DOF an example with a 70-200

[Okiewan]

You've gotta be a photog to appreciate this at all, the subject isn't and wasn't the goal, rather the DOF capabilities of the awesome Sigma 70-200 EX DG ... This is how I've been learning photography, it really doesn't matter what you shoot, you learn a lot just shooting and then trying to understand the results. When that good capture opportunity comes along, you'll (hopefully) know how to shoot it.

This image was not modified at all other than reduced for the web. No sharpening, no nothing! The 70-200 is an insane lens. Note the tree behind the bench and an almost 3D appearance. For the noobs, this is called a shallow DOF, shot at f/2.8, to give a feel of depth. The tree (where the limb was cut) was the focal point.

http://bvostudio.com/images_misc/dof1.jpg

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Bob - Is that the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX DG macro or the 70-200 f/2.8 EX APO IF HSM ?

Either way it looks great.

 

[Okiewan]

NOT the Macro. APO DG HSM.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

It's funny, not 20 minutes before your post I was on sigma4less looking at all the 70-200 lenses wondering how good they were. You must be psychic.

I really have the hots for the macro version.

 

[Okiewan]

Yup, the Macro is the 3rd version of this lens, mine is the 2nd. Would be nice, but I've got $700 in this one!

FYI, the Sig 70-200 is universally known as one the best buys on the market, most can tell no difference between it and a Canon L that cost twice as much.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Yup, the Macro is the 3rd version of this lens, mine is the 2nd. Would be nice, but I've got $700 in this one!

FYI, the Sig 70-200 is universally known as one the best buys on the market, most can tell no difference between it and a Canon L that cost twice as much.

For years all the die-hard Nikon guys swore by the Nikon 70-200 2.8 as a must have lens. But now the Sigma version seems to get reviews just as good but for $1000 less . One more thing on my wish list. :whoa:

 

[Thump]

That is a KICK ASS shot. That tree right behind the bench almost lifts off the image. Nice job.

 

[Okiewan]

Thanks David. That image is one that I look at and still can't believe I didn't post process it at all. It's so cool when something comes right out of the camera and you just can't get yourself to touch it.

Rich, Nikor like Canon make some bad a$$ glass, but as you mentioned there are some third party lenses that rank up there with best. Have no doubt, the Sigma 70-200 is one of them.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Here's one where a shallower DOF would have really made the picture so much better. This was a grab shot out the passenger window of my truck in traffic. I was using a cheapo Nikkor 70-300 f4-f5.6 lens. I had the camera sitting on the seat pre-set at F8 because it was really bright and didn't have time to change anything.

A fast lens set at f2.8 could have really improved this shot because all the important stuff in the picture is pretty much in the same plane.

When I first looked at this I was pretty annoyed that I missed the "great" shot, but it's one of those pictures I learned something useful from, and eventually grew to like.

Luckily the "Birdman" is out in Lincoln Square now and then so maybe I'll get another crack at grabbing the killer shot.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Another one of the Birdman on a different day, but the same problem. Quick grab shot while driving and the camera set at F8. :whoa:

 

[Okiewan]

There's a character! Cool that you know where to find him. In the second one with a long lens, I'd bet f/4 would be shallow enough to be effective.

 

[photojojo]

I don't think there is anything wrong with the DOf on the first one. The fact that the car is visible and pretty much the only thing in the background really places the photo as an urban shot and in fact makes the photo good. Plus you have the late model car and early model human contrast thing going to.

I agree with f4 being good enough, the farther you are from the subject and the more distance between the subject and the background the more blur there will be...to a point.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Plus you have the late model car and early model human contrast thing going to.

LOL, I never thought of it that way. :)

My 70-300mm lens is the cheaper Nikkor version and it tends to work best between f8.0 to f11 so I tend to leave it set to f8.0 when I'm just driving around and pointing it at interesting stuff along the way. What I should do is just pony up the cash for a good long zoom. ;)

 

[Okiewan]

Rich ... speak of the devil, check this guy's signature :p
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/437576

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Rich ... speak of the devil, check this guy's signature :p
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/437576

You are NOT helping. :bang:

 

[Chili]

To be considered, for whatever reason the Nikon version of this lens does not seem to be as coveted as the Canon version. It is also available for cheaper than the Canon version and for much cheaper used which makes me ask why?

I also may just be bitter but if you notice in the shots Dave posted of me at Millville (think I won't retaliate Dave? :laugh: ) that I had a white 70-200 lens on my camera, that's because my Sigma is dead :bang: and I had to replace it on short notice to be able to shoot Millville. Don't know what went wrong with it yet as I didn't have time to arrange to get it sent in for service prior to leaving for Millville. Hopefully the customer service will make me as happy as I was with the lens up until a week ago!

 

[photojojo]

I have had three sigma lenses in the past...they all quit working for one reason or another. In the past 7 years I have only had to send a Canon lens in once, and that's because I dropped it while climbing up a round bale.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

So far I've been really happy with the two Sigma lenses (wide angle & macro) that I bought, but I don't think mine have a fraction of the miles you guys have on them. ;)

 

[Chili]

Talked to Sigma Customer Service today and it sounds like they will make good on the repair. The tech says based on what I'm telling him that the stepping motor has failed. He also mentioned this is a very common failure on the Sigma HSM lenses.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Back to the subject of DOF, BH Photo posted this interesting article on how DOF at the same f-stop can change with different sensor sizes and lenses.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...photo_voodooDOFapr06.jsp&O=2006newsletter.jsp

 

[Tony Eeds]

Rich, et al:

The September 2006 edition of PCPhoto has an article entitled Clean Up The Background by Rick Sammon that explains how to use layers to tweek the backgound of a photo.

In their example they isolate the subject for a slightly different reason, but I don't see why it wouldn't work for you.

I agree with Chris' assessment of the photo, but felt like the birdman was somewhat lost in the photo because of the excellent DOF. For example, the flying rat on his head didn't even click for me until I had looked at the photo for quite a while. Don't know why, but it didn't.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Tony - I read that article with great interest. I have a bunch of shots that could really be improved if I can master that layer technique.