Depth of field and zoom...
Posts: 528
Threads: 67
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation:
0
Hey, I think I just learned something and thought I'd share....
I just took 2 photos from the same spot... the first is at 35mm and the second at 420mm. Both pics were shot with an F number of 4.0 but with different shutter speeds (1/250 & 1/150, respectively). Everything I've read has said that depth of field is determined by aperture... the smaller the aperture, the shallower the DOF. It is obvious in these two photos, however, that #2 has a much shallower DOF than #1 even though they were shot through the same-sized aperture. Am I making sense at all? I wouldn't think the different shutter speeds would account for the DOF, or would they?
#1
#2 - it's a garbage photo but it illustrates the point, methinks.
<><
Camera: Panasonic Lumix FZ10
Image Management/Editing:ArcSoft PhotoBase4
Advanced Image Editing: Adobe PhotoShop 7
Posts: 2,356
Threads: 349
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation:
0
I, like you, always believed that aperture was the controlling factor, but no. Focal length also is.....
Cave canem
Posts: 528
Threads: 67
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation:
0
Ok, so does changing the aperture change the focal length? or is focal length strictly a function of the lens position?
<><
Camera: Panasonic Lumix FZ10
Image Management/Editing:ArcSoft PhotoBase4
Advanced Image Editing: Adobe PhotoShop 7
Posts: 2,356
Threads: 349
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation:
0
No, the aperture cannot influence focal length. Focal length is defined as the distance from the centre of the lens to the focal plane or CCD.
Cave canem
Posts: 528
Threads: 67
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation:
0
OK, that's what I thought.
<><
Camera: Panasonic Lumix FZ10
Image Management/Editing:ArcSoft PhotoBase4
Advanced Image Editing: Adobe PhotoShop 7
Posts: 9,731
Threads: 1,965
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
6
Hmm... interesting results! Like you and Rufus, I thought it was just aperture which mainly controlled the DOF.
Posts: 1,138
Threads: 31
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation:
0
thats is some extremely shallow depth of field though ..
i guess the distance from the object would count as well ..
cause the thing is .. to get the same depth of field from different focal lengths ...
with the same appeture and shutter speed ..
i think youd have to be framing the same image in both shots. .
that might be a factor ..
(This post was last modified: Jul 27, 2004, 06:32 by RichS..)
Posts: 2,356
Threads: 349
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation:
0
That's right. Distance is a factor. This is closely related to the "flattening" and the "deepening" effect of long and wide lenses respectively.
Cave canem
Posts: 9,731
Threads: 1,965
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
6
You learn something new every day..
Posts: 2,483
Threads: 139
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation:
0
That's why you use telephoto in your subjects; to get nice background blur
You can also see this on many bird shots, the background is blurred a lot
Posts: 9,731
Threads: 1,965
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
6
Hey I was just reading... apparently depth of field with digital is also greater than film, due to the smaller sensor size... which makes it even harder to get the blurry background effect.
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/dof/
Posts: 2,356
Threads: 349
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation:
0
True, but it depends very much on the sensor size.
Cave canem
Possibly Related Threads…
Thread / Author
Replies
Views
Last Post
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
|