks different from the 70-200mm at 200mm f/2.8 is that the 70-200mm lens at the distance of the samples is not really 200mm. This is usual with zoom lenses, where their focal lengths at closer focus distances is not the specified distance (which is usually at infinity focus).

I guess maybe there are also other reasons for it.


www.nitailevi.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,461 posts
Likes: 1646
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Nov 23, 2013 14:45 |  #15

Bookeh is little harsher with 70-200mm f2.8 IS II but one is $2000 and the other is close to $6000. And those are 100% I assume. At say 16x20 print, does it matter that much?

Disclaimer: I may pick 200mm f2 someday.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

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

4,612 views & 0 likes for this thread
f/2.8 vs f/4 DOF samples?
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 reservengineer
939 guests, 343 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.