Putting too much importance on DOF and shooting wide open?

I am just getting in to my portrait adventures and now I believe I may be placing too much importance on shallow dof. Seems like I have read and read on how wonderful it is, but now that I think on this, I realize that a lot of times folks are talking about all subjects, like macro and such and not just portraits.

Watching several videos on portraits and lighting I realize that most of the time these portrait guys are not using these extreme wide setting like 1.8 and such. They are using much smaller apertures and making sure their subjects eyes are in focus good and they are not afraid to let their backgrounds actually be seen instead of blurred.

I also realize that when taking portraits outside that the BG will be able to blur anyway because of the distances behind the subject so even when I take portraits at an aperture of 5.6 and even 7 that I have no problem getting a nice separation from the BG outside with my EF 100 F2 lens.

So is it common for people just in to this to pay too much attention on trying to shoot wide open at such large apertures? If I am going to invest in having decent backgrounds with background lighting and such, it seems that I should stop being afraid of actually using my BG and stop trying to shoot at 1.8 all the time, having one eye in focus and the other oof.

Can some of you folks chime in and let me know what aperture you normally shoot at when doing portraits indoors using your proper studio backgrounds?

I usually shoot my portraits with a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens @ f/5.6 or f/8. I can get a decently selective DOF with these apertures because I shoot with a long focal length...

IMAGE LINK: http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com …579394&k=JrkG2C​h&lb=1&s=A

IMAGE LINK: http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com …581153&k=fXNCtJ​9&lb=1&s=A

Nice shots. Just as i thought, I am placing far too much importance on the dof instead of making sure I have good focus on the eyes and actually trusting that I can let my Bg be seen when shooting in the studio. From now on I am going to shoot at a smaller aperture and worry more about good focus and framing, and as i said, outside portraits will take care of themselves with having so much distance options, and my inside stuff will be better as well and I can quit obsessing about trying to shoot at 1.8 all the time.

Shooting wide open has many problems. You generally want both eyes in focus! Or NOT have the tip of the nose to NOT be in focus. I get a kick out of people that shoot at f/1.4 or f/1.2 and have to choose which eyelash is in focus and which one isn't.

Also realize that our cameras' AF system runs on a fraction of the lens' ability to resolve sharpness. You may be using the world's sharpest lens but the AF system driving it is blurry-eyed at best. Shooting with a millimeter of DOF is crazy - your AF system won't even pick the same object to focus on twice! Even if you use single-point focus (I do), the camera will pick a different distance 2 out of 3 times unless you're past infinity.

The upshot of my statements are that you have to use an apeture that provides a DOF at least as wide as your AF focusing error or you're getting unpredictable results every time.

I'm not afraid to shoot below f/4 in the studio, as long as both eyes are parallel to the sensor. But even at f/8, its still possible to have one eye in focus and the other eye slightly out - at least at longer focal lengths when the subject is not squared off.

@ f/3.5:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

I think a lot of it has to do with people buying a fast lens, and then feeling the want/need to always shoot wide open. I'm sometimes guilty of this as well with my 28mm 1.8 and catch myself taking half my pictures at or near wide open.

It could also be used to hide that the background is really something not impressive at all. Personally I'd rather a photographer have an amazing backdrop to a portrait that is or somewhat in focus than completely blurry.

I just have to tell myself that I bought a fast lens for WHEN I need it, not because it's appropriate to use it wide open all the time.

I typically shoot portraits between f/8 and f/11. That makes the face sharp from nose back to about the ears. If you are shooting against a uniform background (eg. black, grey, white), it will be sufficiently blurred if it is 3-4 feet behind the subject. If you are shooting an environmental portrait, you want the background to be sufficiently sharp to be recognizable and provide context.

I concur. I also found f/8 to be the sharpest f/stop for almost all my lenses.

HughR wrote in post #14620204
I typically shoot portraits between f/8 and f/11. That makes the face sharp from nose back to about the ears. If you are shooting against a uniform background (eg. black, grey, white), it will be sufficiently blurred if it is 3-4 feet behind the subject. If you are shooting an environmental portrait, you want the background to be sufficiently sharp to be recognizable and provide context.