Sweet Spot for Landscape Photography
Dec 11, 2018 08:16:50 #
This thread could be very use to the people over in the Landscape forum.
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-132-1.html
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-132-1.html
Dec 11, 2018 08:18:44 #
rmalarz wrote:
OK, here's an f/32 photograph. I'm sure I can find one take at f/64. ...
How is that relevant to this discussion? That's 4x5 film.
Dec 11, 2018 08:22:36 #
selmslie wrote:
How is that relevant to this discussion? That's 4x5 film.
It helps show the degree usefulness of an extreme f-stop to help the judge quality of others. The topic is about finding the sweet spot. You have to start somewhere.
Dec 11, 2018 08:22:44 #
mwsilvers wrote:
Very nice image!!
Thanks. I attached a “Hyperfocal” focused images as an example.
Dec 11, 2018 08:25:36 #
What difference does that make? The discussion is in reference to f/stops. The example is for those folks who religiously believe that small f/stops should be avoided.
--Bob
--Bob
selmslie wrote:
How is that relevant to this discussion? That's 4x5 film.
Dec 11, 2018 08:29:27 #
IDguy wrote:
Overworked issue. Bryan Peterson generally uses f22 of higher.
Regardless what Bryan Peterson shoots, diffraction is real, and f22 can certainly diminish sharpness on 35mm sized cameras. Personally, I never go above f16 on FF (and prefer f11) except for macro shooting, and even then, I prefer to focus stack. Worth a read: https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm
Dec 11, 2018 08:53:57 #
F8 or 11, use a tripod, ISO 100, a good polarizer to diminish reflections on the foliage can really make landscapes look better.
Dec 11, 2018 08:58:28 #
rmalarz wrote:
What difference does that make? The discussion is in reference to f/stops. The example is for those folks who religiously believe that small f/stops should be avoided.
--Bob
--Bob
The absolute f-stop number is only relevant in context with the format.
For full frame (24x36) diffraction starts at about f/11, for 1.5 or 1.6 crop at about f/8.
For larger formats you are ok at much smaller values. Clyde Butcher has gone as small as f/256 with very large format film.
Failure to mention the format size is misleading.
Dec 11, 2018 09:07:59 #
With a crop sensor camera if you are interested in improving sharpness, I would consider the Nikon 24mm f/1.8 lens. It will present as about a 36mm in full frame. That is a good angle of view for general photography and landscapes. You can get a wider angle with modest stiching. It is an excellent lenses on a full frame camera. It will give very good sharpness at f/8. And still quite decent at f/11 or acceptable at f/16. Any of those can be adjusted for nice prints with modest post processing.
Dec 11, 2018 09:24:06 #
IDguy wrote:
No, the easiest solution is higher fstop. As you note, diffraction is overrated. The masters of sharpness, like Ansel Adams, belonged to the f64 group.
True, but he also used a 4x5 or 8x10 negative on a beast of a camera, not an equivalent 35mm. I'm no good at the math, but I think it would be comparable DoF of about f16.
Dec 11, 2018 09:26:27 #
Dec 11, 2018 09:30:13 #
Jsykes wrote:
Having problems with the (often published) recommendation(s) of how to "squeeze the maximum levels of image sharpness out of your lens by simply stopping your lens aperture down 2.5 to 3-stops from the lens's maximum aperture" i.e. for a lens that has a maximum aperture of f/3.5, the sweet spot of your lens resides somewhere between f/8 and f/11.
Using my 18-55mm kit lens and its' max aperture of f/3.5, two F stops would be f/4.5 and three F stops f/5.6.
Comments?
Using my 18-55mm kit lens and its' max aperture of f/3.5, two F stops would be f/4.5 and three F stops f/5.6.
Comments?
imagemeister wrote:
F3.5 + 2 stops = f7.1, 3 stops = f10
4.5 is only 2/3 of a stop.
Dec 11, 2018 09:50:08 #
gvarner
Loc: Central Oregon Coast
A pro that I know determines the sweet spot for each lens. Let’s say it’s commonly F8. He sets that in Aperture mode, ISO at 100, sturdy tripod, and lets the shutter speed float to whatever is needed for the results he’s looking for. Without physically testing for it, you could start at F8 and bracket -1 and +1 stops at 1/2 stop intervals, or whatever floats your boat.
Dec 11, 2018 10:28:12 #
photoman022
Loc: Manchester CT USA
rmalarz wrote:
I'll stop down to f/32 or 64. I'm sure lenses have a particular f-stop at which they are "more" in focus than at other stops, but if it takes lab equipment to see that, I'd not worry about it. If it doesn't take lab equipment to see it, you probably have a bad lens.
--Bob
--Bob
I totally agree. I sometimes think that we make too much of all this stuff. I print my photos (to 11x14 usually) and have never had a problem with sharpness.Dec 11, 2018 10:32:06 #
rmalarz wrote:
I'll stop down to f/32 or 64. I'm sure lenses have a particular f-stop at which they are "more" in focus than at other stops, but if it takes lab equipment to see that, I'd not worry about it. If it doesn't take lab equipment to see it, you probably have a bad lens.
--Bob
--Bob
Assuming you are using a 4x5 camera, f/32 with a "normal" 150mm lens would be equivalent to about f/11 with a 50mm lens on a "full frame" DSLR. If you are using a "normal" 300mm lens with an 8x10 camera, f/32 would be equivalent to about f/5.6. I think discussions of diffraction are only relevant if we consider sensor/film size.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.