Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Frank Filippone wrote: >If you use 2 different lenses, say a 50MM and a 100 MM .....which gives >more wide depth of field? > >The subject area that is in the VF is the same using either lens, implying >that the camera will move closer to the subject with the 50 than the >100.... >The taking aperture is the same. >The only difference is the distance to the subject ( the 50MM is closer >)..... Please quote DOF distances in MM or inches....Please do not get >into the circle of confusion, etc. Hold all those variables constant... > >The purpose in this question is to figure out if a wider angle lens has the >same or wider DOF: if it does, then the closer proximity to the subject ( >Half the distance) using the wider lens will alow a 2 stop smaller F-stop >using a flash, therefore increasing DOF even more....a big bonus to tne >macro types.... > >Thanks for helping.... I am trying to figure out which R series Macro lens >I should explore... DOF is the same at the same aperture and the same magnification. If you are copying larger flat items on a copy stand, the 60 would be better as you would not need to get such a looong column for your copy stand. For most other stuff a 100mm lens would be better. It lets you let light onto the front of your subject, and, very importantly, lets you chose your background better as the angle of view is narrower. As an example, the lotus blossom on my web site was shot with a 200 macro; it was found as shown in nature and the image is untouched by digital fingers, other than the necessary procedures to get it onto the web; if I had had to shoot it with a 60 macro, I would have had a jumbled, distracting background (and I would have gotten quite wet). * Henning J. Wulff /|\ Wulff Photography & Design /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com