Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,225   Posts: 1,532,668   Online: 807
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 36
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    202

    Selective Focus with fast lens

    A lots of people, (myself included) thens to overuse the the thin DoF possible with fast lens.

    Now I think I am getting into the habit of abusing thin DoF without thinking about how it suits my imaging objectives.

    Do you find yourself in a similar situation?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Westminster, Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,504
    Abusing?
    When I grow up, I want to be a photographer.

    http://www.walterpcalahan.com/Photography/index.html

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Århus, Denmark
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,102
    Images
    16
    I use thin DOF a lot when shooting people. Portraits with the eyes sharp and the ears more or less blurred are great. Am I abusing it, then?

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    148
    I don't think you can abuse an artistic technique. Was Picaso abusing cubisim? Was Adams abusing dodging and burning? If that is your style, embrace it. If you don't like the results you are getting, practice more or experiment with other techniques.

  5. #5
    fotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    SE WI- USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,087
    Is there a DoF Anonymous?
    Items for sale or trade at www.Camera35.com

  6. #6
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Sounds like a bad habit; letting your work be guided by technical matters instead of by concept or vision, etc. I don't get it. How does that even happen? If you want more D of F, do what it takes to get more D of F. It is not as if you are out of control.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  7. #7
    Chazzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    South Bend, IN, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,846
    Images
    5
    Hamster seems to be talking about miniature format, since he refers to fast lenses. In miniature format, one does indeed have something of a choice about how shallow depth of field might be. But in the larger formats, relatively shallow depth of field is more or less a given—depending on how long an exposure is feasible.
    Charles Hohenstein

  8. #8
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,593
    Images
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Chazzy View Post
    Hamster seems to be talking about miniature format, since he refers to fast lenses. In miniature format, one does indeed have something of a choice about how shallow depth of field might be. But in the larger formats, relatively shallow depth of field is more or less a given—depending on how long an exposure is feasible.
    Is this really the case? I know of no medium or large format lens comparable (in terms of DOF) to the 50 F/1.0 or the 85 F/1.2 for "miniature format" as you call it. While it may be more difficult to get everything in focus with MF/LF, insanely shallow DOF may actually be more feasible with 35mm cameras.

  9. #9
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeofus View Post
    Is this really the case? I know of no medium or large format lens comparable (in terms of DOF) to the 50 F/1.0 or the 85 F/1.2 for "miniature format" as you call it. While it may be more difficult to get everything in focus with MF/LF, insanely shallow DOF may actually be more feasible with 35mm cameras.
    The mamiya rz 110/2.8 gives extremely shallow DOF, as does the m645 80/1.9; there are numerous others e.g. the contax 645 lenses.

    Then there is the issue of tilts, which make it very easy to produce extremely shallow DOF on some MF and most LF cameras.

    Finally, one must also consider the tonal smoothness of in-focus / out-of-focus transitions. MF and LF give up nothing to 35mm in that department. If you want very shallow DOF and good sharpness and good bokeh in 35mm, you are going to pay big bucks for it, tnere are only a handful of lenses that deliver all three. With LF just about any lens will deliver all of the above. And LF doesn't have to be huge, I played these games with an itty bitty horseman VH, for example: here or here. IIRC the first one was done with a 360 tele Nikkor and the second a 150 convertible.

    .... mind you, I am a guy who uses his Nikon 50/1.2 very happily
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  10. #10
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,743
    I find that a lot of people who have fast lenses for 35mm cameras use them habitually at far too big an aperture for their subject, and think that because they have paid for an 85mm f1.2 lens, for example that it must always be used wide open with the result that their pictures constantly suffer from insufficient depth of field.
    Ben

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin