Troubles with Nikon D70s SLR
 

This is kinda off topic however it does relate. I'm looking for someone local to connect with that has a D70s SLR to share some tips and tricks taking photo's of tanks with. I also think there may be something wrong with how my camera is metering light and i wanted to compare with someone who has the same camera.

Anyways shoot me a PM maybe we can both learn something new.

Kyle

I have the same camera, but I guess we're not local to each other. Check with Raf or Diana though, I think they shoot with that model as well and they'd be closer.

Tank photography is tricky - I used to think I was OK at photography until I started trying to shoot my tanks. Now I realize I'm horrible at it. Anything non tank related seems to go well though. I guess the lighting really throws things off.

A lot depends on what glass you're using too. What lens are you using? If not doing so already you should probably consider shooting with a macro lens and not bother with anything else.

When I was shooting with my 35mm I had a 90mm macro lens and it worked out well. Moving to a DSLR body though puts a 1.5x magnifier on your focal lens so it became the equivalent of a 135mm. Which is great if you want a photo of maybe nostril on a snail but not so good if you want a picture of a whole animal. I found I had to step so far back from the tank to fit a fish it kind of defeated the purpose of a macro lens.

After reading this thread, http://www.canreef.com/vbulletin/sho...d.php?t=36153&
.. I started saving up for the F2.8 60mm Macro lens. Found a good deal on ebay. I have to say, this is a great lens. It's more or less the standard micro (Nikon's term for macro) lens that Nikon offers nowadays. Highly recommend looking into this lens (if you're not using it already that is :) ).

Lastly, practise is underrated :p Seriously, I find I'll shoot some 90-100 pictures in a sitting and keep maybe about 4. :( I guess I need those tips too, but in the meantime, shoot lots and vary it up and see what works well.

Anyhow good luck, hope some of this helps. :)

the biggest problem with Tank photography is the multipule colour temperatures in your tank. Actinics through a lot of light into the tank, but most meters do not read that colour temp. Try turning off your actinics.
Also the dinamic range of digital is far narrower that say Film. So with such stronge lighting and high contrast it is impossible to capture white sand and high colour definision in corals. there is just to great a difference in light reflectance. Basically if you meter your sand you get (for example) f 2.8 @ 1/1000sec. Then meter the coral you are attempting to capture. it will meter at f2.8 @ 1/60sec for example. this range is too high. Your best bet is to switch to spot metering and meter your subject only and let the rest fall where is may.
What you can also do is shoot raw. This will give you 16bit file to play with (jpg is only 8bit) you will then need to use a RAW formate tool like Adobe Lightroom or what ever came with your camera. you can then manipulate the 16bits of data into the 8 bits you need to make the best picture you can.
Hope this helps

J

Tagging along. I also have a Nikon, but its a D40x and not a D70. However I'm sure there is tons to learn either way.

Have you thought of checking any books out of the library on the subject?

I also have the D40X and have decided the only way to fix this is to spend even more money and get a F2.8 60mm Macro. Spending more money always seems to be the cure.

Scott

I got a Sony Alpha 100 DSLR and from the 2 or 3 days I've had to play around with it I'll second the recommendation for spot metering. Is RAW the preferred format for shooting?

I would say for day to day shooting RAW is unnesassary. the biggest problem with RAW are the tools Light 'DarkRoom' are just a difficult to use as Photoshop. but with practice you will greatly improve your pictures.
If you plan on printing your pictures YES Shoot RAW.

When buying Macro lenses be aware of Focus/Magnification. Some Macro lenses have Maxinum limits on focus.

J

Just for comparison and to demonstrate spot metering vs pattern metering...

This first shot is using the pattern metering, regular jpeg "macro" mode. In this picture it looks like it metered more for the background and overexposed the coral. It was also one of the first 20 pictures I took with the camera so there are probably a couple of dumb mistakes in there!

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e2...camtest017.jpg

Here's a shot I took of the same coral a day or so later using the spot metering mode and the raw output. No Macro lense, just the 18-70mm. I didn't do anything to the picture, just straight converted it into a jpeg and it turned out pretty good.

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e2.../Candycane.jpg

Go
 

The trick to shooting through a fish tank is understanding the concept of White Balance. Although it is a simple concept, I find it hard to explain myself so here are some info off the internet:

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...Balance_01.htm

http://www.photoxels.com/tutorial_white-balance.html

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...te-balance.htm

So what you should do is set something white inside the fish tank and fill up the frame with it. Then manually set your white balance so that the camera adjusts it meter accurately. Recompose the scene without the white object and shoot. This should give you a more accurate color reproduction then using AWB. A caution for using a white reflective object is that it may cause your cameras exposure meter to under expose the scene, making it look darker then it is. To compensate for this set your manual exposure control to 1 or 2 stops ( depending on the white object ) to overexposing the scene.

Another way to control White Balance is to shoot in RAW. Shooting in RAW, your camera will not preselect a specific White Balance for you, but rather shoots the scene as it sees it. Using an editing software such as Nikon Capture you can easily correct the photo to the appropriate White Balance setting. Editing with a RAW software is a lot easier then having to mess around with Levels and Curves in Photoshop.

Another tip is to shooting close up macros with an aperature of around f/8 or f/11. Using f/8 or f/11 the whole macro object will be relatively sharp but you might need a tripod as the shutter exposure can get low resulting in a blurred image.

If you try shooting with an aperature value of f/2.8, you can increase your shutter speed, therefore you can hand hold your camera; however the focus distance is very shallow and you may only have a sliver of the macro image in focus. Luckily this is a digital world and it is cheap to erase and try again.

Because you are shooting through water and water magnifies, you need to shoot straight on perpendicular to the object or else you will get a horrible magnifying effect. Make sure that your lens is positioned as close to to object as possible to help reduce magnification. You can also move the object closer to the front of the fish tank so that you are not shooting through much water. Hope some of these tips will help.
________
Suzuki RV125

Just adding a link, I found this page on presetting the white balance on the Nikon D70s:
http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CWry

Question, what are folks using for setting white balance? Piece of acrylic, or ... ?

Go
 

Here are some of my macros shot with f/2.8. Note the limited Depth of Field and some unsharpness as most were shot hand held. Another thing to notice is that with the shallow depth of field, the background is now pitch black because of the faster shutter speed, there is not enough time for the camera to get full exposure on the background therefore rendering it black.


http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/1_24_.jpg


http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/1_115_.jpg


http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/1_114_1.jpg


http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/1_58_.jpg


http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/1_52_.jpg


http://www.canreef.com/photopost/dat...ium/1_194_.jpg
________
free drupal themes

Go
 

Delphinus,

If you have white crushed coral and it is relatively clean, then you can use that as your reference for the White Balance.

If are using Photoshop and needing a reference for "white" you can use the color picker in the Levels Adjustment and select the gravel as your point of reference for white. This will set all the other colors in place as well.
________
CR750

Hehe, the whole problem with sand and gravel is that it IS hard to keep relatively clean :p A lot of people will have BB too. I was thinking a small white piece of white acrylic might work, but wasn't sure if it might be too reflective or something like that.

Marco Lenses by nature have very narrow depth of field. it's the physics of the Lens elements. The only way to increase depth of field is to decrease magnification.

Cool shots BTW
J

Go
 

It's not the magnification but rather the ability of the macro lens to focus down to a few inches. Most conventional lenses have a minimum focus distance of 2-4 feet. A true macro lens will allow the user to focus within inches sometimes mm to the object. Although this may seem like an increase in magnification because you are focusing so close it is rather the macro lenses nature to focus down so tight and that is why they cost so much. If I selected a higher aperture on the lens ie f/16-f/22 and had enough lighting, the result would be a much sharper image that is focused front to back. Most photographers use f/2.8 as a setting when shooting close up is because they want their subject to be sharp but the background to be blurred so that it will not distract the viewer.

True magnification is dependent on the size of the lens that you buy. ie 50mm, 100 mm, 200mm etc..

If I had a 60mm macro and wanted to take a macro shot, I might have to be as close as 1 inch away from my subject. However, if I had a 105mm macro I can now shoot the same image but be further back. Both shots I can select f/2.8 and still get the same blurred and sharpness effect. The only difference is that one lens is magnifying almost twice the other and I can stand further back.
________
dispensaries

Go
 

Delphinus,

Try using a clean piece of white PVC piping. If you find that your image is darker then it seems, set your exposure compensation to +1 EV (exposure value). If this is still too dark then +2 etc....make sure that you don't blow out the rest of the image. In other words, keep an eye on areas with highlights so that they don't appear too bright and compete with the subject that you are photographing.
________
extreme vaporizer review

I have to disagree the lens elements in the marco lens completely change the rules of normal lenses. Depth of field is dependent on the positioning of the lens elements and not f-stop. stopping down to f22 from f2.8 will gain you millimetres of depth of field where as minor decreases of magnification will gain you centimetres.

Anyway. This is usually not a problem with Tank photography as you are never mm from you subject.

Depth of Field Information

J

Go
 

Jason,

This was extracted from the web link that you posted:

"Effect of f-number

For a given subject framing, the DOF is controlled by the lens f-number. Increasing the f-number (reducing the aperture diameter) increases the DOF; however, it also reduces the amount of light transmitted, and increases diffraction, placing a practical limit on the extent to which the aperture size may be reduced. Motion pictures make only limited use of this control; to produce a consistent image quality from shot to shot, cinematographers usually choose a single aperture setting for interiors and another for exteriors, and adjust exposure through the use of camera filters or light levels. Aperture settings are adjusted more frequently in still photography, where variations in depth of field are used to produce a variety of special effects."


Here is another link to close up photography, please read halfway down the article re: DOF

http://www.tcinternet.net/users/nmol...hotography.htm

http://www.shutterfreaks.com/Tips/ControllingDOF.html
________
vapir oxygen vaporizer

Go
 

Here is a link on photog glossery terms:

http://www.floccinaucinihilipilifica...raphy:Glossary

I think that there may be some confusion regarding f-stop verses focal length or maybe focal plane?

Depth of Field
Depth of Field refers to range of distances such that elements are in focus. An image with a narrow depth of field has a very small amount in focus. An image with a large depth of field has a lot in focus.

f-stop
The f-stop is the unit of measure for the aperture. The f-stop is the the size of the aperture expressed as a fraction of the focal length of the lens. This is why some zoom lenses have different minimum f-stops based on the amount zoom. An f-stop of f/16 (f being the focal length), means that a 200mm lens has an aperture openning of 200/16 = 12.5mm. A 18mm lens has an aperture openning of 18/16 = 1.125mm. For a given f-stop any lens, regardless of focal length, transits the same amount of light to the sensor or film.

Focal Length
The focal length is the distance from the front element of a lens to the sensor (or negative). The focal length can be used to describe the effect that the lens has on the produced image. A long focal length (say, 50mm and up) make objects look closer (like a telescope). Short focal lengths (24mm and smaller) capture a wider view, making object smaller. Lenses with short focal lengths are sometimes refered to as wide angle.

As you can see the focal length does have an effect on magnifying the object , however a macro lens will still allow the lens to be positioned closer to the object.

I still stand my ground on that DOF is greatly controlled by the f-stop or aperature setting. Try shooting with your DSLR on Aperature Priority and set it to f/2.8. Focus on a subject 4 ft away from you with some background objects. Take a the shot. Next, set your aperature to f/22 and focus again on the same subject. Take a shot. Compare the 2 shots and I can gaurantee you that your DOF difference will be huge, not just cm but in ft. At f/2.8 your focus will only be for the first few feet. At f/22 the focus should be from the subject to infinity. Therefore DOF is largely controlled on by the f-stop.

Jason, I'm trying to understand your point. Is there another way of explaining what you are talking about?
________
silver surfer vaporizer

I think we have gotten way off topic and I feel bad for highjacking Kyle's thread
But we are talking about 2 different situation. A True Marco photo taken so that the image is 1/2 the oringonal size or greater relys far less on f-stop then magnification as discribed by this equation

DOF~2NC[(M+1)/M2]

Sorry hard to write in text it should be M squared

J

pm sent, hopefully I can help out.


Some general info for D70 owners.

I have had my D70 for just over 3 years now and have taken a few photography classes in that time. One of the instructors had a D70 also and said that they have basically been recalled, and you can take it into Nikon in Richmond and they will fix it for free. I got mine in New York so I am not eligible but can pay for the upgrade but have not just yet. I don’t recall the exact problem it was having but they have problems with different flash cards like Lexar. It’s been quite some time since I heard this so I would contact Nikon directly to clarify.

Kyle feel free to PM me if you want to get together and experiment with your camera.

J

Go
 

Jason,

I agree about the highjacking of the thread, so if you would like to further pursue this we can start another thread on this subject of photography technical formulaes. I am assuming that this is what your point is regarding:

"Close-up

When the subject distance s approaches the focal length, using the formulae given above can result in significant errors. For close-up work, the hyperfocal distance has little applicability, and it usually is more convenient to express DOF in terms of image magnification. Let m be the magnification; when the subject distance is small in comparison with the hyperfocal distance,

\mathrm {DOF} \approx 2 N c \left ( \frac {m + 1} {m^2} \right ),

so that for a given magnification, DOF is independent of focal length. Stated otherwise, for the same subject magnification, all focal lengths give approximately the same DOF. This statement is true only when the subject distance is small in comparison with the hyperfocal distance, however.

The discussion thus far has assumed a symmetrical lens for which the entrance and exit pupils coincide with the front and rear nodal planes, and for which the pupil magnification (the ratio of exit pupil diameter to that of the entrance pupil)[4] is unity. Although this assumption usually is reasonable for large-format lenses, it often is invalid for medium- and small-format lenses."

Now I'm not a very formula oriented type of guy and I'm sure a lot of people here viewing this thread isn't either. But if you could explain in laymen's terms on how the formula will help in understanding macro photography better, it would be greatly appreciated. At this point, I've figured myself to be a decent photog and actually took 2 years of photography school but frankly you've gotten me quite confused.

From my understanding of photography, and there are many links that I've provided to support my claim, f-stop DOES play an important role in DOF.

Other factors that influence DOF are:

Focal length

Subject distance

Film or Sensor format

Here is another website that explains my theory in laymens terms with photo samples:

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=depth_of_field

All lenses have the ability to allow you to change its' aperature therefore allowing you to control the amount of light entering the lens. Because of this control, it causes the lens to change its' point of focus due to the adjusted lens elements focusing onto the film or sensor plane. The smaller the aperature ie f/8-f/22 the greater the focus range. The larger the aperature ie f/1.4-f5.6 the shallower the focus range. Please correct me if I am wrong here.

Macro lenses are specialized lenses that are constructed in a way that allows the photographer to get closer and focus closer to an object that most conventional lenses will not let you. True macro lenses also magnify at a ratio of 1:1 meaning that the lens will reproduce the image to full life size as the photographer is seeing it through the lens. Some lenses advertise that they are macro but are only 1:2 meaning that they will focus close but will only magnify half the life size of the object that it is focusing on. Please correct me here if I am wrong.

Wider lenses ie 28mm have greater DOF sometimes up to f/32 however they also have an aperature ring that will allow you to control DOF. Meanwhile telephoto lenses may have shallower DOF but most have minimum of f/16.
You are saying that the higher the magnification the greater the DOF? Is there something else besides a formula that can explain this?

From my experience shooting with a prime Nikon 105 macro f/2.8 and a Nikon macro 80-200 f/2.8, I can tell you that I see a difference in my DOF when I am shooting aperature priority. Do I know the manufactures specifications on how my lens works, No. All I know is that I control light entering my camera so that I can take a photo but manipulating the lens' iris and my cameras' shutter. Because of this manipulation, there are other factors that need to be considered ie DOF, Bokah, Cirlce of Confusion etc...Unless you are striving to become Annie Lebowitz or the next Ansel Adams most amateur photogs just want to know what they can do to take a better photo. A formula with no explanation will not help them IMO.

Photography is best learned through trial and error. Formulas in my opinion does not really help in understanding how the camera and lens work together.
________
BMW R47

I 100% agree. During my career I have had 100s of people ask me how to become a pro photographer. I always say go to business school and shoot every day.

Half way through this thread I realized that what I'm talking about only relates to Marco photography where the subject is being exposed at a ratio of 2:1 or greater. Meaning the exposed image is 1/2 the size of the original or larger (the Image is actually larger than the original subject). For example if you where to take a picture of 1 polyp of an SPS or LPS and fill the frame with that polyp the actual image would be larger than the subject. The closer you get to a 1:1 ratio the less F-stop effects DoF. So in reality with the tank glass and the distance from the class to the subject it would be very uncommon to get such an instance where this would play a significant role.
But having said that. A true macro lens does not react the same way your standard 50mm or what ever does in terms of DoF. the Classic DoF experiment would be to take a standard lens and stand at a picket fence. focus part way down the fence and then take exposures adjusting the aperture between each frame. This shows the effect of DoF. Now if we were to shrink this test and say set up dominos on the floor and perform the same experiment with a Marco lens you would never achieve the same degree of DoF regardless of f-stop.
Just for some background I too took photographic sciences in school. But instead of taking pictures we built emulsions on glass plate, Built lenses and shutters. then created images from what we constructed.
I still work in the industry but gave up on shooting years ago.

J

Go
 

From my understanding of what you have posted before regarding traditional lenses and macro lenses that DOF does not affect the lens that same, I disagree. Using your picket fence example, if I mounted a 50mm non-macro and did the DOF test and then mounted a 50mm macro lens using the same aperature and subject focus distance, I can create an exact carbon copy of what the non-macro lens did. My argument is that a macro lens differs from a traditional lens in that it can focus down to an object closer then a traditional lens can.

Regarding the limited DOF when you are shooting at 1:1 ratio. You are right in saying that f-stop does not affect the DOF because there is no longer a DOF. Because the object is taking up so much of the frame there is nothing else in the frame that would give you the ability to see the difference it makes in DOF. You are simply so close that only the closest object is in focus filling up the entire frame. You only can see the DOF difference if there is something else that is in the frame that is further of closer then the object that you are photographing. So your example of filling up the frame with only one polyp and having no DOF is correct because only that one polyp will show up as being focused, there is nothing else in the photo.

All that I am trying to communicate is that a 50mm non macro and a 50mm macro both shot using your picket fence example will produce the same result if all the variables are considered the same. ie subject distance and point of focus and aperature/shutter value.
________
Suzuki GS500E

But what are the results using his domino example? It seems to me you two are on different pages and almost talking about different things.

If you have a magnifing glass and put your hand at a right angle to it and focus on the first finger....is the fourth finger out of focus or is it DOF?

Scott

Having shot 1000s of Marco photo's with everything from 8X10 field cameras, 4X5 rail cameras and 35mm I will agree to disagree.
Since this was not the main focus :) of this thread. Maybe we could focus :) again on Kyle's original concern

J

nope. keep up the discussion. i think this is a good overall thread about tank photography, and it will do more than one person some good if you keep it up. I myself have been struggling with nice tank shots using my Minolta Maxxum 5D using a variety of lenses, but my shots are getting better thanks to the pointers being given in this thread.

I spent most of last night going through text books and old photo logs, to come up with examples of Magnification being the main control of DoF. I have 20 or so actual examples, But all were 4X5 sheet film images where the subject was smaller than the image captured. Things like a needle (stylus) from a turntable. A dimond ring, and a industrial gear box.
The information I have supplied above with the equations and formulas still do apply to all macro photography, but become more evident when image size is greater than subject size.

To redirect the thread this is a list of what I feel are the most important things to check when shooting you tank
1) turn off actinics to allow your camera to white balance on 1 colour temp
2) test white balance to find the best area. Or use white card to get correct white balance
3) use spot metering and meter on your subject
4) clean your glass (no one wants to see algae or coraline :) )
5) if you can not get an exposure over 1/125 use a tripod
6) use a light box if you have access to one
7) do not use flash

Jason

R.A.D could you take this shot again with a range of f-stops.

Sorry I do not currently have a DSLR I do have 7 film cameras but that will take way to long to perform the experiment.

J

Go
 

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/DSC_0006.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/DSC_0005.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/DSC_0007.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/508/DSC_0008.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/508/DSC_0009.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/508/DSC_0010.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/DSC_0012.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/DSC_0011.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/504/DSC_0014.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/500/DSC_0015.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/500/DSC_0018.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/500/DSC_0019.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/500/DSC_0020.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/500/DSC_0022.jpg

http://www.canreef.com/photopost/data/500/DSC_0023.jpg

I took some time and shot some more macros yesterday. I didn't do a DOF comparison cause....well...I wasn't really thinking about it. Anyways, here is the detail on how I shot and what I did with post editing software:

Camera: Nikon D70s
Lens: Nikon 105 f/2.8 Macro
Aperature setting: f/16 on all shot
Shutter setting: 1/8-1/25
Camera Mode setting: Aperature Priority
Exposure Metering: Nikon Matrix Meter
White Balance: Preset/Manual, WB metered on white PVC
coupling
Tripod: Yes, must due to low shutter speeds and
close focus
Distance of lens to subject: 2.5 inches
Image File: jpeg

Post Edit Software: Photoshop CS
Levels: Auto Levels
Sharpness: Unsharp Mask
Image Cropping: NO

The camera was mounted on a tripod.

Camera setting was on Aperature Priority mode set to f/16 for maximum DOF.

I took a piece of 2" PVC and positioned it as close to the front glass as possible. I wanted to use the stand as a stage to set my corals onto.

I set my White Balance mode on my camera to "Preset White Balance", then I filled the frame with a close up of the PVC pipe. This tells my camera to set all colors using the PVC white as a reference point.

I then took individual corals and placed them on top of the PVC coupling and positioned myself as close as I could using my 105mm macro lens. The lens allowed me to position my tripod 2.5 inches away from the front of the tank. The corals were only a few mm away from the glass inside the tank.

I had to use my self timer mode because there wasn't going to be enough lighting to prevent blurrness. Also, because I was focusing so close any minute movement will also blur the image.

The tank is a 45 gallon frag tank and the lighting is 2 175 watt 14,000K bulbs.
No supplemental Actinics were used because I did not have any. I wished that I had some because it may have enhanced some of the corals colors.

Anways, I hope that the above info helps.

Jason, disagreeing with each other is tiring and I do not want to pursue the debate any longer. I find that it really isn't helping anyone and the whole point of the thread is to provide tips and tricks to tank photography. Debating magnification technicality does not help in this regard. So I agree with you that we shall remain to disagree and I do not want to confuse people any more then we may have. The point of photography is to create an image that is eye appealing or an image that makes a person think and reflect. At the end of the day, how you created the image doesn't matter.

Cheers.
________
VN1500G

BTW keep it going i'm reading along and learning lots, i may take you up on your offer jason (just b/c i haven't seen your tank in such a long time lol) I'm going to look into taken my camera to nikon for a cleaning also to look at my auto-illumination light which will not fire (yes its on) I didn't realize they were local.

Kyle

So I'm proving myself wrong here but I quickly shot off a bunch of pics of my cap. Starting at 2.8 and going to f 22

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g2...quarium/28.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g2...uarium/f58.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g2...quarium/f8.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g2...uarium/f11.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g2...uarium/f22.jpg

Go
 

Jason,

Good on you for doing those trial shots. For a little while there I was getting tired of banging my head against the wall.
________
Ruckus

OK I hate to dredge up this debate again. But after continued research. This is what I have uncovered.
with increased magnification depth of field becomes narrower and narrower.
Meaning a typical photo the the subject in the image is much smaller than what it's actual size is. like a landscape photo. You could have a depth of field from 3m to infinity at f 22
Now take the images above at nearing 1:1 size ratio the max depth of field becomes very narrow. to with in 20cm to 25cm.
If we had the ability with this camera to increase the magnification to 2:1 or even 4:1 we would find the range of depth of field would become even narrower

Jason

Go
 

Jason,

I'm sure that is the case as the closer you get the less amount of DOF due to the size of the image taking up the whole frame. Please read my previous post. DOF only exist if you can see the difference in distance when you are taking the photo. The debate that you did not agree with, was that the lens aperature setting DID NOT make a difference in the DOF. I am right in telling you that it does and YOUR photo trial proved the theory. So I hope that we can now come to a final conclusion that DOF is affected by the cameras/lens aperature setting. This you have proven yourself.
________
GN125

Yes Aperature effects DOF but Max DOF is limited to magnification. Look at my last pick at f22 Dof is very shallow.
you can see out of focus in front and behind the field of focus

J

Go
 

From your qoute above, you stated that DOF is dependent on the position of the lens element and NOT f-stop.

What lens element are you talking about? The front lens element or the rear element that is closest to the film/sensor plane? In a camera lens, there are many elements that make up the construction of the lens. So to clarify your point, which lens element are you talking about that needs to be positioned so that you can control DOF. If a lens element is fixed to one postion in the lens, does that mean that the lens has only one distance setting for DOF?

Although, the DOF is limited in your photo trials, my point is that DOF can be controlled through aperature. I really don't know why you are adament that this is wrong. You've challenged what I posted and was proven incorrect. Please accept this and let's move on to helping people take photographs. 'Nuff said.

Cheers,
________
weed news