Using 85L II

Is it unrealistic to think that users are memorizing their distance of DOF when shooting with this lens? What I mean, how do people decide whether to use 1.2 vs 1.4 or even 1.8. Is it more hands on knowledge to remember that a shot at 1.2 isn't going to be as long in DOF as a shot in 1.8 (hence the memorizing part). I'm confused on when people would choose 1.8 over 1.2 when shooting. I wouldn't think the bokeh would be that much different between the two to have a decision in this respect.

You just get the hang of it after a little while. I'm not a pro and I don't look at tables, but after using the 85 for a bit I see things a little differently and am much more aware of when things I want in focus are not on the same focal plane and I have a good sense as to how far back I need to be to get the eyes in focus AND the ears, etc.

Practice - After a while I started to see what aperture gave me a dof big enough to do certain things. I don't have an 85L, but I'm sure this is how most people do it. It soon becomes second nature.

Here ya go...

http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.html

It will help you memorize different situations that you may find yourself in frequently.

If you shoot people, this becomes pretty easy because the same framing and aperture will always give about the same DOF no matter what focal length you use.

Then you just learn that you never go below f/4 for head and shoulders, f/2.8 for waist up, f/2 for full length and you only go down to f/1.4 or so for loosely framed shots.

JeffreyG wrote in post #6908499
If you shoot people, this becomes pretty easy because the same framing and aperture will always give about the same DOF no matter what focal length you use.

That's a bit misleading... Different lenses have different MFDs and the more distance = more DOF (given the aperture is the same).

SoaringUSAEagle wrote in post #6908632
That's a bit misleading... Different lenses have different MFDs

Well, I kind of assumed that we were talking about shots beyond the MFD. I don't understand this complaint relative to the DOF discussion.

This statement is only true if you do not change the focal length. I think you are missing my point. Go find your favorite online DOF calculator and try this.

What is the DOF on a 5D for a 100mm lens at 10 feet and f/2? I get 0.35 feet.

Now back up to 20 feet distance but change to a 200mm lens (this will give equal framing of the subject). At f/2 I get.....wait for it......0.35 feet!.

So my statement is correct. For any given framing (like a waist up portrait) you do not need to memorize DOF tables for all different focal lengths and distances and stuff. You just need to know how each aperture will look when a person fills the frame to a certain degree. It really is that simple!

Ok fine I get what you're saying now. My apologies.

SoaringUSAEagle wrote in post #6908733
Ok fine I get what you're saying now. My apologies.

No problem. It's handy trick for shooting people, since this makes it easy to estimate the relative framing since it is easy to estimate the size of the person.

This technique doesn't work for other things though.

JeffreyG wrote in post #6908499
If you shoot people, this becomes pretty easy because the same framing and aperture will always give about the same DOF no matter what focal length you use.

Then you just learn that you never go below f/4 for head and shoulders, f/2.8 for waist up, f/2 for full length and you only go down to f/1.4 or so for loosely framed shots.

All of these are below f/4. I shoot exec portraits all the time between 2.8 and 4.

This was shot with a 500C/M at f/4 180mm CF lens.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Airfrog,

The only one of all of these shots that I would call 'head and shoulders is the first one, and in that you did indeed use f/4. The rest are waist up.

Some of these shots need to be considered in another light too....the one of the man in the dark suit is shot in landscape orientation and is a half (waist up shot) even then. Shot in portrait orientation this would be at least a 3/4 length shot, so it should be OK for DOF all the way down to f/2. You shot it at f/1.6 and it looks OK to me at this tiny size. Check the full image....are the ears noticeably sharp or not? Some people care about that, some don't. Look at the guy in the white lab coat shows how fast the blur is groiwing when you look at the printing on his chest. The DOF contains his face and not much else.

I'm not saying all this as a critique of the shots, just pointing out that the shots you took below the apertures lower than the guide I listed do not contain all of the subjects within the DOF.

My guidelines are good for getting people pretty much in focus front to back for prints up to about 8x10. If you print smaller or are not too picky about soft ears and hair then you can go more open.

for me its the subject's distance, and whether both eyes are in the same plane of focus if they are close. Full body one person, I have no problem with 1.2. head an shoulder, 1.2 only if they are just about perfectly facing me, or, if the other eye is obscured anyway. at mfd, if their head is even a little turned, need 1.6 to get minimum decent dof, and if the hear is turned near 45 degrees, actually need down to 3.2.
here is one at 1.2 near mfd

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

JeffreyG wrote in post #6909353
Airfrog,

The only one of all of these shots that I would call 'head and shoulders is the first one, and in that you did indeed use f/4. The rest are waist up.

Some of these shots need to be considered in another light too....the one of the man in the dark suit is shot in landscape orientation and is a half (waist up shot) even then. Shot in portrait orientation this would be at least a 3/4 length shot, so it should be OK for DOF all the way down to f/2. You shot it at f/1.6 and it looks OK to me at this tiny size. Check the full image....are the ears noticeably sharp or not? Some people care about that, some don't. Look at the guy in the white lab coat shows how fast the blur is groiwing when you look at the printing on his chest. The DOF contains his face and not much else.

I'm not saying all this as a critique of the shots, just pointing out that the shots you took below the apertures lower than the guide I listed do not contain all of the subjects within the DOF.

My guidelines are good for getting people pretty much in focus front to back for prints up to about 8x10. If you print smaller or are not too picky about soft ears and hair then you can go more open.

I'm extremely picky and work with some insanely picky designers and art directors. Thats why I'm so picky about my glass. (fast and sharp) Some of what I shoot goes on bill boards and posters not just annual reports which the horz at 1.6 was in.. The ears are seldom important to me and my clients anyway thank gawd cause there usually not very attractive or relevant.

Sometimes shallow DoF is the answer and you should soften backgrounds or anything else thats not relevant to the visual statement. Don't be afraid to shot below f/4 is my point if that helps with your visual statement.

And the last two are head and shoulder exec portraits. The crop should come just below the V in the buttoned jacket.

Heres something a bit tighter that works.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

JeffreyG wrote in post #6909353
Airfrog,

The only one of all of these shots that I would call 'head and shoulders is the first one, and in that you did indeed use f/4. The rest are waist up.

That was with a Hasselblad 180 CF Zeiss at f/4. What would the 35mm format DoF equivalent be like an 85mm at maybe f/2.8 or below?

I must be backwards,
I shoot head shots at F2 and full body at f5.6 and that works well for me for what I do.

Perfect DoF for me for a generic head shot is tip of nose, just barely in focus; eyes perfectly in focus; ears almost in focus; blur the ____ out of everything else.