- Messages
- 16,696
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Just on that DOF issue. A lot of portraits and I suppose pictures in general seem to have less DoF than I'd be happy with. For example portraits of people where it's clearly visible even in a relatively small picture posted here that one eye is clearly out of focus on my lap top screen. This is obviously a personal preference thing but a lot of the time I'd be looking to get the head in the DOF but some people seem to think that they have to use an f1.4 lens at f1.4 all the time and if they feel like that then good luck to them but there are times when even with a half body shot with FF I'd want to be stepping down past f5.6 to get enough DoF and at f5.6 to f8 you can get that DoF from a MFT zoom never mind a prime.
MFT DoF is IMO a non issue a lot of the time.
But that's just me
I agree, but then no matter the format I have never got this fascination with extreme shallow DOF. For me the wider aperture lenses offer better low light capability, I rarely even think about the 'bokeh' or shallow DOF when opting for a 1.4 lens, because I know I can achieve it with any lens. My cheap adapted 55-250mm has better 'bokeh' at 5.6 - f8 than some bright primes I've owned
Last edited: