cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

DSLR 101 3.0

jazzman1
Rising Star

 

 

 

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

jrhoffman75
Legend
Legend
Unless there is only one item in your viewfinder, which is next to impossible, there are an infinite number of distances between you and the items.

Only one distance is in perfect focus, and depending on depth of field, a range of distances will be in acceptable focus.

Zooming the lens doesn't change the distance anymore than it compresses the distance between objects.

Maybe it's my imagination, but I often feel a tugging on my leg when I read some of these postings.
John Hoffman
Conway, NH

1D X Mark III, M200, Many lenses, Pixma PRO-100, Pixma TR8620a, Lr Classic

View solution in original post

44 REPLIES 44


@jazzman1 wrote:

One of the things I notice is that the Bokeh is stronger with the 24-105mm L lens, than the 50mm Prime lens..... with both set to aperture f/4.  The 50mm Prime lens Bokeh seems a tad stronger than the 24-105mm L lens, when the 50mm Prime lens is set at aperture f/1.4.  But they look very close, in these pics I took.   The results may be slightly different if things are more precisely setup.   I can also see the EF 50mm f/1.4, handles lower light better than my EF 24-105mm L f/4.  I'm beginning to see why the EF 24-105mm L f/4 IS USM is considered a very versitile general purpose lens.  These shots are just casual setup pics I took.  Just results I can expect in everyday shooting.  These results are about what I expected from all I've heard and read.  But nothing helps me understand anything I learn in Photography, better.....  than seeing it with my very own eyes in real world applications.


I presume it was no surprise that the 50mm f/1.4 lens, which is three stops faster than the 24-105mm f/4, handles low light better.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA

 


@RobertTheFat wrote:


I presume it was no surprise that the 50mm f/1.4 lens, which is three stops faster than the 24-105mm f/4, handles low light better.


No it was'nt.  But as I stated....nothing helps me understand and internalise any info I learn in Photography more than to see it with my very own eyes, in use, in practical application.   Besides, since this is DSLR 101, some newbie may one day look in, and this may help him understand things better.   When I actually see and do something in practical application...it's really cemented in my mind.   These things I rarely forget overtime, as opposed to just knowing different bits of information.   Alot of things I learn in photography, at 1st , is only therory in my thinking, till I see it and use it myself.  Hands on so to speak.   That's when I trully understand how something works.  Not everything in Photography, but many things.   Maybe it's just me, maybe age, but this is my best process.

" I learn in Photography, better....."

 

I had decided to butt out of your postings but what in the world are you talking about?  Thoes show nothing and reveal you don't understand bokeh and/or OOF.

Bokeh is the way a lens renders out-of-focus points of light.  It isn't the same as OOF backgrounds.  Comparing one lens at f4 and another at f1.4 is no comparison at all.

How in the world did you think you could compare OOF with a 50mm lens at f4 and another one at f1.4?  One at SS of 1/800 and the other at 1/6400.  When you compare stuff you have to make sure all is the same or you ain't learning nuthin'.

 

The number of, and the shape of, the aperture blades have a great deal of control over both OOF and bokeh.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!


@ebiggs1 wrote:

" I learn in Photography, better....."

 

I had decided to butt out of your postings but what in the world are you talking about?  Thoes show nothing and reveal you don't understand bokeh and/or OOF.

Bokeh is the way a lens renders out-of-focus points of light.  It isn't the same as OOF backgrounds.  Comparing one lens at f4 and another at f1.4 is no comparison at all.

How in the world did you think you could compare OOF with a 50mm lens at f4 and another one at f1.4?  One at SS of 1/800 and the other at 1/6400.  When you compare stuff you have to make sure all is the same or you ain't learning nuthin'.

 

The number of, and the shape of, the aperture blades have a great deal of control over both OOF and bokeh.


Thanks for your input biggs.

I took these 2 shots with a 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 walkaround.  Though the bokeh is not the greatest, I thought it decent, I liked the resuts.IMG_4791.JPGIMG_4790.JPG

Announcements