Shallow Depth of Field

Started 4 weeks ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
RSColo Senior Member • Posts: 1,465
Shallow Depth of Field

I tend to think shallow depth of field is over rated. I am primarily a landscape photographer. I have long been a fan of the historic f.64 Group (Ansel Adams, et.al.) They took their group name for the minimum aperture of the lenses they were using on their large format cameras. In other words, everything is in focus.

However, I do understand there is often a need to isolate the subject from the background using focus. This morning on my drive up to the Flat Tops in Colorado for some wildflower photography I had an idea. I have the Pan-Leica 50-200mm with the 2x extender. I also have some close-up rings for close up work. I figured the combination should give a very narrow DoF. I put the smallest close-up ring behind the lens and extender combination and zoomed out to 400mm (800mm in FF terms) with the aperture wide open. Here are three jpg examples strait out of the camera. Please realize that the 2x extender is a bit less sharp than I generally like; I usually only use it when I absolutely need the reach. There was also a bit of a breeze, so some blur may be due to motion.

MFT tends to get a bit of flaming on this siteĀ for its "lack of DoF". I certainly didn't feel that was the situation here. In any case it was a fun exercise and the flowers were nice indeed.

-- hide signature --

Reid Shay
www.sawatchpub.com
Colorado, USA

 RSColo's gear list:RSColo's gear list
Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246) Leica M-Monochrom Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Leica Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 ASPH +8 more
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow