I always wanted a 2.8 lens and some time ago got a sigma 70-200 2.8.Not understanding about depth of field and aperture at that time i was shocked at how shallow the focus depth was at 200 using 2.8.It felt pretty useless and i wondered what the 2.8 fuss was all about.my question is am i right in presuming that the more you reduce the magnification the greater your depth of field at 2.8 becomes.So a nikon 20mm 2.8 would give much more depth of field at 2.8 than a 300mm 2.8 at 2.8....Thanks
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
2.8 lenses and depth of field question. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Dumfound
- Start date
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
basically yes but it also depends on the distance to the focal point as you would have found if you use a 200/2.8 at 2.8 as a macro lens focusing at 1 metre then pointed it at something 20 feet away. DoF and Hyperfocal distance should be an ally not a hinderance
Wikipedia has the whole 9 yards, actually it has more than a mere mortal will ever need as an explanation
Wikipedia has the whole 9 yards, actually it has more than a mere mortal will ever need as an explanation
jmepler
It's just a flesh wound.
What you are describing is precisely what some photographers like about large aperture lenses.
Shooting at f2.8 allows you to blur the background so as not to distract from your subject. The Wikipedia entry has a good illustration of this in the pictures of the daffodils.
Obviously the other advantage of a "fast" lens like this is that it is fast. The large aperture lets in lots of light which allows you to shoot in low light situations with reasonable shutter speeds.
Mike
Shooting at f2.8 allows you to blur the background so as not to distract from your subject. The Wikipedia entry has a good illustration of this in the pictures of the daffodils.
Obviously the other advantage of a "fast" lens like this is that it is fast. The large aperture lets in lots of light which allows you to shoot in low light situations with reasonable shutter speeds.
Mike
Highcountry
Well-known member
A wide aperture (fast lens) provides a brighter viewfinder and generally more responsive auto focusing. A fast lens can also increase the potential for handholding in low light situations.
Guidenet
Well-known member
Fast Lenses
Most photographers like a shallow depth of field over a deep one under most situations. Scenics and Macro might be two situations that one might want a deep depth of field. Birds and wildlife generally look better when you can isolate the subject by blurring the background. The same goes for portraits and many other applications.
For example, here's an image that shows the very very shallow depth of field of an 85 f1.4 at f1.4. This is a fence.
Now, see how this makes a baby's portrait have punch. See how his eyes are in focus but the ears are not.
Now here's a bird where my fastest lens at the time was only a f5.6, but the background is slightly blurred. I wish that I had a 300 f2.8 to blur it more.
To me it looks much better when you can totally isolate the bird by blurring the background.
Most photographers like a shallow depth of field over a deep one under most situations. Scenics and Macro might be two situations that one might want a deep depth of field. Birds and wildlife generally look better when you can isolate the subject by blurring the background. The same goes for portraits and many other applications.
For example, here's an image that shows the very very shallow depth of field of an 85 f1.4 at f1.4. This is a fence.
Now, see how this makes a baby's portrait have punch. See how his eyes are in focus but the ears are not.
Now here's a bird where my fastest lens at the time was only a f5.6, but the background is slightly blurred. I wish that I had a 300 f2.8 to blur it more.
To me it looks much better when you can totally isolate the bird by blurring the background.
