Is there a general rule to know when using small apertures? How low can you go before diffraction occurs? Is this a lens issue or a sensor issue?
ChrisBlaze Goldmember  1,801 posts Joined Oct 2006 Location: Honolulu, Hawaii More info | Nov 06, 2006 19:15 | #1 Is there a general rule to know when using small apertures? How low can you go before diffraction occurs? Is this a lens issue or a sensor issue? Canon 1D Mark II N/5D Mark III/ 6D/ 7D /85mm f1.2L Mk1/ 24-70 f2.8L/ 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM/ 100mm Macro f/2.8
LOG IN TO REPLY |
cwphoto Go ahead, make my day  2,167 posts Gallery: 30 photos Likes: 76 Joined Oct 2005 Location: Kellyville, Baulkham Hills, Cumberland, NSW, Australia More info | Nov 06, 2006 19:18 | #2 Both. The simple answer is around f/11 for 1.6 croppers, f/16 for 1.3 croppers, and f/22 for FF. EOS-1D X Mark II| EOS 5D Mark IV | EOS 80D | EOS-1V HS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 06, 2006 19:20 | #3 diffraction results in IQ loss right? Canon 1D Mark II N/5D Mark III/ 6D/ 7D /85mm f1.2L Mk1/ 24-70 f2.8L/ 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM/ 100mm Macro f/2.8
LOG IN TO REPLY |
cwphoto Go ahead, make my day 2,167 posts Gallery: 30 photos Likes: 76 Joined Oct 2005 Location: Kellyville, Baulkham Hills, Cumberland, NSW, Australia More info | Nov 06, 2006 19:22 | #4 ChrisBlaze wrote in post #2226689  diffraction results in IQ loss right? Bingo. Although interestingly Canon use it to positive effect (reducing the size and weight) in their DO lenses (eg; EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM). EOS-1D X Mark II| EOS 5D Mark IV | EOS 80D | EOS-1V HS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Tsmith Formerly known as Bluedog_XT  10,429 posts Likes: 26 Joined Jul 2005 Location: South_the 601 More info | Heres a sample I did to prove it to myself. Although it can be subtle its still noticeable.
The crops were adjusted to show detail  
LOG IN TO REPLY |
yanz Senior Member 499 posts Joined Nov 2005 More info | Nov 06, 2006 19:35 | #6 Hi. I learned diffraction this weekend. Shooting with Canon 10-22 @ f16 the IQ was pretty bad, but when i was shooting f9 the IQ was much better. After i posted the pics here everyone said that it was diffraction. I read up on it and reshoot the next day with f9 they were much better. Check out the thread. https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=236153 Canon 5D, Rebel XTi
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 06, 2006 19:44 | #7 so each lens has a different aperture setting that it needs to be set at to prevent diffraction? Canon 1D Mark II N/5D Mark III/ 6D/ 7D /85mm f1.2L Mk1/ 24-70 f2.8L/ 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM/ 100mm Macro f/2.8
LOG IN TO REPLY |
mcminty Goldmember  1,250 posts Joined Jun 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia More info | Nov 06, 2006 22:58 | #8 Isn't the general rule regarding aperture and sharpness something to do with "stopping the lens down by two stops?" Andrew || Flickr!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Bob_A Cream of the Crop  More info | Nov 06, 2006 23:06 | #9 mcminty wrote in post #2227776 Isn't the general rule regarding aperture and sharpness something to do with "stopping the lens down by two stops?" Andrew. When you stop down a few stops from wide open you will improve sharpness. However, if you stop down to f/16 or so sharpness will appear to deteriorate due to diffraction. Bob
LOG IN TO REPLY |
peatoire Goldmember  1,084 posts Likes: 4 Joined Nov 2005 Location: Nottingham (Home of Robbing Hoods) More info | Nov 07, 2006 06:46 | #10 I never gave it a thought about sensor size and diffraction My 5D goes to f22 ish without diffraction. Cool! I was still basing it on around f11/f12. 5D & Grip, 17-40 f4, 70-200 f2.8 IS, 50mm 1.4, 85mm1.2 580EX 430EX II, Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Macro. Rickety tripod.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
rklepper Dignity-Esteem-Compassion  9,019 posts Gallery: 2 photos Likes: 14 Joined Dec 2003 Location: No longer living at the center of the known universe, moved just slightly to the right. Iowa, USA. More info | Nov 07, 2006 06:57 | #11 So, I guess I should stop shooting my 200 at f/32? Doc Klepper in the USA
LOG IN TO REPLY |
cwphoto Go ahead, make my day 2,167 posts Gallery: 30 photos Likes: 76 Joined Oct 2005 Location: Kellyville, Baulkham Hills, Cumberland, NSW, Australia More info | Nov 07, 2006 07:02 | #12 rklepper wrote in post #2228904 So, I guess I should stop shooting my 200 at f/32? Especially on a 30D, that is if you are willing to sacrifice extended DoF for sharper pictures. EOS-1D X Mark II| EOS 5D Mark IV | EOS 80D | EOS-1V HS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Tsmith Formerly known as Bluedog_XT 10,429 posts Likes: 26 Joined Jul 2005 Location: South_the 601 More info | Nov 07, 2006 07:03 | #13 I've kinda found as a rule of thumb to not let diffraction hold you back from using smaller apertures on the APS-C sensor. I've got several excellent f/22 photos taken while slowing down water flow for motion blur. Kinda hard not to use f/22 in that situation.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tim Light Bringer  51,010 posts Likes: 375 Joined Nov 2004 Location: Wellington, New Zealand More info | Nov 07, 2006 08:04 | #14 Oh ffs, 99% of photographers have better things to worry about. Ansel Adams might have to worry about diffraction for 2 meter wide prints, until you reach that level you should worry more about your lighting and composition. Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
peatoire Goldmember 1,084 posts Likes: 4 Joined Nov 2005 Location: Nottingham (Home of Robbing Hoods) More info | Nov 07, 2006 09:10 | #15 Yeah, let's all forget about defraction. (sarc) 5D & Grip, 17-40 f4, 70-200 f2.8 IS, 50mm 1.4, 85mm1.2 580EX 430EX II, Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Macro. Rickety tripod.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2893 guests, 137 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
