Shallow depth of field and glasses

scottduffy

scottduffy

Messages
3,347
Name
Scott
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys,

I'm taking a series of portraits using a 24mm lens at around f3-f5.6 using a full frame camera and I was wondering if there's anything I can do to focus through the glasses and keep the eyes sharp. I don't mind anything else being out of focus but I want the eyes sharp. I could remove the glasses but really don't want to.

Any help appreciated.
 
•


AF systems are not affected by glass… unless dirty!

Another point is your choice of lens. A 24mm (a wide angle)
has a much greater DoF then longer lenses.

Using the AF-AE L is you key to success as you will possibly
reframe after metering.
 
I shoot almost everything at 1.2, 1.4....

Getting eyes in focus is not an issue even with glasses, just aim for it with spot focus.

3.5-5.6 is like ocean deep, the entire head is in focus, especially at 24mm.
 
Last edited:
Cool thanks. I have shot two images at 3.2 and the eyes are tack sharp but the nose is out of focus which is totally fine. I haven't tried the glasses yet I just thought it might be an issue. Thanks again.
 
I've had a problem just once - the camera's AF decided to focus on the reflection in the glasses rather than on the eye behind. Luckily, the mistake was very obvious so I didn't take the shot and it was semi posed so could ask the sitter to shift their gaze so I got the shot.
 
A 24mm Lens for portraits?
That's a bit against conventional thinking isn't it?
How do you manage the distortion?
 
I'm doing a series based on Lee Jeffries and that's the way he shot his images. I'll post some when I can. Not till June though.
 
Brian G said:
A 24mm Lens for portraits?
That's a bit against conventional thinking isn't it?
How do you manage the distortion?
Click to expand...

Distortion will come from the quality of construction of the lens, and from the distance to the subject. Not the focal length per se.

Re. glasses, yeah, same as anything, just focus on what you want to be in focus, i.e. their eye.
 
Jayst84 said:
Distortion will come from the quality of construction of the lens, and from the distance to the subject. Not the focal length per se.
Click to expand...
Not lens distortion but the exaggerated perspective that occurs when you shoot too close to the subject, causing (for example) noses to look larger than they really are - most unflattering.

Most recommendations for portraiture are for lenses slightly longer than standard focal length, usually in the range of 85-100mm.
24mm is certainly NOT a recommended focal length for portraiture.
 
Brian G said:
Not lens distortion but the exaggerated perspective that occurs when you shoot too close to the subject, causing (for example) noses to look larger than they really are - most unflattering.

Most recommendations for portraiture are for lenses slightly longer than standard focal length, usually in the range of 85-100mm.
24mm is certainly NOT a recommended focal length for portraiture.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't life be boring though if we adhered to that as a 'rule'.
As a people shooter, I couldn't live without my 135 f2, but I'd also be lost without my 35mm.

Commercial portraiture might depend on flattery. But it's not the whole story.

I believe the OP is after copying a signature style, and he's picked the right lens for the job.
 
Brian G said:
Not lens distortion but the exaggerated perspective that occurs when you shoot too close to the subject, causing (for example) noses to look larger than they really are - most unflattering.

Most recommendations for portraiture are for lenses slightly longer than standard focal length, usually in the range of 85-100mm.
24mm is certainly NOT a recommended focal length for portraiture.
Click to expand...

Well, you know what they say about rules.
 
Phil V said:
Wouldn't life be boring though if we adhered to that as a 'rule'.
As a people shooter, I couldn't live without my 135 f2, but I'd also be lost without my 35mm.

Commercial portraiture might depend on flattery. But it's not the whole story.

I believe the OP is after copying a signature style, and he's picked the right lens for the job.
Click to expand...

Depends on what was the aim of the photographer. If exaggerated perspective was the aim then 24mm is fun. But for normal portraits 24mm is an odd lens.
 
Pixelator said:
Depends on what was the aim of the photographer. If exaggerated perspective was the aim then 24mm is fun. But for normal portraits 24mm is an odd lens.
Click to expand...

Again. The OP is aiming for a very specific look.

But what's wrong with 'fun', 'quirky', 'unusual', 'odd'?

Surely it's better than everything being shot at the same FL and looking the same?
 
Brian G said:
Not lens distortion but the exaggerated perspective that occurs when you shoot too close to the subject, causing (for example) noses to look larger than they really are - most unflattering.

Most recommendations for portraiture are for lenses slightly longer than standard focal length, usually in the range of 85-100mm.
24mm is certainly NOT a recommended focal length for portraiture.
Click to expand...
Yes, as I said, "from the distance to the subject".

Use a 24mm to take a portrait of someone stood across the room from you, and see if you get any exaggerated perspective.
 
Phil V said:
Again. The OP is aiming for a very specific look.

But what's wrong with 'fun', 'quirky', 'unusual', 'odd'?

Surely it's better than everything being shot at the same FL and looking the same?
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree there is lots of fun in experimenting!
 
If you look at Lee Jeffries stuff (here on flickr) you can see his style is definitely his own. Wide angle lens, close up, giving that "less flattering" look.
It's interesting, quite personal because of how close he gets. Not conventional for portraits, but nothing wrong with that.

@scottduffy are you trying for something like this one from Lee Jeffries:

Untitled by LJ., on Flickr

His depth of field here isn't that shallow. The glasses are in focus, but the tip of the nose and the ears are out of focus.

Remember that the closer you get to a subject, the shallower the depth of field, even at something like f4.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top