RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘Apertures’

The Lomogon 32mm F2.5 lens features perfectly round apertures on a rotating wheel

22 Feb

Lomography has launched the Lomogon 32mm F2.5, a compact lens with full frame sensor coverage and a unique wheel of aperture stops that protrudes from the barrel.

Fitted with the Lomogon Circular Aperture Disk the lens uses a series of five round holes cut into a disk of metal as its aperture control. The toothed disk sticks out from the lens and is turned by the user to drop the desired hole behind the front element – a bit like Waterhouse stops from the 1850s. The holes in this disk correspond to F2.5, F4, F5.6, F8 and F11 – and each is completely round as they aren’t created by an iris.

The Lomogon uses 6 coated elements in 6 groups, has a 62mm filter thread and a closest focus distance of 0.4m. Developed with Russian manufacturer Zenit and built in China, Lomography says the Lomogon uses ‘the finest glass optics’ and is assembled by hand. The result, according to the company, is high micro-contrast and ‘enhanced colors’. It will be available in Nikon F and Canon EF mounts, and adapters can be used for other camera fittings.

Technical Specifications

  • Focal Length: 32 mm
  • Lens Construction: 6 elements in 6 groups
  • Maximum Aperture: f/2.5
  • Regular Apertures: dial aperture stops, f/2.5, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11
  • Image Circle: 44 mm
  • Field of View: 68 degrees
  • Lens Mounting Profile: Canon EF and Nikon F
  • Electronic Contacts: No
  • Closest Focusing Distance: 0.4 m
  • Focusing Mechanism: Helicoid
  • Filter Thread: 62 mm

$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_5983014042″,”galleryId”:”5983014042″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”isMobile”:false}) });

If all goes well the Lomogon will begin shipping in November 2019 and will have a retail price of $ 499. During the Kickstarter campaign though, it can be had for as little as $ 299.
For more information see the Lomogon Kickstarter page.


Disclaimer: Remember to do your research with any crowdfunding project. DPReview does its best to share only the projects that look legitimate and come from reliable creators, but as with any crowdfunded campaign, there’s always the risk of the product or service never coming to fruition.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on The Lomogon 32mm F2.5 lens features perfectly round apertures on a rotating wheel

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

26 Jul

The bigger the number, the better, right? Wrong! The aperture is a strange thing and one you may find difficult to understand in depth. The first weird thing is that large numbers means a small apertures. It is very counter-intuitive.

In this article, you will learn a couple of quirky details about aperture and why you should avoid shooting in the top range of f/18 to f/40.

ocean view and cliff - Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

The aperture plays a significant role in two different equations. The first one defines the exposure and the other one controls the depth of field.

Changing the aperture will change both the exposure settings as well as the depth of field. In some cases, you can take advantage of that, in particular, if you are a landscape or cityscape photographer.

The advantages of small apertures

Two common goals for a landscape or cityscape photographers are:

  1. To get everything within the frame in focus.
  2. Get longer exposure times to blur moving objects like water or moving cars.

It happens so, that these two goals go hand in hand with aperture. If you set your camera to a smaller aperture (that is a larger f-number), you will get a greater depth of field. At the same time, you will also get longer exposure times.

The photo below is a photo of a mountain lake in France. It serves as a classic example of what you as a landscape photographer may experience in the field.

mountain scene France - Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

You want the foreground to be in focus as well as the mountains in the background. On top of that, you want the water to be smooth. It requires longer exposure times to smooth small ripples on the surface.

To get a longer exposure times, you can attach a Neutral Density Filter on your lens. If your filters are not quite enough, you can also lower the aperture to f/22 or whatever is the smallest your lens can do.

The depth-of-field is maximized at f/22 or smaller if your lens allows it. So this magically goes hand in hand and everything seems great.

However, a couple of things happen, when you stop a lens down all the way to f/22 or even lower.

Problem #1: Small apertures reveal dust on your sensor

The first problem that arises is that the dust spots you have on your sensor becomes painfully visible. Almost any camera, even with a freshly cleaned sensor, will have dust spots.

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

Dust spots clearly visible due to a small aperture.

Dust spots are annoying because you have to clone them out later in the post-processing and if you have many dust spots this is a real pain. For this reason alone, you may want to avoid f/22.

Problem #2: Small apertures lose sharpness

The other problem may a surprise to you. The dust spots are annoying, but not more that. At f/40 you can’t even shoot a sharp photo! But even at f/22, there are problems.

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

200% crop of a blurry image at f/22.

This is a 200% close-up of the unprocessed RAW photo of the French lake above, which was shot at f/22. As you can see the photo is not quite sharp. There is a softness to it and it is not a focus problem, but something entirely different.

This lens, a Nikon 16-35mm f/4, cannot produce anything sharper than this at f/22. You can work on this in the post-processing stage by applying some sharpness, and get something that seems reasonably sharp, but it is not really that good.

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

200% crop of the final processed image.

Some harsh post-processing has made the image seem sharper. But had the RAW photo been sharper in the first place, this would have been a much better result.

Below are some examples shot using a Sony 24-240mm lens at 240mm on a Sony a7R II body, shot from a sturdy tripod.

This lens is not the sharpest one in town, but for a superzoom, it is one of the best I have seen. At 240mm f/6.3 (wide open – it is no fast lens) through to f/40 (fully stopped down).

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

1/320th at f/6.3

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

1/160th at f/9.0

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

1/80th at f/13

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

1/40th at f/18

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

1/15th at f/29

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

1/8th at f/40

Have a look at this series as the aperture lowers. At f/9 the lens is at its sharpest and then sharpness begins to decline. Even at f/13, it is not super sharp, but still fixable. At f/18 the lens begins to lose details and at f/40 you can no longer tell the bricks from each other.

Why they even bother providing f/40 on a lens such as this, is a mystery. So what is going on? This is much worse than a few dust spots and it is NOT fixable.

Diffraction is the problem

What happens is that you run into the laws of physics and there is nothing you can do about it. When you stop down your lens, the hole the light passes through inside the lens becomes smaller and smaller. That’s why it’s called a smaller aperture.

When the hole gets small enough you run into trouble with one of the laws of physics which is called diffraction.

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

Shot at f/22 on a full frame camera. Sharpness is not optimal.

In layman terms, what happens is that the light spreads out a bit when it passes through a small hole. The light intended for one receptor (one pixel) on the sensor spreads a little bit to its neighbors. The result is an unsharp photo.

And the smaller the hole, the bigger the problem, which is exactly what you see at f/40 above. Diffraction begins around f/22, but even as the lens is closing in on f/22 the sharpness is declining.

What is the minimum usable aperture?

So what is the minimum f-stop or aperture you should use? Or phrased not be misunderstood, what is the largest f-number you should use?

All lenses behave differently, but the laws of physics are constant. Some lenses are sharpest at f/5.6 while others may be sharpest at f/9.0, as was the case with the Sony 24-240mm lens. This has to do with the design of the lens.

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

15mm at f/8 on a full frame camera.

What is common for most lenses, is that they produce the sharpest photos somewhere in the middle range, from f/7.1 to f/13 (called the sweet spot). What is certain for all lenses is that as the aperture gets smaller (bigger f-number) beyond f/13, the worse the lens performs in terms of sharpness.

Diffraction becomes a problem around f/22 and the lens will become increasingly less sharp. The Sony lens takes diffraction pretty hard while a Nikon 28-300mm I also own is less pronounced.

The title of this article suggests that you should avoid using f/18-f/40. Why do I say f/18?

It is a gradual change, but personally, I have stopped going beyond f/16, simply because I find the photos too soft. You can never make them tack sharp, and you have to process them pretty hard to get something fairly sharp and acceptable.

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40 - park bench and scenic view

The best way to find your personal limit on your favorite lens is to put your camera on a tripod and shoot test shots at f/11, f/13, f/16, f/18 and f/22 or even further down if your lens has those apertures.

Look at the photos at 200%. Notice the sharpness difference and decide what your limit should be. Memorize that and just be sure not to go below that aperture.

The compromises

Photography is full of compromises and now you have a couple more you have to make. As I established at the beginning of this article, there are some good reasons why you want to go for small apertures, but they come at a price of lack of sharpness and dust spots.

You may want to reduce the dust spot problem, I know I do. If you stay around f/8 the dust spots will not be very pronounced. However, the shutter speed will be much faster than at f/16 and the depth of field much less as well.

You can affect the shutter speed by attaching a 2-stop Neutral Density filter, which will produce the same shutter speed as f/16 but shooting at f/8.

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40 - large chain links

Another solution

You can solve the problem of getting everything in focus by shooting more than one photo. One having the foreground in focus and one having the background in focus and then blending these two photos.

This technique is called focus stacking. Whether that is easier than fixing dust spots is something you will have to decide for yourself.

Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40 - forest and pathway

This is a focus stacked photo shot at f/11 and 134mm on a cropped sensor.

In photography, there are always compromises you have to make. How will you overcome the urge to shoot at f/22 and beyond?

The post Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40 appeared first on Digital Photography School.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on Why You Should Avoid Shooting at Small Apertures Like F18 to F40

Posted in Photography

 

Are You Obsessed with Shooting Wide Apertures – Here’s Why You Might Want to Hold Back

24 Mar

There’s a scene in the original Jurassic Park movie, that almost perfectly describes one lesson I have learned when documenting the world around me with my camera. In this scene Dr. Ian Malcolm, a brilliant mathematician who is visiting the prehistoric park, expresses severe reservations about the idea of resurrecting long-extinct species during a conversation with John Hammond, the director of the park. Hammond is gleefully explaining the incredible genetic breakthroughs that his scientists have achieved. “Our scientists have done things which nobody’s ever done before.” Incredulous, Malcolm responds with equal fervor and says, “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.” The same holds true for camera lenses. Just because you can shoot wide open at f/1.4 or f/1.8, doesn’t mean you should.

ultra-wide-apertures-purple-flower

When I first got into serious photography work, I was amazed at the power and light-gathering ability of my 50mm f/1.8 lens. It opened up a whole new world of photographic possibilities, that I continue to explore today, and was capable of producing incredible images, even on my humble little Nikon D200. Unfortunately, like the scientists in Jurassic Park, I did not spend years in the trenches learning my trade and honing my skills in order to learn how to truly utilize the power of such wide apertures, and went through a phase where I shot everything wide open because of things like low light photos, depth of field, and of course bokeh. Always with the bokeh. Now it’s important to note that I don’t regret any of those early lessons but I do want to offer youa few simple things I’ve learned over the years, and a couple reasons why you might want to reign things in a bit and not shoot wide open with that fancy prime or ultrafast zoom lens just yet.

1. Depth of field can be way too shallow

I shoot most of my photos with three prime lenses: a 35mm f/1.8, a 50mm f/1.8, and my favorite, an 85mm f/1.8, that I call my supermodel lens. (Seriously, you could just about point that lens at a moldy old scarecrow, and get a portrait worthy of Vogue magazine.) Each of these lenses has its own set of unique advantages and limitations, but as you can probably already tell, the one thing they all have in common is a super wide maximum aperture. Certainly there are plenty of lenses available with even bigger apertures, like the Nikon 58mm f/1.4 or Canon 85mm f/1.2, but when push comes to shove an f/1.8, or even f/2.8 lens, is no slouch either. Wielding one of these ultra-wide beasts can be a bit like riding a tyrannosaurus rex, in that the sheer amount of power at your disposal is kind of insane. But, one advantage of fast primes like this, an ultra-shallow depth of field, can also be somewhat of a curse if not used properly.

I’m not going to lie, it’s a ton of fun to shoot things with your lens wide open but it took me a while to learn, that just like the scientists of Jurassic Park, maybe I should have held back a bit. This portrait of a college student is yet another time in which I had no good reason to shoot wide open, but did anyway, and the result was a photo that simply could not be used. Due to the wide f/1.8 aperture, and my proximity to the subject, it left me with a depth of field consisting of just a few centimeters. Her left eye (on the right side of the photo) is perfectly in focus while the other side of her face is blurry, and the result is a strange-looking picture that I had to discard. Thankfully, I quickly realized my mistake and got some other perfectly usable images by shooting at f/2.8 and f/4. But, this was one of those situations in which I thought it would be super cool to get the way awesome background blur of an f/1.8 aperture, but did not realize how I nearly destroyed the portrait in the process.

85mm, f/1.8, 1/750 second, ISO 400

85mm, f/1.8, 1/750 second, ISO 400

Here’s another example from when I first got my 50mm lens, and thought it was so cool to go around shooting all my pictures at f/1.8 – because my warped sense of logic told me that no depth of field could ever be too thin. As a result this picture of some crocuses contains an ugly streak across the center where one flower and a lot of dead grass is in focus while the rest of the image is a blurry mess. Shooting at a smaller aperture would have given me a smooth transition between in-focus and out-of-focus areas and a much more pleasing image overall.

50mm, f/1.8, 1/500 second, ISO 400

50mm, f/1.8, 1/500 second, ISO 400

2. Bokeh and background blur can get out of hand

This is a bit subjective, and open to interpretation on the part of both the photographer and the viewer, but over the years I have found that shooting at the widest possible aperture in order to get the most possible bokeh, or background blur, things can go from artistic and interesting, to messy and incomprehensible very quickly. Bokeh is nice and can certainly be used to add an artistic flair to an image, but when overused, it can overpower the subject and ruin the picture. The following photo of a purple flower sticking up from a bed of grass shows this phenomenon in action.

ultra-wide-apertures-purple-flowers

The flowers are so removed from the background it’s almost like they are hovering in midair, and the effect is somewhat disconcerting, and borders on upsetting. Blowing out the background so much has removed any sense of place and context for the subject, and what’s left is a green and purple mess, that is neither artistically interesting, nor aesthetically pleasing.

3. Vignetting, chromatic aberration, and other optical oddities

Before I say too much on this subject perhaps I need to add a bit of a preface. Less expensive lenses can behave strangely when you shoot with them wide open, but more expensive glass is usually much better at this sort of thing. With that disclaimer out of the way, it’s important to understand some of the optical abnormalities such as vignetting, chromatic aberration, and softness, that often show up when your lens is opened up as far as it will go.

Vignetting is when the edges of your image look a bit darker than the rest of the picture, due to how light is manipulated inside your lens before it hits the image sensor inside your camera. It’s not too big of a problem on cameras with smaller sensors like APS-C or micro four thirds models, but it is certainly there, and even more so on full frame cameras.

Vignetting can be a major issue when shooting wide open. Notice how the centers of both images are equally exposed but the corners are much darker at f/1.8.

Vignetting can be a major issue when shooting wide open. Notice how the centers of both images are equally exposed but the corners are much darker at f/1.8.

If you shoot in RAW, you can use Lightroom, Photoshop, or other such applications to mitigate most of the effects of vignetting if you want. Of course another solution is to use a smaller aperture, which tends to eliminate most vignetting altogether. Vignetting is not always a dealbreaker, and many photographers, myself included, actually prefer the subtle effects of a well-used vignette. You may find that you fall into this camp, in which case go right ahead and shoot at f/1.8 or f/1.4 to your heart’s content.

The other optical abnormality that often rears its ugly head at wide apertures is chromatic aberration, which might be a much bigger problem if you are not ready for it. This usually manifests itself as purple or green outlines or fringes, around places in your pictures with harsh contrast between dark and light. For example the image below was shot at f/1.8, and upon first glance, looks perfectly usable.

50mm, f/1.8, 1/3000 second, ISO 100

50mm, f/1.8, 1/3000 second, ISO 100. It looks Okay on first inspection, but all is not well up close.

Take a closer look and you will notice a big problem around the edges of most of the dry stalks of grass. Ugly green halos show up all over the place, and this is a direct result of shooting wide open, due to how the incoming light is transformed by the lens on its way to the camera. Here’s a 100% crop of the image next to the exact same picture shot at f/8.

Green outlines abound on the left side while stopping down to f/8 eliminates them entirely.

Green outlines abound on the left side while stopping down to f/8 eliminates them entirely.

This optical imperfection can often be mitigated somewhat in Lightroom, by using its: Remove Chromatic Aberration option in the Develop panel. But even then the results are not ideal, and you will often be left with images that still show some green or purple artifacts, or lose a bit of color from other parts of your picture. Rather than mess around with fixing these issues in post-production, I like to just avoid it from the start and shoot at a slightly smaller aperture. It usually fixes the problem, and still leaves me with the same overall composition I would have had with a wider aperture.

The last weird characteristic of most lenses at their widest apertures might not be that big of a problem unless you are painstaking examining your pictures on a per-pixel basis, but it’s something you should know about nonetheless. Almost all lenses are a bit softer when used at their widest apertures, which can result in pictures that are not quite what you want. The picture below was shot at f/1.8 and looks decent upon first glance, but a closer inspection reveals a very different story.

50mm, f/1.8, 1/125 second, ISO 100

50mm, f/1.8, 1/125 second, ISO 100. Seems decent but once again a closer look reveals a much different story.

Zooming in on the exact center of the image, the point at which I locked focus, shows two very different pictures when this is put next to the very same picture shot at f/8.

Focus was locked precisely on the letter "K" and yet the image on the left, shot at the widest aperture on my lens, is much less sharp.

Focus was locked precisely on the letter “K” and yet the image on the left, shot at the widest aperture on my lens, is much less sharp.

Once again this sharpness problem can be corrected to some degree in post-production, but my ideal solution is to avoid shooting at f/1.8 unless I specifically need the light-gathering ability, background blur, or other effects that such a wide aperture offers. Photography is all about tradeoffs, and while closing down the aperture on my lens resulted in a picture that was sharper, it also gave me an image that had much wider depth of field, which made the overall composition less pleasing.

4. Use wide apertures sparingly to maximize their impact

The Roman philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero once said, “Never go to excess, but let moderation be your guide.” This nugget of wisdom is applicable not only to life in general, but also speaks volumes about how to approach photography. I like to treat the widest aperture on my lenses like flooring the gas pedal on my car. It’s fun, but if I went around driving full speed everywhere I went, it would quickly lose its appeal. (Though in my 1998 Toyota sedan I would probably lose a race to a skateboarder, but you get the point.)

Your lenses have wide apertures for a reason and they are meant to be used to get good images, particularly if you are aware of some of the quirks and idiosyncrasies of using them like this. If you like shooting wide open, and don’t mind some of the potential tradeoffs like a bit of vignetting and chromatic aberration, then go for it! However, my own personal rule of thumb is to only use f/1.8 when I really need it, otherwise the creamy backgrounds and bokeh balls start to lose a bit of their luster. When I’m doing a portrait session I keep f/1.8 in my back pocket for when I really need it, otherwise I shoot most pics at f/2.8, f/4, or smaller.

I took most photos of this couple at smaller apertures, which made this one at f/1.8 really stand out.

I took most photos of this couple at smaller apertures, which made this one at f/1.8 stand out among the rest.

After hearing this list of reasons to hold back a bit when shooting wide open, I almost feel like I should write a similar article about the benefits of taking photos at the largest aperture possible. I don’t want to give the impression that you should never use your equipment to the fullest of its capabilities, just that there are a few things to know before you go around taking all your pictures at the widest possible aperture your lenses can use. You might end up with a few problems, just like the ill-fated scientists of Jurassic Park, but hopefully yours won’t be quite as lethal, and along the way you could very well manage to take some incredible photos too.

I’d like to know what your thoughts are on all of this, and if you have any favorite shots taken at not-quite-wide apertures, please post them in the comments below!

googletag.cmd.push(function() {
tablet_slots.push( googletag.defineSlot( “/1005424/_dPSv4_tab-all-article-bottom_(300×250)”, [300, 250], “pb-ad-78623” ).addService( googletag.pubads() ) ); } );

googletag.cmd.push(function() {
mobile_slots.push( googletag.defineSlot( “/1005424/_dPSv4_mob-all-article-bottom_(300×250)”, [300, 250], “pb-ad-78158” ).addService( googletag.pubads() ) ); } );

The post Are You Obsessed with Shooting Wide Apertures – Here’s Why You Might Want to Hold Back by Simon Ringsmuth appeared first on Digital Photography School.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on Are You Obsessed with Shooting Wide Apertures – Here’s Why You Might Want to Hold Back

Posted in Photography