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 Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment People 
Thread started 02 May 2018 (Wednesday) 20:22
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Lens selection and the HUGE difference it can make!

 
Phoenixkh
a mere speck
6,823 posts
Gallery: 67 photos
Likes: 1431
Joined May 2011
Location: Gainesville, Florida
     
May 02, 2018 21:31 |  #16

CyberDyne posted a drawing years ago now.... camera, distance to subject, distance to background. That's how one can determine the background blur.


Kim (the male variety) Canon 1DX2 | 1D IV | 16-35 f/4 IS | 24-105 f/4 IS | 100L IS macro | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | 100-400Lii | 50 f/1.8 STM | Canon 1.4X III
RRS tripod and monopod | 580EXII | Cinch 1 & Loop 3 Special Edition | Editing Encouraged

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
joeseph
"smells like turd"
Avatar
9,787 posts
Gallery: 95 photos
Likes: 1687
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
     
May 03, 2018 04:05 |  #17

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18618499 (external link)
Also once you know the formula, you will realize you don't need a fast lens to create a favorably narrow DOF.

don't say that! I've just bought me an 85mm f/1.2...


some fairly old canon camera stuff, canon lenses, Manfrotto "thingy", 1D MK II converted for IR, and now an M5
TF posting: here :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,340 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4877
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
May 03, 2018 04:40 as a reply to  @ joeseph's post |  #18

Great lens, enjoy it! I miss mine....


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShutterKlick
Senior Member
Avatar
374 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 235
Joined Oct 2017
     
May 04, 2018 19:15 |  #19

joeseph wrote in post #18618607 (external link)
don't say that! I've just bought me an 85mm f/1.2...

No worries, I have a 105mm 2.8.. between 2.8 and 3.5 sweet bokah is easy to achieve. This is likely my #1 fav lens!
Enjoy yours, it will deliver!

Andrew


"Camera & lens rich, Cash poor"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ltdave
Goldmember
2,933 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 824
Joined Apr 2012
Location: the farthest point east in michigan
     
May 07, 2018 20:01 |  #20

rhuel wrote in post #18618462 (external link)
I was doing an impromptu shoot with my daughter and my wife was assisting yesterday evening.

After going through the images to pick ones to keep or toss, I found these two and wondered why there was such a difference. I recalled after looking at the EXIF data for each image what was going on at the time.

I took the 1st image (small town, very little traffic at this time of day) with my 7D MkII and a 17-40mmL at 40mm f/5.6, realized I wanted more bokeh and compression, so I mounted my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS within 4 minutes, took a few steps back, set to 165mm at f/2.8 and had my wife hold a silver reflector to light my daughter on the "shadow" side.

I'm no pro, just a dad with a camera, but the difference between a "snapshot" looking image vs a good looking portrait, even with L-Glass is knowing your gear and realizing the differences each will give.

There's a pretty stark difference between these two images and I hope this serves as a decent example for someone.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by rhuel in
./showthread.php?p=186​18462&i=i96007762
forum: People


i love the 2nd. the 1st could still be used as an environmental portrait though, if the story is there...

HOWEVER, you or your daughter moved positions because regardless of which lens you used there should be green trees (although blurred) behind her head. also the reflection on the meters moved from middle left (of frame) to upper right of frame. the yellow lane markers should also be visible in the 2nd image as well, based on where they cross with her right leg and hand placement/rips...

im wondering how much difference is from the slight change in position, added to the DOF and fill light...

STILL like the images though!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
meruehl
Member
Avatar
34 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 38
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Alabama
     
May 09, 2018 08:05 |  #21

Thanks for showing this comparison!
Now I need a 70-200 :lol:

side note...is rhuel your last name? mine is just rearranged.


Canon 5D IV, Canon 50D, Canon Nifty Fifty, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, Canon 70-200 2.8II IS, Yongnuo YN-568EX II, Tamron 80-210mm f/4.5-5.6, (2) Lumopro 160, (1) YN-622C-TX, (2) YN-622C II, (3) Cactus V5, (2)Flashpoint eVOLV 200 , flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sibil
Cream of the Crop
8,146 posts
Likes: 29061
Joined Jan 2009
Location: SoCal
     
May 09, 2018 08:31 |  #22

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18618499 (external link)
Also once you know the formula, you will realize you don't need a fast lens to create a favorably narrow DOF. There are various combinations and placement of you to your subject to create subject isolation (narrower DOF).

I have many shots at 400mm or 500mm at f5.6 or smaller with very good subject isolation.

So very true.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,009 posts
Likes: 1024
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
May 09, 2018 08:41 |  #23

I love your image #2 shot with the 70-200mm lens. IMO it is head and shoulders above #1, shot with the 17-40L.

Of all the "L" lenses I have owned, the 17-40mm f/4L is my least favorite for people shooting.

My favorite lens for outdoor and indoor people and dog portraits is the 70-200mm f/4L IS. I chose this lens over an f/2.8 version because of its lighter weight. I can carry an f/4L IS along with an extra crop sensor body at the weight of an f/2.8L...

Shutterkick mentioned: "Old Japanese glass is sooo delicious!"

I agree! Some of the older Tokina glass gives me the imagery that I love. I have a 28-70mm Tokina f/2.8 ATX that I got on the used market in Japan. This is the Japanese version of the Angenieux 28-70mm f/2.6 lens or the U.S. Tokina 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 lens; a fairly rare version that was replaced by Tokina with the slightly inferior 28-70mm f/2.8 SV lens...

I can't put my finger on just what I like about my Tokina's imagery but, I know that I lke it...


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,340 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4877
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
Post edited 9 months ago by TeamSpeed. (3 edits in all)
     
May 09, 2018 08:47 |  #24

400mm at f5.6

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Church-and-Family/The-Kids/i-mcgGZwD/0/dd82b896/X2/5P1B0168-X2.jpg

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Church-and-Family/The-Kids/i-8vwZCKK/0/d765edb6/X2/5P1B1245-X2.jpg


Having fast lenses that aren't typically wide angle just make things easier though.... :)

Now, here is some fun if you want to play a bit. You are not able to get this kind of DOF on a wide angle such as this, even with a 50 1.4 due to distance you would have to be to create this framing. So how do you do this? (hint: search for brenizer method)

This is from an APS-C at f1.4, however the distance and AOV would typically render quite a bit more in focus without this method. In summary, it is not always just the lens that you want to look at for subject isolation, there are other factors and methods too.

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Church-and-Family/The-Kids/i-fF8xCz9/0/d680128c/X2/sadie_brenizer2-X2.jpg

Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShutterKlick
Senior Member
Avatar
374 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 235
Joined Oct 2017
     
May 09, 2018 19:07 |  #25

These two taken with my new to me Tokina 11-16 f2.8. Bought off ebay with a scratch on the front glass.. after testing it out extensively last weekend, I cannot find the scratch in the image... so its a $220 keeper! Screw drive AF works a treat on my D7500. This is one of my most favorite lens!!


Though the street window inside Texas Tavern in Roanoke VA


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




Inside a N&W mail car of old (On display at the transportation museum, this image cost me $10 admission, and it was worth it!)


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



I hope you enjoyed them!
Andrew

"Camera & lens rich, Cash poor"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,061 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2717
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
May 12, 2018 13:24 |  #26

Not lens selection making the difference. Perspective is.

Wide angle... get low shot up. change the perspective. Anything in the 20mm-40mm range will look like a normal cellphone photo if you take a photo at eye height.

As awkard as it seems... getting up on ladders or laying down on the ground makes for different looking photos.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K ­ Soze
Goldmember
Avatar
1,666 posts
Gallery: 79 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3110
Joined Dec 2011
     
May 12, 2018 18:24 |  #27

Talley wrote in post #18624515 (external link)
Not lens selection making the difference. Perspective is.

Perspective, lens focul leinght and apature all matter.

What are you referring too?


I try to make art by pushing buttons

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShutterKlick
Senior Member
Avatar
374 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 235
Joined Oct 2017
     
May 12, 2018 21:34 |  #28

K Soze wrote in post #18624645 (external link)
Perspective, lens focul leinght and apature all matter.

... Plus, light, shadows, distance to subject, shutter speed (movement blur, or not).. the list goes on and on.

Point is I think we agree with, proper gear is 1/2 the image, the photographer is the other 1/2.

A good photographer cannot (IMHO) capture (consistently) stunning images with junk gear,
and a junk photographer cannot capture stunning images with pinnacle gear, there fore
it *must* be a co-operative/shared effort of artist and gear.

Thats my take on it anyway...

Andrew


"Camera & lens rich, Cash poor"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K ­ Soze
Goldmember
Avatar
1,666 posts
Gallery: 79 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3110
Joined Dec 2011
     
May 13, 2018 11:06 |  #29

ShutterKlick wrote in post #18624729 (external link)
... Plus, light, shadows, distance to subject, shutter speed (movement blur, or not).. the list goes on and on.

Point is I think we agree with, proper gear is 1/2 the image, the photographer is the other 1/2.

A good photographer cannot (IMHO) capture (consistently) stunning images with junk gear,
and a junk photographer cannot capture stunning images with pinnacle gear, there fore
it *must* be a co-operative/shared effort of artist and gear.

Thats my take on it anyway...

Andrew


I think a photographer can get consistently great shots from mediocre gear. With a single lens all the shots will look similar. Look at some of the past film photographers, some used what is now considered antique kit.


I try to make art by pushing buttons

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,796 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3292
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
May 13, 2018 11:26 |  #30

Talley wrote in post #18624515 (external link)
Not lens selection making the difference. Perspective is.

That's exactly what I was thinking.

To me, the diference between the two photos that the OP posted is not so much the result of the lens. . Rather, it is the result in the change in perspective that he got by stepping back. . Stepping back completely changed the ratio between the camera-to-subject distance and the subject-to-background distance.

The OP also took the two photos from two different angles. . Not only did he step back, but ha also stepped to his right. . That is why the background is different.

And then we have the drastically different use of lighting between the two photos, which accounts for most of the difference. . When you change the amount of light on the subject relative to the amount of light on the background, that is going to make a vast difference in what the photos look like. . And it has nothing to do with the lens that was used.

I'd just hate for noobies to read this thread and think that the lens is what made the difference. . The 17-40mm could have produced an image very similar to the one that the 70-200mm produced, if it had been used differently. . The 2.8 aperture wouldn't have been necessary to get a photo that is pretty similar to image #2 - f4 would've been able to produce a fairly similar result, so long as the afore-mentioned distance ratio had been maintained.

I think that the difference between the two photos is attributable to good photography - a photographer who knows what to do to create a pleasing image in a given situation. . The OP's skill and experience is what led to the change in perspective and the change in lighting. The lens just allowed him to more readily facilitate those changes, as the 17-40 would have resulted in different framing if used from the further-back camera-to-subject distance.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

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

3,812 views & 44 likes for this thread
Lens selection and the HUGE difference it can make!
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment People 
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 kotsyphotography
522 guests, 396 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.