S602 Questions

[Wolfgang]

Morning all. These are a set of questions someone (a fellow S602 user) had sent to me via PM and i was wondering if anyone here could help this chap out?

Just repost your answers in the same thread.

Cheers!

Questions:

1) How can i use the exposure conpensation in "P" mode with the flash on. EG. taking pics of a party indoors, in a house... Dosent seem to work for me. +2.0/-2.0 same pic leh.

2)long question. bear with me. heehe
Let say, i zoom all the way in just nice to fit a person's head nicely in my frame, and standing 3m away from subject. I understand that zooming all the way in gives u the shallowest DOF(blurest background) right?

If i fit a wide angle lens, can i zoom in all the way to fit the same person head in my frame, and because i am using wide angle, i can STAND NEARER(lets say 2m) at full zoom, THEREFORE getting a shallower DOF than w/o the wide angle?

Will this happen? Or, because i have to tell the camera i'm using the lens adaptor, make some funny adjustment, and thus not giving me the shallower DOF? Read in the manual that it'll adjust some focusing thingie.
btw, my adaptor is 55-52mm. which lense should i get? and the cost for it?

[mpenza]

I've got the same set of questions.

1. Since flash is the main source of lighting, use flash compensation (up to +-0.6EV if I'm not wrong).

2. wide angle lens are usually built to increase the depth of view. This might lead to a greater depth of view when attached.

Adaptor size should not limit the lens you get. You can easily get a step-up ring to fit wide-angle converters with larger threadsize. Good ones don't come cheap. Olympus have some which should work nicely (can't remember the model number though).

[reflecx]

1. Use slow sync flash mode, then you can use exposure compensation.

2. You should actually get more depth of field. Use a teleconvertor instead to get shallower DOF.

[darkness]

If I'm not wrong, it doesn't matter whether you attached a WC or TC in front, the DOF remains the same. This is because the physical apperture size remains the same no matter what you attach in front.

Yeah, I know that a 200mm f/2.8 lens have a shallower DOF compared to a 50mm f/2.8 lens, but that's becoz the 200mm has a larger physical apperture. It's different from adding a TC to a, say, 50mm lens. That's also why the TC for SLR (the one that goes in between lens and body) changes the effective apperture size.

Correct me if I'm wrong!

Then again, in WG's case, since he's moving forward to 2m from 3m to achieve the same framing for the person's head, the DOF may actually become *shallower* becoz the subject distance has changed to become shorter, so actually there's another factor to consider. Dun really know if it will become deeper or shallower until you try!!

[mpenza]

hmm.. come to think of it, actually there's no need to use a wide-angle lens. he could just use less zoom and move closer....

Gosh... Could not log into the forum with my usual comp. wats wrong?

Ahh.... that was what meant. ability to move closer to subject with the WA, while keeping framing unchanged, thus reducing DOF. Will it work? could any kind souls with WA test it out?

mpenza: I am alrady using full zoom for my potraits, but i would like to have LESS DOF, so i was thinking moving closer would help me acheive it. But then again, with full zoom, i move closer, the subject will not fit into my frame liao.

Cheers.

Quote: Originally posted by darkness If I'm not wrong, it doesn't matter whether you attached a WC or TC in front, the DOF remains the same. This is because the physical apperture size remains the same no matter what you attach in front. Yeah, I know that a 200mm f/2.8 lens have a shallower DOF compared to a 50mm f/2.8 lens, but that's becoz the 200mm has a larger physical apperture. It's different from adding a TC to a, say, 50mm lens. That's also why the TC for SLR (the one that goes in between lens and body) changes the effective apperture size. Correct me if I'm wrong! Then again, in WG's case, since he's moving forward to 2m from 3m to achieve the same framing for the person's head, the DOF may actually become *shallower* becoz the subject distance has changed to become shorter, so actually there's another factor to consider. Dun really know if it will become deeper or shallower until you try!!

[darkness]

Frankly speaking, for consumer digicams, no matter how hard we try (largest apperture, longest zoom), the DOF is still pretty deep compared to a SLR (by my rough estimate f/2.8 on the S602 actually has DOF of around f/11 on the SLR lens). It's not easy to take nice portraits for us...

Consolation is that we can easily take better insect macros then SLRs...

[Wolfgang]

The DOF can be achieved, but you would need to make sure you have enough distance between you and the subject, and then, the distance of the subject behind the background.

Try going closer to the subject and position the subject (if physically possible) accordingly against the desired background.

[ckiang]

Quote: Originally posted by darkness If I'm not wrong, it doesn't matter whether you attached a WC or TC in front, the DOF remains the same. This is because the physical apperture size remains the same no matter what you attach in front. Yeah, I know that a 200mm f/2.8 lens have a shallower DOF compared to a 50mm f/2.8 lens, but that's becoz the 200mm has a larger physical apperture. It's different from adding a TC to a, say, 50mm lens. That's also why the TC for SLR (the one that goes in between lens and body) changes the effective apperture size. Correct me if I'm wrong! Then again, in WG's case, since he's moving forward to 2m from 3m to achieve the same framing for the person's head, the DOF may actually become *shallower* becoz the subject distance has changed to become shorter, so actually there's another factor to consider. Dun really know if it will become deeper or shallower until you try!!

Actually, DoF is dependent on:

1. Aperture (diameter of opening)
2. Focal length
3. Subject distance
4. Acceptable Circle of Confusion

I am not sure how add-on WC and TCs finally affect DoF, but in his case if he go nearer, he should get *less* DoF, but since it's a wide angle, it might negate that "going near" part. Really have to do some calculations to be more sure.

Regards
CK

[chenwei]

Quote: Originally posted by darkness If I'm not wrong, it doesn't matter whether you attached a WC or TC in front, the DOF remains the same. This is because the physical apperture size remains the same no matter what you attach in front. Yeah, I know that a 200mm f/2.8 lens have a shallower DOF compared to a 50mm f/2.8 lens, but that's becoz the 200mm has a larger physical apperture. It's different from adding a TC to a, say, 50mm lens. That's also why the TC for SLR (the one that goes in between lens and body) changes the effective apperture size. Correct me if I'm wrong! ....

thru real experience, TC will help to get narrower DOF when the zoom is the same. however, longer distance is needed again since the min focus distance is extended.

[darkness]

AFAIK the physical apperture size (not talking abt the f stop here) determines the DOF, given that subject distance remains constant. However, the apperture size is a function of 2 variables, the focal length and the f number.

f number = (focal length)/(diameter of apperture)

Therefore, longer lenses requires larger diameters to maintain the same f number, and at the same time, decreasing the DOF since the physical hole itself is larger.

That's just my understanding of the physics behind it, pls correct me if I'm wrong!

Wah... confused already.

Anyway, heres mine thoughts.
Lik i mentioned earlier. If i have a WA lens, lets say for example 0.5x.

Senerio 1
I take a picture at full zoom of a box that covers left half of my LCD. and the right half is the background. I am standing 2m away from the box(in order to fit the WHOLE box i am taking into my frame).

Senerio 2
I take a picture at full zoom of a box that covers left half of my LCD. and the right half is the background. However, now the (0.5x) WA lens allows me to stand 1m away from this box and still have the whole box in the frame.

Therotically, Senerio 2 would give a shallower DOF right? Reason coz dist between subject and me is nearer.
Correct me if i'm wrong. Anyone tried this before?


Bottomline, what i am trying to achieve here is to get macro kinda effect. very shallow dof. perhapes there might be a filter that can help?
Yes, i know digicams dof can be compared to slr.

Cheers,

[avatarzero]

but i thought a WA would increase the DOF?
isn't it that the more tele one uses, the more shallow the DOF will be? pls correct me if i'm mistaken thnks~
perhaps a close-up filter might help? since u're trying to achieve the macro effect?

[chenwei]

Quote: Originally posted by jeremywe Wah... confused already. Anyway, heres mine thoughts. Lik i mentioned earlier. If i have a WA lens, lets say for example 0.5x. Senerio 1 I take a picture at full zoom of a box that covers left half of my LCD. and the right half is the background. I am standing 2m away from the box(in order to fit the WHOLE box i am taking into my frame). Senerio 2 I take a picture at full zoom of a box that covers left half of my LCD. and the right half is the background. However, now the (0.5x) WA lens allows me to stand 1m away from this box and still have the whole box in the frame. Therotically, Senerio 2 would give a shallower DOF right? Reason coz dist between subject and me is nearer. Correct me if i'm wrong. Anyone tried this before? Bottomline, what i am trying to achieve here is to get macro kinda effect. very shallow dof. perhapes there might be a filter that can help? Yes, i know digicams dof can be compared to slr. Cheers,

nope, scenario 1 will give shllower DOF... erm, i dunno how to calculate also, but imagine if u zoom less u will get deepeer DOF, wideangle also get something similliar effect?

[darkness]

Quote: Originally posted by chenwei nope, scenario 1 will give shllower DOF... erm, i dunno how to calculate also, but imagine if u zoom less u will get deepeer DOF, wideangle also get something similliar effect?

No, scenario 2 will have a shallower DOF.

Assuming at scenario 1, you stand at 2m with a certain amount of DOF. Attaching the WC and remaining at 2m does NOT change the DOF (since the apperture size doesn't change).

Now move in close to 1m at the relative distance of the background is further wrt to the subject distance, thus decreasing DOF.

*However*, taking a picture with a 50mm lens at 2m, f/2.8 and taking a picture with a 25mm lens at 1m, f/2.8 is a *totally* different story since now the apperture size of the 50mm lens is twice that of the 25mm lens. In this case, I dunno how to compare liao...

Ah yes... i think i kinda get it now. i thought sen 2 would give less dof too.

When i use the WA, i can move closer to fit my subject in the same frame, but still maintain my physical aperture size. the WA does not modify my physical aperture size in anyway unlike my zoom lens(is i reduce zoom to fit my subject when i stand closer).

Correct?
It'll be best if i can try it out myself before buying... Antyone kind souls?

Quote: Originally posted by darkness No, scenario 2 will have a shallower DOF. Assuming at scenario 1, you stand at 2m with a certain amount of DOF. Attaching the WC and remaining at 2m does NOT change the DOF (since the apperture size doesn't change). Now move in close to 1m at the relative distance of the background is further wrt to the subject distance, thus decreasing DOF. avartarzero: yea... trying to get the"macro" effect. Its actually for potrait shots i intend to take. *However*, taking a picture with a 50mm lens at 2m, f/2.8 and taking a picture with a 25mm lens at 1m, f/2.8 is a *totally* different story since now the apperture size of the 50mm lens is twice that of the 25mm lens. In this case, I dunno how to compare liao...

[mpenza]

you move closer but your actual zoom is less (you may have zoom fully but the wide-angle converter actually reduces the effective focal length). so the effect is really hard to determine on paper....

[chenwei]

Quote: Originally posted by mpenza you move closer but your actual zoom is less (you may have zoom fully but the wide-angle converter actually reduces the effective focal length). so the effect is really hard to determine on paper....

ya, i totally agree on this. didn't think of the zoom in previous post