That's what I thought. This photo was taken with exactly the same camera as I have (a D80) but with a 50mm. I could never hope to get this DoF with my 18-70. Does going from 2.8 to 1.8 really make that difference.
For £80, I'm going to get one!
Yes, you won't regret it, that's 4 stops of difference,right? It is also supposed to be faster at focusing
Does anyone have any example of, or know of where I can find examples of, the Nikkor 50mm f1.8 D AF?
I doubt you have an 18-70 with an initial aperture of 2.8, Nikon's 18-70 has an initial aperture of around 5 at that focal length and 2.8 gives you a significantly shallower dof.Would a 50mm prime at 2.8 give a shallower DoF than an 18-70mm set at 50mm at 2.8?
Thats 1.33... stops of difference.
Would a 50mm prime at 2.8 give a shallower DoF than an 18-70mm set at 50mm at 2.8?
If so, why??
The DOF is determined by the subject distance (that is, the distance to the plane that is perfectly in focus), the lens focal length, and the lens f-number (relative aperture). Except at close-up distances, DOF is approximately determined by the subject magnification and the lens f-number. For a given f-number, increasing the magnification, either by moving closer to the subject or using a lens of greater focal length, decreases the DOF; decreasing magnification increases DOF. For a given subject magnification, increasing the f-number (decreasing the aperture diameter) increases the DOF; decreasing f-number decreases DOF.
From Wikipedia:
Thanks for posting copy from Wikipedia that doesn't answer the question asked.
That's what I thought. This photo was taken with exactly the same camera as I have (a D80) but with a 50mm. I could never hope to get this DoF with my 18-70. Does going from 2.8 to 1.8 really make that difference.
For £80, I'm going to get one!
Thanks for posting copy from Wikipedia that doesn't answer the question asked.
Thanks for posting copy from Wikipedia that doesn't answer the question asked.
Depth of field only depends on aperture, focal length, and the distance between you and the subject...... as stated in compuwar's post.
I thought that, too. But this past summer, I was having a discussion with a photographer named Vincent Versace. He said there are only two ways to control depth of field: aperture and distance. He explained that focal lengths do not alter the depth of field, they merely shrink it and push it further into the background