19

It's widely believed that a lens with a faster aperture will perform better stopped down compared to a slower lens wide open. Whilst this is often the case it's not a hard and fast rule. With DSLRs the lens is wide open until you take the shot (at which point the iris quickly closes). Having a faster lens therefore means you get a brighter viewfinder image. ...


18

Many many reasons exist to buy lenses slower than f/2.8. Price Size Specialty lenses No need for a wide aperture Versatility Compromise over above factors As you suggested not all types of photography require wide apertures. Landscape photographers oogle over the Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L II Tilt-Shift Lens for example. It is f/3.5, costs around $2,000USD, ...


16

When used at the same aperture and focal length, a faster lens will have less vignetting than a slower lens. For example if you choose to shoot at 35mm f/4.0, then a 24-70mm f/4.0 lens will have the most vignetting, a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens will have less, and a 35mm f/1.4 prime will have the least vignetting. The reason this happens is because of tradeoffs in ...


14

Those are almost certainly reflections from the UV filter. I recommend taking it off. This is a topic of much debate, but the fact is filters do cause artifacts visible in your photos — you've got the evidence right there. You can get better results from a more expensive filter, but then it'll cost almost as much as your lens. Lenses aren't as fragile as ...


12

A faster lens (= low F-stop) allows easier manual focus and better auto-focus, given the camera has AF sensors which can exploit faster lenses. For landscape however, there is usually enough time that there is not much to gain from this. Faster lenses often surpass slower lenses when stopped down to the same F-Stop (eg. f/8). The reason is not that a faster ...


11

This is called axial chromatic aberration (or longitudal chromatic aberration) and it's fairly common with large aperture lenses. It appears as a purple halo around objects that are closer than the plane of focus and as a greenish one around objects that are further, regardless of where they're located in the frame. It often shows up around highlights, ...


10

Canon's 70-200 f/4 L lens is a perfect example of a lens slower than f/2.8 that has a niche even when an f/2.8 equivalent is available. Comparing the f/4 lens(s) to their corresponding f/2.8 cousins, the f/4 lenses are around half the weight (not to mention half the cost), which makes a real difference to some people if they're carrying the lens around all ...


8

When I was doing online photography course, the photographer who wrote it was specialised in food photography. At some point he admitted moving from lens with f2.8 to f4 explaining it by the change of his style of shooting. Before he liked food having very shallow DOF, and now he wanted to show more details. I am shooting food for stock and almost never use ...


8

However, someone has told me that if in both lenses I will use f/1.8 aperture, still the latter lens will have more light. It sounds illogical because it's wrong. At f/1.8, both lenses will let in (approximately) the same amount of light. I say "approximately" because the f number is derived only from the ratio of the focal length to the size of the ...


7

Some have told me the f/2.8 lens requires more glass to achieve f/2.8 and therefore it lets in more light and can shoot at a faster shutter speed at the same aperture - but I really don't think that makes sense. Basically incorrect. The entrance pupil for 300mm at f/8 will be 37.5mm in diameter, regardless of the diameter of the lens' front element. So you ...


7

The UV filter likely explains this. As I've explained in this answer, any filter will degrade image quality, but some do so more than others. Tiffen filters do not have anti-reflective coatings and are thus prone to flare. You should either remove the filter or use a high-quality one from a brand like B+W or Hoya.


7

Consider low light conditions. If you can use a low F-stop, you can use a lower ISO. You'll then have less noise and higher dynamic range. Even with a tripod, you'll have more options if you only need an exposure time of, say, 0.3 seconds instead of 2 seconds. In very windy conditions the tripod may shake, but even in alight breeze tree branches may move a ...


6

There is more than just lens quality, depth of field control and low light shooting ability to consider. For some applications size and weight are important or perhaps a convenient zoom range in one package. As @Itai said "buy what you need". My kit consists of several fast primes but I also have a 24-120 f4 zoom. I have that lens because I wanted ...


6

Lens design is always a matter of choosing the right balance between a number of factors. Maximum aperture is one, of course, but others are size, weight, distortion, micro-contrast, evenness of field, zoom range, curvature of focal plane, chromatic aberration, spherical aberration, and more — including, of course, price. Pushing a lens to a fast aperture ...


6

Your two requirements are orthogonally opposed to one another. To get more detail and resolution requires more sensor pixels (assuming the lens is not more limited than the sensor). More sensor pixels require more processing, which increases the time needed to process each frame. This reduces the maximum number of images that can be taken in a specified ...


5

With the parents permission, you are going to get the best results by putting a remotely triggered flash unit on her balcony. Then you expose for the ambient and adjust flash power to light her properly -- at dusk this could be a really cool shot. This is much cheaper than a 300mm f/2.8 and will greatly expand your capabilities as a photographer. Pick up a ...


5

Some times we have a f2.8 or two already and don't need all lenses f2.8. Because of weight. size and cost. I'm using a 5Dmk3 and currently use a 40mm f2.8, 100 f2.8L and 70-300L so I really don't need a 24-70 f2.8L unless I was a full time Professional and I'm not. Only studying less then 3 years Photography full time. Yes f2.8 and faster lenses are easier ...


5

I only have odd numbered 5Ds, but the pixel pitch is very similar between the 5DmkII and 5D mkIII so the results ought to hold up. Here's the same scene shot using a tripod under the same lighting, 1/8s exposure ISO 100, f/1.2 (using the Canon 85L). RAW, converted with ACR with the same settings (everything on zero with a linear tonecurve). I shot pairs of ...


5

The big difference between the two lenses will not be when the picture is taken. At that point both lenses will allow the same amount of light through within the limits of the accuracy of their aperture settings and transmission ratios. The big difference will be when the lenses are focused prior to stopping down. The wider aperture lens will allow more ...


5

A prime lens has a much simpler design, so for the same price, and weight, you can get larger lens elements and therefore a higher aperture. However, there are some other factors to what you're asking. In the case of a 18-55 zoom lens, the lens has to have a retrofocal design, because at the wide end you are going down to much smaller effective focal ...


5

I don’t have a dedicated camera. Just using an iPad, not good enough though. Distant shots are grainy, and fast-paced mages get blurred. You have arrived at what you think is a solution to your problem (high pixel count, long distance shooting) and have asked about that. Instead, I'd encourage you to take your solution, shelve it, and instead ask the meta-...


5

Your camera has a 1.6x crop factor. On APS-C, 50mm gives you the field of view of a classic portrait lens on full frame (80mm). While 35mm will give you the FOV of a "normal" lens (56mm). If you want the lens mainly for portraits, go for the 50/1.4. If you're on a budget, consider 50/1.8. If you want the lens for general photography, get the 35/2. You might ...


4

Faster lenses give you almost always better image quality than slower lenses at the same f-stop. This is true for vignetting, resolution and contrast, distortion and color. A faster lens also gives you a brighter look through your viewfinder or less noise on your live view display. Anyone who has tried to focus on a star at night knows how annoying a noisy ...


4

Depends what sort of AP you're talking about. And whether you're using a standard photo tripod or a proper astronomical tracking mount. For a standard tripod, you're limited in exposure by star trailing; as the earth rotates, the stars appear to move across the sky. Unless you're intentionally after star trails, with a fixed tripod the length of time you ...


4

If you are shooting ice hockey the exposure is probably biased by the white ice. Before you spend any money try to use the camera's exposure compensation to make the pictures lighter. The Wikipedia article starts with an example which is pretty close to your problem (shooting snowy mountains). Here are some more explanations on exposure compensation.


3

Lifting the relevant section from another answer of mine: Basically, the larger the aperture is, the larger the angle of light rays on the outside of the lens has to change: Look at the image and imagine that D increases while f stays the same - it should be clear that the light rays then need to "bend" more. And making optics that refract light rays at ...


3

I'm reminded of one of Feynmann's anecdotes about one of his first engineering jobs. He was told to pick gear tooth count from the middle of the catalog in the desired diameter. On either end they are pushing limits; if they could do that last one perfectly, they'd offer another one after that! The extremes are less than optimum. I think it's the same ...


3

Mr.Grum offered some very good reasons why faster lenses exist - because of fast and reliable focusing, and of easier framing and following due to brighter viewfinder. To add a little to what he said, focusing with teleconverters is much better too when the lens is fast. Apart from focusing, optics in slower lenses often is not designed to be used with a TC,...


3

For Canon EF mount you have pretty much only one option, the EF 50mm f/1.0L, which went out of production in 2000. For the e-mount you could adapt a huge number of lenses, good choices would be Mitakon Speedmaster 50mm f/0.95 (native E-mount) SLR Magic 50mm f/0.95 Hyperprime Lens (native E-mount) SLR Magic 35mm f/0.95 Hyperprime Lens (native E-mount) ...


3

I will probably not answer the question, but I hope to narrow your search first. Provide high-resolution High resolution is a relative term. There can be a "High megapixel" count blurry photo and you can have a sharper "Not that high megapixel count" one. I would say that 24 Mpx image is good enough for almost any usage. Billboards, magazines, posters. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible