Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Depth of Field

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Depth of Field

    In EOSpedia it was stated that all you need to remember is that a large aperture decreases depth of field, while small aperture increases it. True, but the second thing to remember is the effect of focal length on depth of field.
    Alan

    No longer using Canon but still teaching new Canon users (and others) the gentle art of Photography.

    http://www.springfield-photography.com/

    #2
    Absolutely….
    there are many articles within photo publications that don’t talk about all factors…I think we have to assume that no other factors are changed.
    Brian Vickers LRPS

    brianvickersphotography.com

    Comment


      #3
      Absolutely, I've had better depth of field from longer focal lengths than I do with my 50mm f1.8

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by SpringfieldPhoto View Post
        In EOSpedia it was stated that all you need to remember is that a large aperture decreases depth of field, while small aperture increases it. True, but the second thing to remember is the effect of focal length on depth of field.
        And the third thing to remember is that DoF increases with subject distance...
        Nigel

        You may know me from Another Place....

        The new ElSid Photogallery...

        Equipment: Far too much to list - including lots of Nikon...

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by El Sid View Post

          And the third thing to remember is that DoF increases with subject distance...
          I seem to remember reading that subject distance is the factor which has the most marked effect on DOF.
          John Liddle

          Backwell, North Somerset - "Where the cider apples grow"

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by El Sid View Post

            And the third thing to remember is that DoF increases with subject distance...
            Certainly does, Nigel.
            Alan

            No longer using Canon but still teaching new Canon users (and others) the gentle art of Photography.

            http://www.springfield-photography.com/

            Comment


              #7
              ...and the fourth thing to remember is that there are two DOF limits - near (in front of the focal point) and far (behind). The far one is longer than the near one.
              Sometimes this is important, other times (when the DOF is tight) not so much as narrow DOF has almost the same front and back.
              And a fifth - if you want the same optical DOF on APS-C as on full frame (for the equivalent field of view) then you'll need an aperture which is larger than the FF!

              I'd agree it is always worth mentioning the three main factors (focal length, aperture, subject distance) when discussing DOF or people will be confused. There are conflicting scenarios "out there" and some of them, the misleading ones, need correcting.

              Comment


                #8
                I think that the note about tables of depth of field "being misleading" is misleading. I have not seen any tables or discussion of tables of depth of field being "hard" boundaries at all. Rather, explanations have linked it to the circle of confusion. There may of course be some articles making such claims- I could not have read all by any means! - but I would say tables of DoF limits can have its uses.
                Experienced photographers may have learned DoF limits through their experience. Newcomers might be assisted by knowing where perceived sharpness starts to fall off. It may help in critical photographs to setting up precise focal distances. Thogh focus stacking and multiple shots will generally alleviate such precision which may have been more important in days of film when shots cost relatively more.

                Comment

                Working...
                X