Can I get this kind of DOF out of the 35mm 1.8 DX???

Started Nov 12, 2012 | Discussions thread
brightcolours
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,620
Like?
Re: No, you can't. And not such bokeh either.
In reply to primeshooter, Nov 13, 2012

primeshooter wrote:

brightcolours wrote:

primeshooter wrote:

brightcolours wrote:

jamesorr wrote:

One of the types of photography I'm really attracted to is ridiculously shallow DOF work that pulls together people and nature, so last night when I found Elena Karagyozova's work featured on this site , I was extremely excited. In her interview she mentions that she uses the Nikkor 50mm 1.4 (there were a few when I looked it up) and Nikkor 85mm 1.8 on a full frame D800E.

I have the 35 1.8 DX for my D5100, which gives me that 50mm focal length, but not necessarily the same DOF since it's still technically a wider lens.

It is not about it being a wider lens. It is about that it has a smaller aperture. DOF is a function of the aperture.

Lets examine the aperture:

50mm f1.4: 50 / 1.4 = 35.7mm aperture.

35mm f1.8: 35 / 1.8 = 19.5mm aperture.

While the lenses will give a quite similar field of view on FF and APS-C respectively, the apertures are a lot different.

To get a similar DOF, you need a similar aperture. For 35mm that would mean 35mm focal length / 35mm aperture = f1

Nevertheless, I'm attaching one of the shots I REALLY love (there are a few) so you can see what I'm talking about. Have any of you been able to get this kind of DOF out of the 35mm 1.8? I guess I have when I'm, like, two feet away. I'm also a beginner and wonder if there might be some technique things I can employ here?

Another thing to consider is the relatively nice/smooth bokeh we see in this image. That is NOT possible with the Nikon AF-S 35mm f1.8 DX, because that lens has one of the worst bokeh characters I know.

A much better option for you will be the Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC. 30mm x 1.5 = 45mm, close enough to 50mm FF field of view wise

And aperture? 30 / 1.4 = 21.4mm aperture, a slight advantage over the Nikon 35mm f1.8. but with a MUCH nicer bokeh character, which is very important for such images.

Sorry, what you are saying is wrong. Dof isn't just a function of aperture alone...

I am not wrong. And it is. If you apply similar framing that is. I said aperture, not f-value.

What you have just said is like saying a cheese and tomato pizza is the same as a ham and pineapple pizza...

*as long as you change all the toppings.

Nonsense, dude. What I said is correct. That you can't get your head around it is fine, not my problem.

Regardless, I will try to make things a bit more clear to you.

It is NONSENSE to talk about DOF without considering the same framing of a subject. Without framing, it makes NO sense to talk about how lenses compare in certain ways (like DOF).

Further, that you think f-value and focal length determine the DOF, is fine. Those two determine the aperture size. That I say aperture size determines DOF is correct. Aperture size is what the f-value is about... focal length divided by f-value = aperture.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow