12-06-2011, 03:18 PM
[quote name='Frank' timestamp='1323171399' post='13479']
Hi Wim and Serkan:
Thank you very much for your very detailed interpretation. I understand that for any f-value greater than 11 the diffration becomes serious, but I find that for landscape in many cases f8 (at around 20mm）does not give enough DoF, f11 maybe marginally, so I often stop down to f16 or f13 at least, in occasional cases I stop down to f22. I also read that many (or just some?) professional landscape photographers shoot landscape with f16, f18, f20, and sometimes even f22 (35mm camera). From an aricle I read that something like "beyond f11 the diffration will cause the sharpness of objects in the focus plane to decrease due to diffraction, but the overall sharpness of the image will increase due to the increase in the DoF， untill the diffraction limit of f22 is reached". Did I misunderstand something?
Perhaps I need more tests to see the effect of f11, 13, 16 and beyond. But for the following scenery my past experince tells me that f8 will not give enough DoF (I focused on the foreground stone then the background trees and mountains would be blurry), f11 or 13 maybe marginally OK, to ensure a large enough DoF I stoped down to f16 (Nikon 16-35mm f4 lens at 22mm):
![[Image: gallery_0_87_164831.jpg]](http://forum.photozone.de/uploads/gallery/album_87/gallery_0_87_164831.jpg)
[/quote]
Frank, are you serious? For the D700 the DOF at 3m stretches from 1.08m to infinity with a 20mm lens at F8 <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' />
At F11, your DOF goes from 0.9m to infinity!! What kind of landscapes are you shooting if your DOF is not long enough?
I have done some research on my own shots with a 35mm f2 and the different landscape shots I have done; at F8 my hyperfocal distance is at 5.14m, so if I want to have absolutely the whole picture in the DOF, I just focus at 5.14 m and the picture is sharp from 2.7 m until infinity!!!
Maybe you should look at the way you focus, if you have a problem with a 20mm lens at F8!In your picture, if you focus on the third stone, your whole picture from the second stone to infinity will be sharp and the the first stone will be almost sharp.
Now, with respect to which lens to choose; I am going for the Nikkor 20mm, just for that reason. Resolution becomes a no brainer in landscapes and architechture with that wide a lens. Just stop down and you are fine. I have looked at pictures shot with the Nikkor 20 f2.8 and as of about 5.6 it is glorious, both in colour and resolution. Are there better lenses theorethichally - yes for sure if you wnt to shoot at 1.4 and 2 and even 2.8, but who does? It is hard to beat 500€, 240g and Nikon quality, plus AF and you can use a polariser that costs 50€ instead of 150€! (Hoya Pro slim) On a 14-24 goodbye to filters and hello flare! The Zeiss is very nice, but look at pics of both and tell me you can see the difference if you stop down and focus correctly! For the money for the Zeiss, I buy a 20mm Nikon and a 24-120f4 Nikon!
Hi Wim and Serkan:
Thank you very much for your very detailed interpretation. I understand that for any f-value greater than 11 the diffration becomes serious, but I find that for landscape in many cases f8 (at around 20mm）does not give enough DoF, f11 maybe marginally, so I often stop down to f16 or f13 at least, in occasional cases I stop down to f22. I also read that many (or just some?) professional landscape photographers shoot landscape with f16, f18, f20, and sometimes even f22 (35mm camera). From an aricle I read that something like "beyond f11 the diffration will cause the sharpness of objects in the focus plane to decrease due to diffraction, but the overall sharpness of the image will increase due to the increase in the DoF， untill the diffraction limit of f22 is reached". Did I misunderstand something?
Perhaps I need more tests to see the effect of f11, 13, 16 and beyond. But for the following scenery my past experince tells me that f8 will not give enough DoF (I focused on the foreground stone then the background trees and mountains would be blurry), f11 or 13 maybe marginally OK, to ensure a large enough DoF I stoped down to f16 (Nikon 16-35mm f4 lens at 22mm):
[/quote]
Frank, are you serious? For the D700 the DOF at 3m stretches from 1.08m to infinity with a 20mm lens at F8 <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' />
At F11, your DOF goes from 0.9m to infinity!! What kind of landscapes are you shooting if your DOF is not long enough?
I have done some research on my own shots with a 35mm f2 and the different landscape shots I have done; at F8 my hyperfocal distance is at 5.14m, so if I want to have absolutely the whole picture in the DOF, I just focus at 5.14 m and the picture is sharp from 2.7 m until infinity!!!
Maybe you should look at the way you focus, if you have a problem with a 20mm lens at F8!In your picture, if you focus on the third stone, your whole picture from the second stone to infinity will be sharp and the the first stone will be almost sharp.
Now, with respect to which lens to choose; I am going for the Nikkor 20mm, just for that reason. Resolution becomes a no brainer in landscapes and architechture with that wide a lens. Just stop down and you are fine. I have looked at pictures shot with the Nikkor 20 f2.8 and as of about 5.6 it is glorious, both in colour and resolution. Are there better lenses theorethichally - yes for sure if you wnt to shoot at 1.4 and 2 and even 2.8, but who does? It is hard to beat 500€, 240g and Nikon quality, plus AF and you can use a polariser that costs 50€ instead of 150€! (Hoya Pro slim) On a 14-24 goodbye to filters and hello flare! The Zeiss is very nice, but look at pics of both and tell me you can see the difference if you stop down and focus correctly! For the money for the Zeiss, I buy a 20mm Nikon and a 24-120f4 Nikon!