Display:
Ref discussion about depth of field above.  I was experimenting with my new 80-200/f2.8 in Macedonia, near Skopje, and took this photo of an otherwise pristine wheat field.  I thought to name it "Flower of Peace."  But, I guess it's technically just a weed with a flower!



I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears

by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Wed Oct 3rd, 2007 at 10:43:48 PM EST
I'm just learning this stuff, but I take it you need an f2.8 lens to achieve this affect. When I go to America in a few weeks I'm going to buy a 50mm with an f stop of 1.8(amazingly it's very cheap) so perhaps I can experiment with the "depth of field."
This photo is beautiful, by the way.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP (rafifoon@yahoo.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 02:04:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
LEP, most of your lenses will have variable aperture, if not all?  You can alter the aperture through the camera settings to get the effect you desire.  The f stop value given for a lens is the lowest it can go to usually (ie maximum aperture).  So the 50mm f/1.8 will also go to f/22.

For the photo I took, my lens aperture was set via manual mode (or you can use aperture priority) to f/2.8.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 02:34:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think my lenses only go to f 3.5 now. Do I also have to change the focus settings, I'm not sure how they are called.
I'm also learning to shoot in manual; sometimes I'm forced to if the setting is very dark, eg., this concert I shot last week that my kids were in. It was in a very dark church and I was far away and I only had my 28-105 lens with me. It would have been easier if I had my 55-200 lens. But I got a few decent photos by raising th ISO to 1000.
Here's one that I shot with manual. Its a choir of young adults from France and Argentina.



Hey, Grandma Moses started late!

by LEP (rafifoon@yahoo.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 03:23:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That turned out decently!  If you were in completely manual mode then I guess you were changing the shutter speed and aperture, as well as the ISO.  

The balance is between having the aperture wide enough to let in enough light and retaining the depth of field you want (if that is an issue), and having the shutter speed long enough to let enough light in without camera shake or movement causing too much blurring.

And with ISO, having it high enough to be able to further reduce the shutter time but without becoming too grainy (unless you are after this look).

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 04:45:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I was happy to get several clear photos with the lens I had. I guess I was about 75 feet away and if I went to the 105mm it's very hard to take a shot without blurring.(No VR)  And my lens will open up to only f3.5.
When I get my new 50mm I'll have to get up closer (that means arriving earlier) but I expect much better results.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP (rafifoon@yahoo.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 05:10:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
As Colman said further up, the 50mm is a lovely portrait lens.  You can't zoom in or out with it which limits flexibility if you are stuck in one spot (ie you can't move forward or backwards to get more or less in the shot) but once you learn how to work with it, it is brilliant.

Ad astra per aspera
by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 05:27:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
DOF is also affected by the focal length of the lens. I'm guessing that Gringo had that lens (which one was it exactly?) extended out towards the 200mm end of the range, so he's getting very shallow depth of field.

The 50mm 1.8 won't have as extreme an effect, though it's a wonderful portrait lens on the digital bodies. 50mm lenses are cheap because they're very simple. I think they're the simplest to make.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 02:59:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So, according to this site, at 10m a 50mm set to f2.8 has about a 4m interval in acceptable focus while a 200mm will have about  0.28m in focus.

At f16 that becomes 1.58m for the 200mm and everywhere from 4.4m out for the 50mm - the background won't be blurred at all.

By way of further contrast, my 20mm would be in focus from 4.15m out at f2.8. You don't get blurred backgrounds with short lenses!

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 03:10:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for the info Coleman. (By the way, my ex-wife's maiden name was Coleman and my stepson's first name is also Coleman. He lives in America.)
When I see discussion of lenses people are always talking about good boceh. Is that what we're discussing?

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP (rafifoon@yahoo.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 03:36:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well that explains your ability to insert an extraneous 'e' into my name ...

Discussion Bokeh here. Basically it's the shape and qualities of the out-of-focus parts of the picture.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 03:52:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Coleman" must have been the poor side of the family.
Please excuse the error.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP (rafifoon@yahoo.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 03:59:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm not sure whether it's a simplification of the spelling, or a separate name. The Irish form of my name is Colmán, with the accent - called a fáda - lengthening the vowel so the pronunciation in Irish is Col-mawn, a form I use in places where the short 'a' of 'man' causes trouble for the locals.

I'm always perplexed when people who almost always see my name only in print misspell it. Annoys me almost as much as mis-accenting Jërómê's name does him.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 04:46:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Coleman is 10 times more common than Colman according to Google.

But I mean, people misspell principal as principle and lose as loose, so what are you complaining about?

I admit it is almost as annoying to have people call me Meewell even after they have heard me repeatedly say my own name properly.

We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 05:09:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I saw that now.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 02:47:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, I used to think a lot depended upon the exact spelling of a name, but since researching my family history, I have come to realize/realise that many if not most surnames have changed in spelling numerous times over the years.  My paternal grandmother spelled/spelt her maiden name differently than her brother did. She even had my father's birth certificate corrected to show her spelling vs. yet a third way.  Jameson, Jamison, Jamerson, Jemison, Jimmison, etc.  It's no wonder people are confused.

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears
by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 10:28:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Exactly, it must have been cranked out to 200mm at f2.8, which is kind of extreme, but you can get a nice background blur for portraits at f4 as well when in the 200mm neighborhood.  As you've pointed out a lot depends on distance between camera and subject.

I would say to all interested that you don't have to spend huge amounts of money.  50mm lenses, though less expensive, are also typically among the sharpest, and this was the lens that was usually included with cameras in the era before zooms became so popular. They were also very fast with some opening as wide as f.7 that's point 7, or faster.

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears

by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 09:58:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That's really nice.  It's so hard to get a very narrow depth of field just right so the bit you want is completely in focus!

Ad astra per aspera
by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 02:35:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You know, I think my camera/lens combo did it all here, but I may have manually focused, can't remember for sure.

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears
by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 10:08:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You used technique effectively to draw attention to the flower, and imagination to suggest a way of thinking about it - stick with it :-)

I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.

Einstein



Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 04:51:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks Ted, that is nice to hear/read.  It so happened that Macedonia was having lots of problems at the time and was walking a fine line between peace and civil war so the idea kind of popped into my head.  The process of working out political solutions is kind of like finding and focusing on this flower (or weed) in a large field.

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears
by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Thu Oct 4th, 2007 at 10:06:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This extra information enriches one's thinking about the photo and what you had in mind - include it. Image and text is a powerful combination - very few people make silent films these days :-)

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Fri Oct 5th, 2007 at 03:14:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series