This photo is taken with the glass version of the all purpose lens Nikon includes when bought as a kit. The plastic version gets high marks for performance and the glass version one stop faster but there is little benefit in 1 stop faster than a very fast lens to begin with, shots are rarely taken that open, but still it expands the range incrementally. This is as close as I can come to the subject. You see the ball on the left slightly ahead of the wall that is the depth of focus at this low an f-stop and the ball immediately behind it also out of focus so that wall where things are in focus is not very thick.
More light would enable the aperture to be smaller and the wall of focus to expand, be deeper, depth of field, DOF, but that's a bleh of a term so I'm changing it to wall of focus, WOF .
More distance between subject and lens wold make the WOF thicker too, if that is desired.
But I'm trying to get in close.
So I change lens to the 60mm and that can get right in there.
And this thing is awesome-opossum. It is a brilliant stack of lenses. I must say it is impressive. I lerv it so. And the lens in front is so teeny-tiny, like a backward microscope, but that is not what is doing the magic, it is the stack inside that's doing that.
But it does have one drawback regarding that same WOF thing, its wall is even thinner, thin as paper in some circumstances, and that really does restrict things sometimes because you simply cannot get enough light to make the fieldxxxx I mean the wall of focus thicker. Say, if you are photographing an insect, you must decided not on the insect's face or its body, but rather decide on the front of the insect's face or the middle of its face or the back of it's face.
10 comments:
I absolutely love my Micro-Nikkor 60mm macro lens but as I've sold my D-90, I no longer have a use for it. If anyone's interested, drop me a line. It's in pristine condition.
If its Tuesday, it's Face the Food.
I found 90mm (long lens) was best for faces, back in the day.
It makes noses normal sized.
Any food with a face would probably work the same.
Someone took a bite.
I've been giving thought, lately, to teaching myself how to paint landscapes.
The urge should pass in about two weeks, same as all the others.
If you fling your dinner napkin at a rhetorician instead of a cast iron pot, it's metaphor. But if you fling the matching cloth pot-holder, it's metonymy. That's simple enough.
But if you gaze at the distant blue hills, is the bluing of the hills in the watercolor of what you see, a metaphor for distance, or metonymy? What perspectival trope alters the hikers far below into bug-sized dots? ...
John Hollander, ``Confound a Rhetorician'' in ``The Poetry of Everyday Life'' Raritan I:2 Fall 1981 p.16
What were you focused on, Chip? The little red spot there?
rh:
"Any food with a face would probably work the same."
Good one.
Mitchell, I looked at Chip's pic and regretted I didn't have photography skillz. Then I got over it :)
I'm in the market for a new camera. So confused. So many kinds. I do know that I really want one with a view finder as relying on those LCD screens in outdoor shots when the sun is glaring and I'm using the telephoto function is next to impossible.
My needs are for something to do both long distance wildlife and scenery types of shots as well as close ups of food, craft projects, jewelry that I am listing on Ebay.
Any suggestions? Under $500....I'm cheap and not a professional photographer....just for fun and family photos.
BTW: Chip's explanation of F stops, WOF (I like that) and lens aperture was way better than any given in most books or classrooms.
Cody Jarrett, sorry for lateness, I'm focused on the front surface of the ball. And the wall of focus is so thin it cannot even take in the back of the ball.
Post a Comment