# Thread: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

2. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

Although technically more or less correct. The premise of the article is incorrect. DOF is not calculated or related to how large the subject is in the frame, but rather (among other things) the focal lengeth, aperture and camera to subject distance. You can't prove or disprove a theory by changing more then one variable.

Using the same logic, I could easily prove that my car is capable of doing 400km/hr. I know it can do 200+ (i have done it), so all i need is another of the same doing the same speed but going in the opposite direction. So for the passengers in each car the effective speed of the other is 400km/hr. Technically this is correct, but.........

3. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

Good say! it's all depends on our point of view.

4. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

actually if you note the trees and the dog in between the gremlin and the tower
they are very different than those from the longer focal lenghts lenses.

5. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

i don't quite agree with the article but I don't know how to point out what's wrong.

6. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

i thought a fair comparison would be to use the distance between subject and lens rather than using image size/proportion, the latter is affected by crop factor

7. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

that guy must be writing a thesis for his phd in photography hence need to write new theory.

8. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

Originally Posted by jopel
that guy must be writing a thesis for his phd in photography hence need to write new theory.
phd　＝　頭が壊れています　the head must be broken

9. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

Originally Posted by eikin
phd　＝　頭が壊れています　the head must be broken
greatly damaged. he should use a 50mm and try DoF from 2 feet to infinity. don't even need to test on the tele-lens.

10. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

hmm..in order for writer to have the gremlin appear the same size in each frame, he would have to vary the camera to subject distance. so for wide angles he would have to go in really close. and as cyber_monkey pointed out, camera to subject distance is one of the factors that affects DOF. DOF gets shallower as you move closer to subject.

so the writer's test does not seem to support his statement about wide angle lenses. more like he just proved DOF depends on camera to subject distance.

11. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

hmm..in order for writer to have the gremlin appear the same size in each frame, he would have to vary the camera to subject distance. so for wide angles he would have to go in really close. and as cyber_monkey pointed out, camera to subject distance is one of the factors that affects DOF. DOF gets shallower as you move closer to subject.
can use photoshop to crop also

12. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

Originally Posted by eikin
can use photoshop to crop also
that is true but he didnt mention that. in fact he said..

"Each of the frames below was taken so that the gremlin doll is exactly the same size in each frame."

i take that to mean that camera to subject distance was adjusted accordingly.

13. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

that is true but he didnt mention that. in fact he said..

"Each of the frames below was taken so that the gremlin doll is exactly the same size in each frame."

i take that to mean that camera to subject distance was adjusted accordingly.
that's true, i wonder how he measured through the view finder somemore not all the shots are properly focussed on the same object

14. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

Originally Posted by eikin
that's true, but i wonder how he measured through the view finder somemore not all the shots are properly focussed on the same object
looks like he using EOS 1v. maybe he replaced focusing screen with the grid version.

15. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

i also dont really agree with the article.....

perhaps the idea is correct, but the way he is proving it is not correct....

Shoot more.

17. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

Chim........ instinct will tell me what f stop to use for wat lens i am using to get what shot. Just like driving a car you will not think first how much pressure to put on the left leg before you make a slow stop.. instinct will guide you..MY POV

18. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

Originally Posted by soma
Chim........ instinct will tell me what f stop to use for wat lens i am using to get what shot. Just like driving a car you will not think first how much pressure to put on the left leg before you make a slow stop.. instinct will guide you..MY POV
It is not instinct it is experience.

19. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

The writer Michael Reichmann is simply trying to prove a common statement that appears in some authoritative photographic books:

Quote from article: "In fact, if the subject image size remains the same, then at any given aperture all lenses will give the same depth of field"

To paraphrase, it simply means that if the object has the same magnification (on the film or sensor), at the same f-stop, the depth of field is always the same.

This phenomenon would appear strange to most photographers because instinctively, or from experience, they would expect different DOFs from different lenses, eg a 14mm versus a 600mm. Yet, it is theory that is probably based on sound mathematics and optical science.

In real life, there might be some differences as the diaphragms of the lenses could be differently shaped, the actual focal point are different, complicated by that the DOF before the focal point and the DOF behind the focal point might not be equal or proportional. While we could think about this and be confused further, it would be interesting to bring your camera out and try out this principle. It can actually be used to achieve certain desirable results when switching from one lens to another while maintaining magnification.

BTW, magnification depends on the distance of subject and the focal length of the lens.

20. ## Re: Do Wide Angle Lenses Really Have Greater Depth of Field Than Telephotos?

The best way to convince one self is to take a WA go out shoot and verify. The results will be better than just reading offline and referencing books/MTF charts.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•