Comments on: Aperture and the huge difference http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/ The personal web site of Eirik Solheim Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:22:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Håkon Iversen http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-18903 Håkon Iversen Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:15:05 +0000 http://eirikso.com/?p=974#comment-18903 I've tested this lens quite a bit in real life. And I've found that as long as the subject your taking a shot of isn't more than about 2-2,5 meters away from you it is ok to use 1.4, anything longer away you need to stop it down. Also, it misses focus a worrying amount of the time. (at least with my 5D mk1.) I’ve tested this lens quite a bit in real life. And I’ve found that as long as the subject your taking a shot of isn’t more than about 2-2,5 meters away from you it is ok to use 1.4, anything longer away you need to stop it down. Also, it misses focus a worrying amount of the time. (at least with my 5D mk1.)

]]> By: eirikso http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-8229 eirikso Tue, 26 May 2009 16:08:11 +0000 http://eirikso.com/?p=974#comment-8229 You are right. F16 and f22 is not the best place to be either. And on the 50mm I'm talking about here f22 is not good at all. You are right. F16 and f22 is not the best place to be either. And on the 50mm I’m talking about here f22 is not good at all.

]]> By: ted http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-8228 ted Tue, 26 May 2009 15:59:55 +0000 http://eirikso.com/?p=974#comment-8228 All lenses are designed with a 'sweet' spot where it is the sharpest resolution: 5.6 or about there. Optic designers know there is no perfect range on lenses, especially zooms and it's a compromise in lens design. For many years I was thought that the smaller the apperture the sharper the image. WRONG! Actually at f:16 is much worse. I tested images and came to the same conclusion of using f:5.6 is about sharpest you'll get the image with most lenses. I shoot with 5.6 all the time and it works for me... including video. There are many info on this online from optic designers. All lenses are designed with a ’sweet’ spot where it is the sharpest resolution: 5.6 or about there.
Optic designers know there is no perfect range on lenses, especially zooms and it’s a compromise in lens design.

For many years I was thought that the smaller the apperture the sharper the image.
WRONG!
Actually at f:16 is much worse.

I tested images and came to the same conclusion of using f:5.6 is about sharpest you’ll get the image with most lenses.

I shoot with 5.6 all the time and it works for me… including video.
There are many info on this online from optic designers.

]]> By: eirikso.com » DXO Optics Pro Rocks! http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-7626 eirikso.com » DXO Optics Pro Rocks! Mon, 04 May 2009 22:51:02 +0000 http://eirikso.com/?p=974#comment-7626 [...] I’ve just scratched the surface of this program. It does all kinds of advanced corrections. Here is my old test image from the 50mm f1.4. [...] [...] I’ve just scratched the surface of this program. It does all kinds of advanced corrections. Here is my old test image from the 50mm f1.4. [...]

]]> By: Tony http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-7594 Tony Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:58:00 +0000 http://eirikso.com/?p=974#comment-7594 I always assumed there would be a difference in the shot depending on the aperture setting, but I never would have guessed that It would be so noticeable. Thanks for taking the time to experiment! I always assumed there would be a difference in the shot depending on the aperture setting, but I never would have guessed that It would be so noticeable. Thanks for taking the time to experiment!

]]> By: Olli http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-7518 Olli Fri, 10 Apr 2009 08:41:13 +0000 http://eirikso.com/?p=974#comment-7518 wow, thats a big difference. I like this lense and use it often, but I never compared two pictures with two different apertures. Thank you for this useful information. wow, thats a big difference. I like this lense and use it often, but I never compared two pictures with two different apertures. Thank you for this useful information.

]]> By: eirikso http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-7470 eirikso Sun, 05 Apr 2009 07:06:32 +0000 http://eirikso.com/?p=974#comment-7470 I can think of a million situations where a low aperture setting is the best choice. Situations where you really want a shallow depth of field and situations where you don't have enough light to step down. A couple of examples here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/eirikso//sets/72157616368191052 One example: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/eirikso/3413267919/" title="IMG_0551 by eirikso, on Flickr" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3538/3413267919_1816600bfc.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="IMG_0551" /></a> But with the 50 mm I'm talking about here I would try to step down to 1.8 or 2.0 if possible. No matter what situation you're in this lens is not very sharp at 1.4. Not even in the center of the image. <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/eirikso/3413269385/" title="IMG_4614 by eirikso, on Flickr" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3591/3413269385_2896dd0cdd.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="IMG_4614" /></a> Still, when does it matter? The situation, target, light, composition and timing... Much more important than pixel perfect sharpness. :-) I can think of a million situations where a low aperture setting is the best choice. Situations where you really want a shallow depth of field and situations where you don’t have enough light to step down. A couple of examples here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eirikso//sets/72157616368191052

One example:
IMG_0551

But with the 50 mm I’m talking about here I would try to step down to 1.8 or 2.0 if possible. No matter what situation you’re in this lens is not very sharp at 1.4. Not even in the center of the image.

IMG_4614

Still, when does it matter? The situation, target, light, composition and timing… Much more important than pixel perfect sharpness. :-)

]]> By: Håkon T Sønderland http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-7469 Håkon T Sønderland Sun, 05 Apr 2009 01:29:55 +0000 http://eirikso.com/?p=974#comment-7469 Well, what this tells you is "Don't use f1.4 for landscape shots unless you mean it" :) Almost any lens when shot wide open will not be as sharp as when stepped down. f1.4 is for those situations where you want to isolate the subject or there just isn't any light. Try taking a face shot, focus on the eyes and try this again... Well, what this tells you is “Don’t use f1.4 for landscape shots unless you mean it” :) Almost any lens when shot wide open will not be as sharp as when stepped down. f1.4 is for those situations where you want to isolate the subject or there just isn’t any light. Try taking a face shot, focus on the eyes and try this again…

]]> By: Wolferey http://eirikso.com/2009/04/04/aperture-and-the-huge-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-7467 Wolferey Sat, 04 Apr 2009 22:23:19 +0000 http://eirikso.com/?p=974#comment-7467 Great post, learning something new every day about photography <3 Great post, learning something new every day about photography <3

]]>