Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Michael: how often beyond f/2.8?  (Read 4645 times)
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5171


« on: October 04, 2005, 07:03:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Michael,

    I wonder if you can say what fraction of your DSLR photography is done at aperture ratios below f/2.8? Or better yet, what fraction below f/4? Answers are also very welcome from other photographers, particularly professionals.

I ask because
a) looking through the "Featured image" selections, going back about five years, I see not a single example using a lens that goes faster than f/2.8, but actual f-stops used are not listed.
 Canon seems to be expecting a lot of its FF DSLR users to work within a f/4 limit, judging from its development of an extensive "f/4 L" series, often alongside existing f/2.8 offerings: 17-40, 24-105, 70-200, 300, 400, 500, 600. (Not to mention the 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L)
Logged
Guest
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2005, 07:57:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I own several fast lenses, and use them frequently, but not everyhting that I do appears online.

If you're trying to determine if you need fast lenses don't go by what others do. Simply look at the type of shooting that YOU do.

Michael
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2005, 01:27:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Most of my stuff recently has been of people - especially with my wedding work (which I'm getting out of).

I loath flashes. For any flash to keep up with my shooting it requires a heavy battery pack and personally I think flash work looks like harsh poody. I regularly shoot wide-open (f/1.4) at high-ISO. I prefer to keep it at 3.2 or higher but it's not always possible.

Like Michael said, it depends on the task at hand what you'll need or want to shoot at.
Logged
Anon E. Mouse
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 197


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 05, 2005, 05:05:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Increasing a lens' design from f/4 to f/2.8 is expensive, especially with zooms. The f/4 limit is probably where the cost/performance line is. It is easier with single focal length lenses until you start approaching very long or very short focal lengths.

I have a question for folks with DSLR about maximum aperture. If using an f/1.4 lens, will the camera use the maximum aperture in program AE? Or does it only reach about f/2.0?
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 05, 2005, 10:00:17 AM »
ReplyReply

The camera will utilize the full aperture range of the lens.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5171


« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2005, 01:24:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Michael's reply above has been augmented by another in his "Chinese trip gear report". For that trip, he left the 24-70 f/2.8 behind, and used entirely aperture f/4 or smaller, with the help of IS and high usable sensor ISO speed.

But I am sure he has not disposed entirely of his f/2.8 zooms and fast primes!

As to my needs: adequate DOF and a preference to avoid excessive weight would definitely make me an Canon f/4 L lens enthusiast if I was still using Canon 35mm format gear very much. (It comes out of the closet just occasionally for B&W film work.) For me f/4 in 35mm format gave as much background softening as I ever wanted. Even for my few portraits.

I might be towards one extreme, but then so is nature photographer John Shaw http://www.johnshawphoto.com/equipment.htm who in his 35mm film days said that he essentially never went beyond f/4 and now seems happy with f/2.8 on a D2X, with primes only for macro, tilt/shift, and extreme telephoto.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8360



WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2005, 04:38:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi there,

Doing mostly landscape, I typically use my Nikkor lenses around f11, which appears to be the best aperture for many DX lenses on a d2x.

This being said, I also do other type of work, and use by 2.8 zooms, as well as a 35 f2 and 85 f1.4 at their widest aperture on a regular basis. No noticeable light fall off of corner sharpness problems.

If you are concerned by the corner image quality of FF Canon bodies, you might want to consider using German lenses or Nikkors. Many posters here and at robgalbaith have been using those instead of Canon wide zooms for quite some time now.

The great DxO Optics Pro from Dolabs should also help correcting those 1ds2 and 5d wide angle images.

Regards,
Bernard
« Last Edit: November 16, 2005, 04:44:03 PM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
Yakim Peled
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


« Reply #7 on: November 17, 2005, 02:07:30 AM »
ReplyReply

2.8 is slow. I currently have 28/1.8, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 and frequently use sub-2.8 to get shallow DoF. Then again, YMMV.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Logged

Happy shooting,
Yakim.
sergio
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 662


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 17, 2005, 08:11:25 AM »
ReplyReply

It really depends on the image you have before your eyes. I shoot in a range between f1.2 and f90. The fstop is a compromise between available light and aesthetical purposes. Look at your subject, feel it and decide if you go up all the way to 1/8000 f1.2 or go down to 1/60 f11. Different moments ask for different approaches. My favorite lens is the Canon 50 1.4 USM @ 1.4, where it rates worst, I mean very poor edge sharpness, strong vignetting, distortion, plus other defects which I simply love for certain type of subjects. Its part of my way of speaking photographically.
I never pay to much attention to quality issues related to lenses as long as the photo is good as an image. Nothing worse the a sharp picture of a fuzzy concept, as Ansel Adams said.
I cannot remember the name of a North American photographer who used to collect broken old 4x5 lenses and shot wonderful images with them. A link to his/her work would be great, in case somebody remembers.

Sergio

www.sergiobartelsman.com
« Last Edit: November 17, 2005, 08:12:33 AM by sergio » Logged

BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5171


« Reply #9 on: November 17, 2005, 03:03:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I ... frequently use sub-2.8 to get shallow DoF. Then again, YMMV.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51474\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Indeed, Mileage Varies greatly; see my comments above about my own DOF tastes, and those of John Shaw. When my standard lens was a Pentax 50mm f/1.7, I only ever went anywhere near to f/1.7 for speed in low light, never for "Shallowness Of Field" (SOF).

That is why I am interested in getting a wide array of responses on this topic from sincere, competent photographers: keep them coming!
Logged
Bob Nicholson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 18, 2005, 07:17:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Bernard

Prolly a silly question, BUT how do you use lenses other than Canon on a Canon body?

Bob

Quote
If you are concerned by the corner image quality of FF Canon bodies, you might want to consider using German lenses or Nikkors. Many posters here and at robgalbaith have been using those instead of Canon wide zooms for quite some time now.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51448\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Yakim Peled
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


« Reply #11 on: November 18, 2005, 09:09:38 AM »
ReplyReply

With adaptors.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfa..._focus_EOS.html

http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-manual-lenses/
Logged

Happy shooting,
Yakim.
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5171


« Reply #12 on: November 18, 2005, 11:53:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
how do you use lenses other than Canon on a Canon body?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51601\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
With adaptors, but without any automation, including basic aperture control. You must focus manually with lens set to maximum aperture, then stop the lens down to the desired aperture, all with the lens's aperture ring, not the camera's aperture controls.

So, only for slow, careful, and probably tripod based work.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad