Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 8, 2006, 7:55 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 9
Default

got that figured out... :-), been reading about the fstops and what not. but does that change your view of focus... like, i took a pic of a flower and only like a few pedals were in focus
dapoopta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2006, 8:14 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 824
Default

dapoopta wrote:
Quote:
so, I have the 50mm f2.0 right now....been using it the last 2 days. The problem I have with it is that the focal plane is so small when I zoom up on something VERY close. like, i took a picture of a spider and its face was in focus, but its legs werent. Does this have to do with the f # i use. because I set it to f3.5 and it worked better. Basically... if i get the 35mm f3.5 i think I will be more pleased, since when I had it on auto mode it went to f3.5 most the time anyway. good thing click has the 10 day return thing, then I'm gonna buy the 35 and test it out a bit!
You're talking about the "Depth of Field" and yes, it's narrow with any macro lens. The 50mm is a very sharp lens both for macro and portraits, but it demands respect and it does require learning how to use. There's a learning curve.

FWIW, DOF decreases as you get closer and as you open up the f-stop. So if you're doing macro on your spider and want a bit more dof, you'll normally want to use a tripod, use aperture priority mode, and close the f-stop down to f5.6 or f8 (unfortunately, using a smaller aperture probably won't help much since diffraction of light around the aperture blades at smaller apertures causes a loss of sharpness).


Norm in Fujino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2006, 8:49 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 185
Default

Dapoota, with respect, you are about to spend a whole lot of money on something for which I think you lack some fundamental understanding. I really don't mean that to sound snide but, with $500.00 on the line, you have to have to understand at least the very basics.

The relationship of F-Stop and depth of field is among the most critical relationshipin all of photography. F-stop and DOF is to photography what "2+2" is to mathematics.

In macrophotograpy, it is even more critical. In fact understanding depth of field is THE primary skill required for macrophotography.

I appreciate we all have to learn this somehow but I think you are going about the process backwards. You are test driving some very expensive glass while trying to figure out the fundamentals of DOF. You've got a $500.00 lens which you are preparing to return so that you can test out a $300.00 lens and see if you get better results. You have to do some basic research on F-stops in general and depth of field specfically BEFORE you test the lenses.

Norm has given you the capsule version. You'll get more depth of field as you stop down the lens (not to be a snot but you are familiar with the term "stop down the lens"?). But, if you stop it down too much you lose sharpness. Those are minimum pieces of fundamental knowledge that you must understand before dropping some major coin on an expensive lens. It isn't fair to the people who sold you the 50mm for you to return it just because you neglected to try it at F8 or F11...which would likely improve your results significantly.

You must understand these fundamentals before your retailer gets stuck with hundreds of dollars worthof returned equipment. It wouldn't be a problem is you had a camera with a non-interchangable lens. You would just keep playing with it until you hit the best combination of F-stop, shutter speed and sharpness. But I shudder at the thought of expensive Olympus lenses being used for basic training.
Brent Gair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2006, 9:50 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 9
Default

i understood the stop stuff, just didnt realize that with a f2 lens how small of a dof you would have. I do understand most of that, just the whole macro aspect of it is confusing. I have tried it out at different f's higher than 3 and above... thats why i was asking if the 35 mm would perform basically the same... my questions do same basic and stupid, but like you said, theres a lot of money on the line and i want to be sure i am understanding this exact. like the picture the guy took above of the little green bug, it seems there is more in the dof view then in any of mine i have taken at f2, and he said he took it at f2, just thought i might be doing something wrong. dont mean to upset anyone :-P.
dapoopta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2006, 3:35 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
jorgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 200
Default

And here is one from this morning using the 35mm (handheld using autofocus): the smallest dragonfly I have ever seen. It was laughing at my handling of the camera no doubt.

Attached Images
 
jorgen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2006, 3:18 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
jorgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 200
Default

I don't even need to leave my house any more. This one visited me on the terrace this morning. 35mm macro, handheld and autofocus. It is not laughing at my fumbling with the camera. It is smiling at me.


Attached Images
 
jorgen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2006, 8:02 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 183
Default

Thaks to all for the great macro shots. I have the 35mm and only dabble with the macro capability for fun. For me it's primarily a great walkaround prime lens (the 70mm slight tele is a good perspective). The light weight is a blessing on the otherwise heavy E-1 and I find myself using it for family shots. The quality is excellent for the price and while it's "only" f3.5 as opposed to the 50mm's f2 it can blur the background when called upon. I also find it nostalgic to use a prime lens where I have to position myself and actually move around to compose a shot rather than just zooming in and out. It's a great, inexpensive learning tool in that respect.
stowaway7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 13, 2006, 12:29 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
jorgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 200
Default

I use it the same way. The 35mm is very, very sharp and has an amazing resolution.

In the old days, I would walk about with an OM camera and the 85mm/f2 and if I were to carry two lenses, a 35mm or 28mm.

jorgen is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:27 PM.