Aperture and night photography


Status
Not open for further replies.

ryuggen

New Member
Apr 5, 2006
791
0
0
Bukit Panjang
#1
I've seen several posts on the forum regarding lower aperture value gives shows a faster lens. What it actually means?

Shooting night portraits without a tripod, I normally have to shoot at the lowest stop to capture more lights. But wont it gives a rather shallow DOF; bluring parts of the subject's?
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#3
I've seen several posts on the forum regarding lower aperture value gives shows a faster lens. What it actually means?

Shooting night portraits without a tripod, I normally have to shoot at the lowest stop to capture more lights. But wont it gives a rather shallow DOF; bluring parts of the subject's?
Yes. But if you are shooting nightscapes, you may still get away with low F stops when you focus far away. You can also compensate with a higher ISO speed and also using something to rest on to allow for a slightly longer exposure.
 

ryuggen

New Member
Apr 5, 2006
791
0
0
Bukit Panjang
#4
So basically it is quite difficult to take night portraits with handheld.- unless with a flash to freeze the subject.


Users who buy 2.8 and below are players of shallow DOF?eg. focusing on eyes only. Hence it may not be necessary if one is taking normal portraits.
 

ExplorerZ

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2006
7,752
0
36
West Legion
hkchew03.deviantart.com
#5
So basically it is quite difficult to take night portraits with handheld.- unless with a flash to freeze the subject.


Users who buy 2.8 and below are players of shallow DOF?eg. focusing on eyes only. Hence it may not be necessary if one is taking normal portraits.
not true, it depends on how you shoot. if you use f2.8 on just head/shoulder shot, the DOF is very little. but for full body shots, even at f2.8 you can easily get the whole person sharp.
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,698
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#7
The aperture to use depends largely on your DOF requirements and the available lighting condition. If you are making a living out of photography, then the faster lenses would obviously give you more options and god knows when it will save your life when you needed it most. Just because they have faster lenses doesn't means they use the fastest setting all the time.
 

ExplorerZ

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2006
7,752
0
36
West Legion
hkchew03.deviantart.com
#8
The aperture to use depends largely on your DOF requirements and the available lighting condition. If you are making a living out of photography, then the faster lenses would obviously give you more options and god knows when it will save your life when you needed it most. Just because they have faster lenses doesn't means they use the fastest setting all the time.
yes, I do shoot f8-11 with a f2.8 lens as well. but f2.8 is a good to have, and have saved my a** many times.
 

wanzw

New Member
Aug 15, 2006
919
0
0
#9
you can use a 2.8 lens to shoot at 5.6 for grp shots, or when you want everything in focus.

you can also use the 2.8 lens and shoot at 2.8 to achieve some nice DOF, something a 3.5-5.6 lens cannot achieve.

you cant use a 5.6 lens to take pictures at 2.8... that's why constant aperture lenses are so expensive but yet in popular demand.

like explorerz said. 2.8 good to have. !
 

ryuggen

New Member
Apr 5, 2006
791
0
0
Bukit Panjang
#10
I was thinking if i could use 2.8 to shoot a portrait/street handheld, smaller aperture value gives me relative higher shutter. But i'm worried over shallow DOF.

Normally, I see portraits shooter tend to shoot at F4 to F5.6 instead of the 2.8. 2.8 lens is good to have, but is it good to use?:dunno:
 

lastboltnut

Senior Member
Mar 23, 2006
4,528
0
0
Where the wind blows...
#11
I shoot with f1.8 at home, at my baby boy. The lighting is not bright (usual home flouracent lamp) and my son is moving his body parts fast, but the f1.8 allows me to shoot him without flash (I dun 1 2 blind my son with flash as such tender age). The shallow DOF is good for isolating him from the background, so I find that large aperture portrait is quite nice too.

But for your case, if you 1 2 shoot protrait/street with big aperture, it really depends on your personal liking, ie do you like bokeh background? Or you prefer the BG to be sharp too? Then its fair to choice the aperture you 1.....If you really 1 sharp BG, then no choice but to use higher aperture loh....but need tripod if lighting is dim. Flash doesn't help much for outdoor portrait, especially if the BG is far....slow syn will help only if you have tripod....

These are my limited experience....may have better solution by the seniors.:)

P.S. - I love my f1.8, I am using it most of the time and I can shoot full body portrait of a "glass" with nice bokeh.....I am loving it, so I am now looking for a wide prime with at least f2.

I was thinking if i could use 2.8 to shoot a portrait/street handheld, smaller aperture value gives me relative higher shutter. But i'm worried over shallow DOF.

Normally, I see portraits shooter tend to shoot at F4 to F5.6 instead of the 2.8. 2.8 lens is good to have, but is it good to use?:dunno:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom