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 06 Mar 2014 (Thursday) 16:23
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

DOF difference between the 85mm 1.2 and the 50mm 1.2

 
clarnibass
Senior Member
793 posts
Likes: 9
Joined May 2011
     
Mar 07, 2014 01:36 |  #16

There are two thing affecting DOF, aperture and magnification.

Nick_Reading.UK wrote in post #16739657 (external link)
I calculated the 50mm at 5metres and the 85mm at 8 metres and the 85mm has less DOF.. Wow!!!

In this example the magnification is different. Compare 50mm at 5m and 85mm at 8.5m for a comparison. If you use 85mm at 8m then it's a larger magnification than 50mm at 5m.

In theory, if you take a photo of a 2D subject, at same magnification and same aperture, DOF is the same, but for a theoretical 2D subject there is no DOF. For a 3D subject, changing the distance and FL will keep magnification the asme only for a theoretical 2D area of the subject (i.e. the precise spot you are focused on), so different parts of a 3D subject have a different magnification as a result.


www.nitailevi.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
windpig
Chopped liver
Avatar
14,887 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 1194
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Just South of Ballard
     
Mar 07, 2014 06:58 |  #17

Nick_Reading.UK wrote in post #16739648 (external link)
The 85mm seems to have less DOF.. I am wondering why. Maybe I calculated incorrectly :o

Go about 3/4 down the page for an explaination
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …SM-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx (external link)


Would you like to buy a vowel?
Go ahead, spin the wheel.
flickr (external link)
I'm accross the canal just south of Ballard, the town Seattle usurped in 1907.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,996 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5826
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Mar 07, 2014 07:33 |  #18

clarnibass wrote in post #16740529 (external link)
There are two thing affecting DOF, aperture and magnification.

I had to think about this a bit, but then realized magnification encompasses the other 2 attributes that affect DOF: focal length and distance. :)

The only other caveat to all of this is that 2 of the 3 factors affecting DOF won't affect perspective, but changing distance will. This means that if you use distance to control DOF, you won't end up with the same content in your photos that you would if you use focal length.

It can sometimes be difficult to compare different photos across different settings, if perspective is different.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Mar 07, 2014 08:15 |  #19

In general, when you frame your subjects the same, with the same aperture, you'll end up with the same depth of field. Now this doesn't mean you'll end up with the same photograph, as the background compression will be different.

Here's the photo that windpig is referencing out of the macro lens reviews that shows exactly that.
http://media.the-digital-picture.com …ength-Background-Blur.jpg (external link)

So the real question here, is what are you trying to achieve? Are you looking for background separation or are you looking for a narrow DoF on your subject? Most people want the former, not the latter in the majority of shots they take.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
werds
"Yes, Sire. You'll shut your trap!"
Avatar
613 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 64
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Delaware
     
Mar 07, 2014 08:24 |  #20

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16739963 (external link)
This is something I put together a long time ago, maybe it would be helpful here?

QUOTED IMAGE

I registered JUST to tell you how amazingly helpful in visualizing this set of images are!


Gear: Nikon D750, Nikon D7200, Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS, Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS HSM EX , Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR1, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Tamron 28-300mm Di VC PZD, Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD, Tamron 150-600 VC, Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.8, Nikon SB-900
POTN Seller Feedback (and other)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,996 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5826
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Mar 07, 2014 08:39 |  #21

werds wrote in post #16740873 (external link)
I registered JUST to tell you how amazingly helpful in visualizing this set of images are!

Thank you, I did it years back for somebody that needed help with DOF, and I simply could not explain it well enough in words, where others on the board are much better. :oops: Welcome to POTN!


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WhyFi
Goldmember
Avatar
2,766 posts
Gallery: 237 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 804
Joined Apr 2008
Location: I got a castle in Brooklyn, that's where I dwell.
     
Mar 07, 2014 08:47 |  #22

vengence wrote in post #16740864 (external link)
In general, when you frame your subjects the same, with the same aperture, you'll end up with the same depth of field.

Pretty much. It doesn't take too much hands-on time to realize that, for a given f-stop, no matter the FL, framing your subject in a particular manner will result in predictable DoF. A head shot at 1.2/1.4, for instance, isn't going to get the full face in focus - hell, it won't even get both eyes in focus unless you're shooting them dead-on, putting both eyes in the same plane.


Bill is my name - I'm the most wanted man on my island, except I'm not on my island, of course. More's the pity.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick_Reading.UK
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
836 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Reading, Berkshire, UK
     
Mar 07, 2014 09:23 |  #23

werds wrote in post #16740873 (external link)
I registered JUST to tell you how amazingly helpful in visualizing this set of images are!

Hay, welcome !!!!!!


EOS 5Dmk3 X2, 60D, EF24-70mm f2.8L mk2, EF70-200mm f2.8L IS mk2, EF85mm f1.8, EF50mm f1.4, EF50mm f1.8 mk1(350D with 18-55mm Sh"kit" lens).
Speedlite 600EX-RT, 430EX II Flash. manfrotto 190XDB tripod, Giottos GTMML 3290B Monopod, B+W 77mm 110 Single Coated filter, Hama 77mm Variable Neutral Density Filter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Mar 07, 2014 09:42 |  #24

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16739963 (external link)
This is something I put together a long time ago, maybe it would be helpful here?

It's a great image. If you ever update that image, you might add red rectangles to show the relative framing. Or perhaps change the subject's size or something.

IMAGE: http://i.imgur.com/X52p3X3.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,996 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5826
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Mar 07, 2014 09:43 |  #25

vengence wrote in post #16741090 (external link)
It's a great image. If you ever update that image, you might add red rectangles to show the relative framing. Or perhaps change the subject's size or something.

Good idea, I wonder if I still have my PSD for this laying around... :D

I was just trying to show DOF relative to a focal point (using the people) with the diagram, but definitely the framing would be different for 2 of the 3 areas.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clarnibass
Senior Member
793 posts
Likes: 9
Joined May 2011
     
Mar 07, 2014 10:17 |  #26

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16740789 (external link)
I had to think about this a bit, but then realized magnification encompasses the other 2 attributes that affect DOF: focal length and distance. :)

Magnification has all attributes that affect DOF in it, except aperture.
The magnification is determined by FL, distance, sensor size and print/display size.
Those DOF calculators are based on some specific print size viewed from a specific distance, that I guess is a standard that I forgot.


www.nitailevi.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agedbriar
Goldmember
Avatar
2,622 posts
Likes: 352
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Slovenia
     
Mar 07, 2014 15:38 |  #27

This is a great calculator:
http://toothwalker.org​/optics/vwdof.html (external link)

It will calculate/compare DOF, as well as background blur at chosen bg distances.

Anyway, for the same framing (i.e. same number of respective focal lengths shooting distance), the DOF is the same for any two equal apertures.
Said another way, for the same framing the DOF depends only on aperture, irrespective of FL.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
draculr
Member
133 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2010
     
Mar 07, 2014 21:08 |  #28

gasrocks wrote in post #16739663 (external link)
Be honest with us and yourself, how often are you going to shoot either lens at 1.2?

Almost always? I don't see why anyone would buy either lens if you were not intending to use them wide open quite often.


Photography by Peter Georges (external link) - Sydney Wedding and Portrait Photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Mar 07, 2014 22:49 |  #29

draculr wrote in post #16742419 (external link)
Almost always? I don't see why anyone would buy either lens if you were not intending to use them wide open quite often.

I'm mixed feelings on this. If the lens was 1.8 or 2.8 absofriggenlutely. 1.2 though, it's just too damn narrow DoF on most shots. having the eyes in focus and the eyelashess OOF doesn't make for good photography. That said, I don't buy a 1.2 lens to stop down to 2.8 or 4 most of the time either.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,063 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6152
Joined Sep 2007
     
Mar 08, 2014 00:16 |  #30

vengence wrote in post #16742554 (external link)
I'm mixed feelings on this. If the lens was 1.8 or 2.8 absofriggenlutely. 1.2 though, it's just too damn narrow DoF on most shots. having the eyes in focus and the eyelashess OOF doesn't make for good photography. That said, I don't buy a 1.2 lens to stop down to 2.8 or 4 most of the time either.

I agree with draculr. Almost always. Neither are really good to get in a tight headshot (OOF eyelash scenario), and it would make no sense to shoot wide open in such a scenario, but environmental and candids, 1.2 all the way.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

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

4,863 views & 0 likes for this thread
DOF difference between the 85mm 1.2 and the 50mm 1.2
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 Panzer90
1150 guests, 341 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.