Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 5, 2004, 12:45 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 88
Default

I am noticing after 6 months of family portrait photography with my pan fz10, that i am not getting the same depth of field effect, as with my nikon 35mm at 2.8 aperture. The background is only moderately blurred.

using the blur feature in my ohoto brush editor does not take me far enough & CAN BE LABOROUS TO DO OVER & OVER.

ergo my question:



"any chance there is DEPTH OF FIELD FILTER WHICH BLURS PORTRAIT BACKGROUNDS

Lou Ledda
PAISANO5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 5, 2004, 3:48 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3
Default

No filter will do this. If you use aperture priority and set the aperture to maximum, in this case f2.8, you will get the minumum depth of field.

You can put the subject farther from the background to maximize background blur. Cutting out the main image in a program like Photoshop, blurring the backgrounf and pasting the shrap foreground back in the imate is a very hard way to do it:-)
gerryf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 5, 2004, 6:09 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 24
Default

small camera sensors have more dof even with 2.8 than with a 35mm, what you can do is.. what gerryf said and get closer to the person, the closer you get the smaller the dof is, but i dont know how it works with the zoom, try diferent setups.
Frederico is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 5, 2004, 6:32 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 88
Default

Frederico wrote:
Quote:
small camera sensors have more dof even with 2.8 than with a 35mm, what you can do is.. what gerryf said and get closer to the person, the closer you get the smaller the dof is, but i dont know how it works with the zoom, try diferent setups.
FEDERICO;

I appreciate your suggestion but i'm a bit confused. .

Also i found that when i get to close there is a distortion of the subject

furhter away 70 to 100 zoom i get a more pleasing & naturaaaal shot

what do you think? a tradeoff?

lou



lou












PAISANO5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 5, 2004, 9:01 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 272
Default

Your observations are correct Lou. Use in the neighborhood of 70-100mm for portraits. Using 35mm might distort the persons features. Use a longer zoom, wide aperture (lower number), and stand back a little from your subject to get a greater DOF. There are filters that blur the perimeter of the frame leaving the center sharp.
Guerito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 5, 2004, 10:06 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 88
Default

Guerito wrote:
Quote:
Your observations are correct Lou. Use in the neighborhood of 70-100mm for portraits. Using 35mm might distort the persons features. Use a longer zoom, wide aperture (lower number), and stand back a little from your subject to get a greater DOF. There are filters that blur the perimeter of the frame leaving the center sharp.

GUERITO;



THANKS FOR YOUR CONFIRMATION.

I WOULD LIKE TO BUY ONE OF THOSE FILTERS NAY LEADS ON WHERE I CAN GET ONE MODEL NO.'S MGR'ERS ??



THANKS LOU


PAISANO5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 5, 2004, 10:07 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 88
Default

<<<Your observations are correct Lou. Use in the neighborhood of 70-100mm for portraits. Using 35mm might distort the persons features. Use a longer zoom, wide aperture (lower number), and stand back a little from your subject to get a greater DOF. There are filters that blur the perimeter of the frame leaving the center sharp.>>>



Don't you mean a LESSER dop ?

lou



PAISANO5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 5, 2004, 11:55 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3
Default

It's not exactly distortion. Our mind's image of people is as they look from a distance, so that when the camera is close we don't like the effect.

Depth of field is a function of the actual physical aperture of the lens and of the resolution of the sensor. Since digital sensors have lower resolution than film, and they are smaller than film (making thelens smaller for the same f number) so digital cameras generally do exhibit greater depth of field than film cameras.
gerryf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 6, 2004, 2:59 AM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 88
Default

<<<<It's not exactly distortion. Our mind's image of people is as they look from a distance, so that when the camera is close we don't like the effect>>>>

NOT EXACTLY - I TAKE CLOSE UP PORTRAITS WITH MY ZOOM AT 100MM THAT LOOK GREAT LIKE I WAS STANDING 3 FEET AWAY

MAYBE IT'S NOT DISTORTION BUT WHEN I TAKE THAT SAME PHOTO AT 3 FT AWAY THE SUBJECT & PHOTO DO NOT LOOK AS GOOD. WORSE HAPPENS WHEN I USE WIDE ANGLE.

LOU






PAISANO5 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 6:33 PM.