Equivalent focal length - a more correct way to compare (Page 7): No, what was stated was that if you want a very narrow DOF you need a fast lens. It’s all relative. For a 50mm lens...

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

frankraney wrote:

What was stated was a fast lens was needed to control DOF. As I stated (and it is correct) DOF is controlled by, lens mm, apperature, and distance to subject.

I also stated a fast lens let's more light in, allowing for faster shutter speed. Can you get a shallow DOF with one, yes, but it is only one component, but not necessary.

No, what was stated was that if you want a very narrow DOF you need a fast lens. It’s all relative. For a 50mm lens f/1.4 is fast, even f/1.8, while “normal” is fairly fast, 600mm f/4 is fast.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

BebuLamar wrote:

No both are FX (FF). The difference is that the Df is only 16MP and the D850 is 45MP. Any Nikon F mount lens it doesn't matter. Just use the same lens.
Take a picture with each camera. Same distance from camera to subject. Same lens. display both in PS and zoom to 100%. The subject in the D850 image is 1.7 times the one from the Df.

User ID

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Well “fast” means a wider f stop. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

Maybe he thinks "fast" is about AF.
Thaz a thing thaz going around ...

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

frankraney wrote:

What was stated was a fast lens was needed to control DOF. As I stated (and it is correct) DOF is controlled by, lens mm, apperature, and distance to subject.

I also stated a fast lens let's more light in, allowing for faster shutter speed. Can you get a shallow DOF with one, yes, but it is only one component, but not necessary, a shallow DOF can be had at lower apertures,

🤣😂🤣😜🤣
And just how often is your subject only two feet away? When that subject is a more reasonable 1’ away the DOF is almost 4’. Don’t try to defend your ridiculous position with edge cases.

User ID

SuperflyTNT wrote:

🤣😂🤣😜🤣
And just how often is your subject only two feet away? When that subject is a more reasonable 1’ away the DOF is almost 4’. Don’t try to defend your ridiculous position with edge cases.

Forget someone ?!?

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

User ID wrote:

Forget someone ?!?

That’s what I get for typing on my phone with essential tremor. It was there once. 😜🤪

EJMcD

The best entertainment on all of UHH is Superfly TNT vs. User ID😅😆😄😁😅😏🤪!
This is priceless.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

SuperflyTNT wrote:

🤣😂🤣😜🤣
And just how often is your subject only two feet away? When that subject is a more reasonable 1’ away the DOF is almost 4’. Don’t try to defend your ridiculous position with edge cases.

I just gave 2 feet as an example. You say more reasonable is 1 foot away, with DOF of 4 feet. You just moved closer, which decreases DOF with same lens and apperature.

I agreed with you the a fast lens gives a shallow DOF, but DOF is also controlled by distance to subject, lens and apperature , which is true.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

frankraney wrote:

I just gave 2 feet as an example. You say more reasonable is 1 foot away, with DOF of 4 feet. You just moved closer, which decreases DOF with same lens and apperature.

I agreed with you the a fast lens gives a shallow DOF, but DOF is also controlled by distance to subject, lens and apperature , which is true.

As you already saw it was a typo. So now you’re definitely being disingenuous. You know I meant 10’.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

EJMcD wrote:

The best entertainment on all of UHH is Superfly TNT vs. User ID😅😆😄😁😅😏🤪!
This is priceless.

Nope, I laughed at his post. At least he recognized what I meant to type.

User ID

SuperflyTNT wrote:

As you already saw it was a typo. So now you’re definitely being disingenuous. You know I meant 10’.

Thaz UHH Sacred Tradition in action.

User ID

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Nope, I laughed at his post. At least he recognized what I meant to type.

Okay ... so at first I had a WTF moment but immediately logic then told me that ten feet made sense so therefor a zero was missing.

Occasionally, UHH discusses the question of "what is a real photographer ?". Well, for a REAL photographer that particular missing zero is in-you-face obvious as just a typo.

Apparently to the typical hack "UHH Expert" the very obvious is not at all obvious. Thaz just the nature of our herd of fake experts.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

SuperflyTNT wrote:

As you already saw it was a typo. So now you’re definitely being disingenuous. You know I meant 10’.

I looked back and yes, use asked if you forgot someone with a dancing zero....

Here's 10 feet. Same apperature, just used a longer lens. Could I have went with wider apperature, absolutely. But not necessary. Depends on what you are photographing and the l look you want. Changing any one of the components I mentioned, changes the DOF.

User ID

frankraney wrote:

I looked back and yes, use asked if you forgot someone with a dancing zero....

Here's 10 feet. Same apperature, just used a longer lens. Could I have went with wider apperature, absolutely. But not necessary. Depends on what you are photographing and the l look you want. Changing any one of the components I mentioned, changes the DOF.

(Download)

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

frankraney wrote:

I looked back and yes, use asked if you forgot someone with a dancing zero....

Here's 10 feet. Same apperature, just used a longer lens. Could I have went with wider apperature, absolutely. But not necessary. Depends on what you are photographing and the l look you want. Changing any one of the components I mentioned, changes the DOF.

So yes, you can change the parameters to look like you can always get a very narrow DOF without a fast lens, but again, you’re just reinforcing how disingenuous you are. In most REAL WORLD CASES you need a fast lens for a very narrow DOF.