Focal Length vs Minimum Focusing Distance


Aug 4, 2010
279
0
0
Singapore
#1
Hi, just want to clarify something.

Does minimum focusing distance(MFD) necessarily increase with higher focal lengths? (i.e. is there a relationship between the focal length and MFD?) I was of the impression that lens with further focal lengths require more MFD, but am not fully certain.

Can someone enlighten me on this subject?

Thanks in advance!
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#2
Hi, just want to clarify something.

Does minimum focusing distance(MFD) necessarily increase with higher focal lengths? (i.e. is there a relationship between the focal length and MFD?) I was of the impression that lens with further focal lengths require more MFD, but am not fully certain.

Can someone enlighten me on this subject?

Thanks in advance!
excluding the macro lenses, generally I would tend to agree with you. But I think many people here can find exceptions, so it's a moot point really.

* my 35, 50, 85 primes have progressively increasing MFDs, if that means anything to you.
 

Jun 22, 2010
850
3
0
Singapore
#3
Hi, just want to clarify something.

Does minimum focusing distance(MFD) necessarily increase with higher focal lengths? (i.e. is there a relationship between the focal length and MFD?) I was of the impression that lens with further focal lengths require more MFD, but am not fully certain.

Can someone enlighten me on this subject?

Thanks in advance!
If you compare a 50mm F/2.8 macro vs a 50mm F/1.8, the MFD is different.

50mm F/2.8 macro - 20 cm
50mm F/1.8 - 34 cm
 

Aug 4, 2010
279
0
0
Singapore
#4
excluding the macro lenses, generally I would tend to agree with you. But I think many people here can find exceptions, so it's a moot point really.

* my 35, 50, 85 primes have progressively increasing MFDs, if that means anything to you.
Yes, that was what I noticed too in general (excluding macro lens), but was not sure whether it's true.

If you compare a 50mm F/2.8 macro vs a 50mm F/1.8, the MFD is different.

50mm F/2.8 macro - 20 cm
50mm F/1.8 - 34 cm
Yes stardust, that what I expected for macro lens too.

I guess my question(more specifically) is if we keep all other variables constant (max aperture, manufacturer, etc), whether MFD will increase with higher focal lengths, e.g. 85f1.4 vs 50f1.4 vs 24f1.4.

I don't think it will really affect the way I shoot, its more a question out of curiosity.
 

henry soh

New Member
Aug 29, 2008
851
0
0
#5
Hi, The wider the lens, say 10mm, the MFD should be as near to subject as possible for better effect of image and DOF.
 

ovaltinemilo

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2009
2,819
0
0
Sin jia Po lah
#6
Hi, just want to clarify something.

Does minimum focusing distance(MFD) necessarily increase with higher focal lengths? (i.e. is there a relationship between the focal length and MFD?) I was of the impression that lens with further focal lengths require more MFD, but am not fully certain.

Can someone enlighten me on this subject?

Thanks in advance!
My old Nikkor 200mmf4 can focus at a mfd of 2metre. While a Nikkor 200mmf4 Micro can focus close to ~0.7m. Both are same focal length. It depends on the design.
 

Last edited:

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#7
Hi, The wider the lens, say 10mm, the MFD should be as near to subject as possible for better effect of image and DOF.
i don't understand what you're trying to say.

MFD is a fixed property of a particular lens.

"better effect of image and dof" ??? :dunno:
 

Top Bottom