f2.8 vs f4
Jul 20, 2014 05:48:16 #
If you are shooting sports under lights or in gyms go for the 2.8. If you shoot a lot of night shots while handholding the camera also go for 2.8. Otherwise the 4.0 is fine. It basically depends on what you want to photograph.
Jul 20, 2014 06:27:54 #
johnst1001a
Loc: West Chester, Ohio
Unless most of your shots are outdoors, mostly sunny days get the f2.8. Lens are something you have for years, so I always get the best, usually 2.8. Of course that is assuming 2.8 is the fastest in that lens. Go even faster with prime lens.
Jul 20, 2014 07:43:28 #
Mark7829
Loc: Calfornia
No one has mentioned it and I think it is very very important especially when you get it, BOKEH. You will achieve better and beautiful BOKEH with faster, low light lenses than not. I know we tend to focus on the subject matter but the background is equally important. Soft, dreamy like background can remove distracting details and highlight the focus point. So why all after 3 pages and all the experts here, no one mentions one of the most distinguishing factors between and ordinary photo and that which is simply amazing?
Jul 20, 2014 07:54:20 #
For DOF differences -- to as if it is important to you, try to get your hands on an f2.8 lens and switch between 2.8 and 4 using the DOF preview button.
Jul 20, 2014 08:03:50 #
steve_stoneblossom wrote:
I am interested in learning from those with first ... (show quote)
If you are getting paid for your work, go for the 2.8, as it will pay for itself the 1st or 2nd job. With regard to tools, always better to have it and not need it then need it and not have it.
Jul 20, 2014 08:12:42 #
Mark7829 wrote:
No one has mentioned it and I think it is very ver... (show quote)
Better bokeh is not a function of aperture or DOF. Those cause an out of focus point to be more (or less) out of focus.
Bokeh is the character of the out of focus area. Harsh, soft, creamy, whatever... if it is harsh it is harsh regardless of f/2.8 or f/4. That can easily be verifyied with one of the older very inexpesnive 50mm f/1.8 lenses. Canon and Nikon both produced 50mm f/1.8 lenses with over corrrection of spherical aberrations specifically because that tends to make the in focus areas look sharper. It also makes the out of focus areas look extremely harsh.
The typical example is a family snapshot in the backyard at a summer get together. The sun shining through the leaves on trees or reflecting off the blades of grass on the lawn, if out of focus, will be extremely harsh, and of course that is even true at f/1.8. And average kit lens that is f/4.5-5.6 has better bokeh!
Jul 20, 2014 08:18:20 #
Mark7829 wrote:
No one has mentioned it and I think it is very ver... (show quote)
Bokeh is better on the F4 in this case. Less color fringing and smoother overall. Go figure. The same is true of the 85 F1.8 G vs the 85 1.4G - bokeh quality is generally smoother on the 1.8, but not nearly as nice as on the AF-D 1.4.
So to make a blanket statement like fast lenses produce better bokeh is difficult to support - there are many exceptions that need to be considered on a case by case basis. I've used all of these lenses and I speak from firsthand experience. You are welcome to rent or borrow and see for yourself, or you can take my word for it, though I have only used one or two copies of each. Your mileage may differ.
Jul 20, 2014 08:27:47 #
steve_stoneblossom wrote:
I am interested in learning from those with first ... (show quote)
As you said, you will find yourself wishing you had spent the extra for the faster lens. Put an end to it, buy the best, and don't look back.
Jul 20, 2014 08:39:26 #
Mark7829
Loc: Calfornia
Gene51 wrote:
Bokeh is better on the F4 in this case. Less color... (show quote)
The statement is true. I challenge you to find anything online that says different, as I was unable to. Find anyone who says an f4 has better Bokeh than a 2.8 or faster less. All of the comparisons for Bokeh, are in the fast-lens class. Please explain optically why an f4 would be superior to a 2.8 or less.
In your statement you compare an f1.8 to 1.4, not an f4 but that is not what you said in the paragraph above.
Sorry, I don't speak from first hand experience, which can be very narrow and limited but look for authoritative and quantitative information for make my choices. To do so otherwise is unwise.
Jul 20, 2014 08:41:36 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
As you said, you will find yourself wishing you had spent the extra for the faster lens. Put an end to it, buy the best, and don't look back.
Or save your $$$ and get a used 80-200 - F2.8 AFS, or even the AF-D, which I routinely use for birds in flight in close quarters on a D800 body. For my purposes, it is every bit as crisp as a 70-200 F2.8 VRII. Is the more expensive lens better? I am not so sure - especially after comparing the results from both when I was considering upgrading from the 80-200. I do not subscribe to the notion that price ALWAYS indicates quality. And the notion of "best" is a big, all-inclusive term. For me, what is best, is my old 80-200 F2.8 AF-D. When it breaks, I will figure out what to then. For now it does a great job.
Jul 20, 2014 09:09:52 #
steve_stoneblossom wrote:
I am interested in learning from those with first ... (show quote)
Last year I decided to go to all f4 lenses, I have nikons 16 to 35, 24 to 120 and the 70 to 200. These lenses are good quality, I have shot motocross with them and landscapes as well as some wildlife, if you need 1 more stop of light but theISO from 100 to 200, The image quality will not suffer.
These lenses are a lot lighter then the 2.8 versions. I still use my 2.8s in studio only because I have them but I use them in studio at about f5.6 to get the whole head in focus.
I included a few photos for you to look at First 2 photos taken yesterday the third was in my little studio with studio strobes
Jul 20, 2014 09:14:36 #
An f2.8 lens lets in twice as much light as an f4(at the widest opening).
Jul 20, 2014 09:16:47 #
kymarto wrote:
For DOF differences -- to as if it is important to you, try to get your hands on an f2.8 lens and switch between 2.8 and 4 using the DOF preview button.
Another follow up to my image and DOF, the dragonfly was taken at f4 as you can see the wings are not sharp throughout. I wish now I shot at 5.6
Jul 20, 2014 09:21:28 #
nimbushopper wrote:
An f2.8 lens lets in twice as much light as an f4(at the widest opening).
"The difference in the lenses is ONE stop of light." Says M T Shooter in the third post of this thread :shock:
Jul 20, 2014 09:30:06 #
Marionsho wrote:
"The difference in the lenses is ONE stop of light." Says M T Shooter in the third post of this thread :shock:
Correct, and one stop wider means that twice as much light is going to hit the sensor! Two stops wider would mean four times more light, etc, etc.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.