| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/19/2008 05:28:38 PM · #1 |
OK so I have one of these for my D40, and I do love it. But I keep hearing about how great they are in low light?
Surely you have to open it up really wide to shoot in low light, which then creates DOF issues? With the wide aperture prime lenses, what is the most useful f/stop to shoot at? Something like 2 to 2.8 more useful?
I used it for this pic below, just missed getting the eyes in focus, doh!
 |
|
|
|
04/19/2008 05:47:58 PM · #2 |
| I'd think that it is more likely motion blur at 1/25 on a 50 mm lens. |
|
|
|
04/19/2008 06:20:46 PM · #3 |
| I agree that it looks more like motion blur than missed focus. 1/25 sec is a bit slow for a 50mm lens being handheld. A general rule of thumb is 1/50 sec on a 50mm lens(though they say on a crop sensor it should be a bit faster) to avoid motion blur from being handheld. That goes for any lens, it's focal length should match the the shutter speed( 1/focal distance sec) to avoid motion blur from the camera holder, so using a 200mm focal length you should use at least 1/200 sec as your shutter. None of that pertains to stopping motion blur from your subject. |
|
|
|
04/20/2008 04:43:31 PM · #4 |
| If you're worried about DOF, back up a bit. The closer you are, the more you'll lose. With most cameras having such large resolutions, you can just crop to make up for the fact that your composition may include some boring stuff. |
|
|
|
04/21/2008 06:42:35 PM · #5 |
I agree, some of it could be motion blur... I was probably moving a little as well as him. I couldn't back up a bit as I was looking directly down, and a D40 doesn't have many pixels I can afford to lose! ha ha
:-P
So lets say I'm out shooting street candids, what aperture should I be looking at using if the subject is say 10-15 feet away? At this distance do you still have a very shallow DOF? Should I be looking at 2.8+?
I'm just worried that I'll never get people in focus if the DOF is too shallow? |
|
|
|
04/21/2008 06:48:36 PM · #6 |
2-2.8 (from what I recall) is actually pretty sharp. I think f/8 is still the sharpest for that lens though. (I don't recollect entirely).
Using this as a reference (Depth of Field Calculator) you get about 3 feet of good focus. This should be good enough for most pumpkin heads :)
|
|
|
|
04/21/2008 08:21:41 PM · #7 |
Also you are using manual focus on a camera whose viewfinder, though a touch better than my D50's was never intended for that purpose. Combine that with shallow depth of field and you have huge potential for user error in the best of conditions, let alone in low light.
I love my 50mm 1.8, but there is no way that I could use it on a d40 wide open and in low light. It really needs either a nice big full frame viewfinder with a proper focus screen, or autofocus.
Still, the shallow depth of field is the whole point, no? |
|
|
|
04/22/2008 04:55:20 AM · #8 |
This lens is awful, pure evil.
As soon as i got it for my d40 it performed so well and forced me to spend $800 and upgrade to a d200 so i could get autofocus :) |
|
|
|
04/22/2008 03:36:06 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by cjoconn22:
This lens is awful, pure evil.
As soon as i got it for my d40 it performed so well and forced me to spend $800 and upgrade to a d200 so i could get autofocus :) |
Ha ha! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 03:39:26 AM EDT.
