Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Shallow DOF - Larger Sensors  (Read 2782 times)
Williamson Images
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 52


WWW
« on: December 14, 2009, 02:05:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Thought I would post the effect I get with my Contax 645 and Leaf Aptus II 10 and 140mm zeiss lens at f2.8. It is shallow.  I get similar results with my 80 at f2.0 and my Hassy 110 at 2.0.

Any similar effects with the larger sensors on the P65+ or Hassy 50 or 60's now that they have been out there a bit?  Or are you only shooting them stopped down?  I like the look and the backgrounds.  I think it only gets better with a fuller frame sensor.  

Robb


Full size - natural window light.  1/60th f 2.8 at iso 200 Handheld.

[attachment=18646:RW_000789_sm1.jpg]

and at 100%

[attachment=18647:RW_000789_sm2.jpg]

Logged

-------------------------
Robb Williamson
www.williamsonimages.com
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2009, 07:17:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Williamson Images
Thought I would post the effect I get with my Contax 645 and Leaf Aptus II 10 and 140mm zeiss lens at f2.8. It is shallow.  I get similar results with my 80 at f2.0 and my Hassy 110 at 2.0.

I can get a similarly narrow DOF shooting a Canon 1Ds with a 135 f/2--the eye is in focus, but the eyebrow is not...
Logged

ced
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 266


« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2009, 03:57:11 AM »
ReplyReply

What result were you anticipating and compared to what?
Logged
Williamson Images
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 52


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2009, 11:47:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Just an FYI more than anything else.  I had normally relied on the 140mm for landscape or architecture and had mostly stopped it down to f8 or f11.

Was pleasantly surprised with the shallow dof and rendition at f2.8

I normally grab the hassy 110 for that use at f 2.0.

With either, I find that fine tuning focus is tricky especially if handheld.  Wondering how others are faring with the larger resolution mf backs with lenses wide open or if they are noticing any differences.  

Robb

 

Quote from: ced
What result were you anticipating and compared to what?
Logged

-------------------------
Robb Williamson
www.williamsonimages.com
LiamStrain
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 116



WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2009, 11:50:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I think the increased focal length has a greater impact, than the lost stop of aperture.

ie.
110mm@f2 at 5ft subject distance = .11ft DoF on 6x4.5

140mm@f2.8 at 5ft subject distance = .09ft DoF on 6x4.5
« Last Edit: December 15, 2009, 11:51:25 AM by LiamStrain » Logged

Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2009, 11:55:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Phase P65+ head-and-shoulder shot of a model at around 6 feet with the 75-150 Mamiya zoom at 150mm and f11. At 100% view, the eyeball is in focus while the tips of eyelashes and eyebrows are not.  So it all depends on your perception of what is critical DoF:

« Last Edit: December 15, 2009, 11:57:49 AM by Jack Flesher » Logged

LiamStrain
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 116



WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2009, 11:56:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Indeed - final viewing size (and viewing distance) of the image is a factor when dealing with circles of confusion and apparent DoF. On an 8x10 print, that softness would not be apparent except under a loupe.
Logged

Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2009, 11:58:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: LiamStrain
Indeed - final viewing size (and viewing distance) of the image is a factor when dealing with circles of confusion and apparent DoF. On an 8x10 print, that softness would not be apparent except under a loupe.

Exactly, and maybe not even then
Logged

k bennett
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1449


WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2009, 03:04:09 PM »
ReplyReply

All technical stuff aside, the original is a nice portrait.
Logged

Equipment: a camera and some lenses.
cyberean
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 161


WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 15, 2009, 05:08:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: LiamStrain
I think the increased focal length has a greater impact, than the lost stop of aperture.

ie.
110mm@f2 at 5ft subject distance = .11ft DoF on 6x4.5

140mm@f2.8 at 5ft subject distance = .09ft DoF on 6x4.5
not quite ... you're comparing green to red apples here.
your example above will yield two different frame-perspective pictures.
if the goal is to present the same/comparable FoV perspective adjust
the lens-to-subject distance to either lens accordingly, and recalculate. ; )

Logged

check out the size of my sensor ...
LiamStrain
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 116



WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2009, 05:19:00 PM »
ReplyReply

That's true - to match framing the subject distance would have to adjust. Good point.

Even so. I'm, not sure one loses much by going to 2.8, if you are increasing the focal length - as the OP discovered.

I do wonder how much it changes between a crop sensor MF back vs. a P65+ sized sensor. Likely not all that much, but it's curious. I'm still used to what I get on the big film, so all this seems small.
Logged

Williamson Images
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 52


WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 15, 2009, 06:29:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks much.  

I like the background.  I seem to shoot my portraits very close to wide open with my d3x and the 85's and 50's.  With Canon in the past, I loved the 85 1.2, 50 1.2 and 135 f 2.  I enjoyed the bokeh and backgrounds with sharp eyes.  All those are magical.  Just added the new 70-200 VR II which is very nice corner to corner sharpness and better aperture blades with unnoticeable vignetting.

Shooting more of these with the contax and leaf setup now.  Will try to post a comparative shot with the 110mm at f 2.0.

I hadn't seen too many examples of portraits shot with the zeiss 140mm so thought I would show an example.  And I was surprised by the smaller dof.  I expected more in focus.  Pleasantly surprised.

Robb



Quote from: k bennett
All technical stuff aside, the original is a nice portrait.
Logged

-------------------------
Robb Williamson
www.williamsonimages.com
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7952



WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2009, 12:40:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Williamson Images
Thought I would post the effect I get with my Contax 645 and Leaf Aptus II 10 and 140mm zeiss lens at f2.8. It is shallow.  I get similar results with my 80 at f2.0 and my Hassy 110 at 2.0.

Yep, there are portrait guys working with 300 f2.8 lenses at f2.8, right?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
k bennett
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1449


WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2009, 06:26:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
Yep, there are portrait guys working with 300 f2.8 lenses at f2.8, right?


I've tried that. You need a long studio.
Logged

Equipment: a camera and some lenses.
carstenw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 581



« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2009, 02:39:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: k bennett
I've tried that. You need a long studio.

The Leica 180/2 is also known for giving nice portraits
Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad