210 AF IF or 300 APO AF IF for beauty work

[Dan Santoso]

Halo,

I have been using 150mm for beauty work with P65+ and I found the DOF is very narrow. I dont like to crop and my usual composition is head and shoulder, some only face and neck.

If the model is facing 45 degree left or right, I cant get both eyes sharp ( the eyes further from the camera is out of focus). Even slight angle will make the face out of focus. I shoot at F11-16 and still I have this problem

I am thinking to get 210 AF IF or 300 APO AF IF. With the minimum distance of 2 and 3M, will i be able to get close enough for face close up without cropping? Will the longer focusing distance improve DOF? Which one should I get?

I want the lens to give me nice reach and DOF. great sharpess, color rendition, 3D, and contrast.

Thanks,
Dan Santoso

 

[Valentin]

DOF is affected by focal lenght, aperture and distance to subject. You have to play with these to get the DOF you want.

 

[Schmiddi]

Well, the longer the lens, the smaller DOF - so if 150mm doesn't work, things are worse with 200+... You have to go the other direction, 110/120 or so should help. Of course different view then.

Also: DOF is not enough viewing 100% on screen? Or in print of the size needed? That's a difference too.

Andreas

 

[H3dtogo]

If you can focus manually and like shooting wide open: get a 200 F2,8 APO manual focus. Nothing else matches the smootness of that lens.

 

[krb]

Halo,

I have been using 150mm for beauty work with P65+ and I found the DOF is very narrow. I dont like to crop and my usual composition is head and shoulder, some only face and neck.

If the model is facing 45 degree left or right, I cant get both eyes sharp ( the eyes further from the camera is out of focus). Even slight angle will make the face out of focus. I shoot at F11-16 and still I have this problem

150mm and f/11 at 2 meters should be giving enough DOF for this. Are you sure that the lens is actually foucsing on the model and not focusing on a point in front of the model? Are you sure that the aperture is stopping down when taking the shot?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Both shot with the 150D at F11 on a P40+ . So yes i am a touch further back than you would be with a P65. These also have negative clarity on them . This lens is brittle sharp

Now any closer i would most likely get in some DOF issues. I did shoot these handheld. Focused on her eye and recomposed

 

[BJNY]

DOF is affected by focal lenght, aperture and distance to subject. You have to play with these to get the DOF you want.

Well, the longer the lens, the smaller DOF - so if 150mm doesn't work, things are worse with 200+... You have to go the other direction, 110/120 or so should help. Of course different view then.

My understanding is different, so please correct me if I should be wrong:

Whether you use a 55mm or 200mm,
if you frame the subject to occupy the same space on the focusing screen,
then the depth of field is the same [at the same aperture, of course].

Same scale = same depth of field

 

[Shelby Lewis]

Both of the shots I just posted in the "Fun with MF Images" thread... tight headshots... were with the 210AF ULD at very close to min focus distance. At that distance, the crop is quite tight and DoF is pretty narrow, but the look is nice.

ETA: Mamiya AFD III / Aptus II 6

 

[Valentin]

My understanding is different, so please correct me if I should be wrong:

Whether you use a 55mm or 200mm,
if you frame the subject to occupy the same space on the focusing screen,
then the depth of field is the same [at the same aperture, of course].

Same scale = same depth of field

I don't know the theory/physics behind it. Based on what you say, using a longer focal length will not solve your problem.


For a given focal length and aperture, the closer you get to the subject, the shallower the DOF. So, you have to distance yourself from the subject or use a smaller focal length (not flattering for portraits). In addition, for a given aperture, increasing magnification (greater focal length) will decrease your DOF.

My suggestion: crop in post.

With that said, at f11 you shouldn't have that narrow of a DOF.

 

[Shelby Lewis]

With that said, at f11 you shouldn't have that narrow of a DOF.

You'd think so... but in MF work, I've seen F11 be quite narrow if you're near to minimum focus distance. You would be surprised at how F11 doesn't get you much.

 

[Dan Santoso]

My understanding is that by shooting further from the model the DOF is bigger. Longer lens will give me this. Is this correct?

Here is a sample at F14. The left eyes is out of focus. I dont use manual focus, maybe I should start practice using it.

 

[Valentin]

You'd think so... but in MF work, I've seen F11 be quite narrow if you're near to minimum focus distance. You would be surprised at how F11 doesn't get you much.

"Step away from the subject"

I didn't do any extreme testing, so I guess it's possible. That's why I suggested to move back a little and then crop in post if he wants a tight shot.

 

[MGrayson]

My understanding is different, so please correct me if I should be wrong:

Whether you use a 55mm or 200mm,
if you frame the subject to occupy the same space on the focusing screen,
then the depth of field is the same [at the same aperture, of course].

Same scale = same depth of field

Yep, you're right. I had never heard this so I drew the ray diagram and, sure enough, the telephoto compression (the angle between the near and far points is less with a longer lens) is almost exactly counterbalanced by the longer lens to sensor distance.

Cool!:thumbs:

Matt

 

[Dan Santoso]

I have never heard of this before. So the only solution is step back and crop? 210 and 300 wont solve it?


Thanks

 

[fotografz]

Seems a focusing issue. The foreground portions look to be more in-focus than the subject target ... the eyes,

Check your camera/lens on a tripod at close focusing distance for front focusing by shooting a ruler set on a 45º angle away from the camera ... the focus point should be the sharpest item, and DOF acceptable sharpness should be approx. 1/3 front 2/3 back ...

-Marc

 

[Valentin]

I have never heard of this before. So the only solution is step back and crop? 210 and 300 wont solve it?


Thanks

Longer focal length alone will not solve the problem. I would increase aperture first. Next step would be to go shorter focal length. If those don't help, then I would move further and crop. Again, since other people are getting good results, there is something else at play.

 

[krb]

the focus point should be the sharpest item, and DOF acceptable sharpness should be approx. 1/3 front 2/3 back ...

While the 1/3 - 2/3 guideline has been around for a long time, it is a gross oversimplification that is often incorrect.

A 150mm lens on a 645 focused 2 meters away the DOF will be close to a 50/50 split front and back. You would have to focus the lens 10 meters away to get a 1/3 - 2/3 split. At hyperfocal distance the rear DOF will be infinite so you can't really say what the split will be, except that it is much larger than 2/3.

 

[krb]

I have never heard of this before. So the only solution is step back and crop? 210 and 300 wont solve it?


Thanks

When you change the distance to the subject you are changing the perspective.

The process should be:

- Choose the distance that gives the perspective you want.
- Choose the focal length that gives the framing you want at that distance.
- Choose the aperture that gives you the DOF you want at that distance and focal length.

 

[gsking]

My understanding is different, so please correct me if I should be wrong:

Whether you use a 55mm or 200mm,
if you frame the subject to occupy the same space on the focusing screen,
then the depth of field is the same [at the same aperture, of course].

Same scale = same depth of field

I'm been kicked out of forums for trying to explain this to nonbelievers. Some people just don't get it. :loco:

But everything out of focus will look very different, and the background will be magnified, making it LOOK more out of focus.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Also you will see some distortion as well with the shorter glass. I personally like the longer lenses on people for the compression alone. I like to see the noses shrink more. Plus you get nicer falloff on the DOF.