Jump to content

nzl

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

nzl's Achievements

  1. Thanks, this is exactly what I was hoping someone would have done and done far more comprehensively than I could ever have imagined doing myself. Extremely versatile website and after doing some various testing it shows that for a 'locked frame' as they call it, where the size of the subject remains constant, the 56mm has a shallower depth of field than the 90mm. As many others have noted the difference in perspective between photos from the two lenses is more pronounced in the simulations that the difference in depth of field but good to know that you don't need the longer focal length to get the shallow depth of field. As much as I want the reported sharpness and quick focusing of the 90mm I think the first one I will buy will be the 56mm given the increased flexibility of the faster aperture and increased versatility from the smaller size. I suspect the 90mm won't be far behind though..... Thanks again for all of your comments.
  2. Yeah, I have used this before and found it interesting but the way these photos are taken the photos are taken from the same position and the subject obviously stays static as well so as you move from lens to lens you get different content in the photos because the field of view changes. I was hoping there might be something online like this tool, or even some simple calculations, where the subject (say the crown) fills the same amount of the photo for each lens.
  3. I have thought of this myself but it is reasonably difficult in New Zealand to find shops that regularly have both of these lenses in stock and even if they do i then need to find someone or something to stand still and be photographed several times. It also relies on me to be able to frame accurately from one photo to the next which is dubious.
  4. I have looked everywhere I can think of to see if there is a depth of field comparison between the XF 56 and the XF 90 for taking a similarly framed photo - i.e. a head and shoulders photo or full length photo where the subject takes the same amount of space in the final photo. For this to occur obviously the distance from the camera to the subject would need to change given the different focal lengths of the lenses and I don't know how much impact this would have. I can imagine the XF 56mm may have the shallower depth of field because of the faster aperture and closer focus distance but then again the XF 90mm may have the shallower depth of field because of the longer focal length of the lens, even though it has a slightly slower maximum aperture and further distance from the subject. I don't know if there are formulae for these calculations, I have only seen formulae where the subject and the camera are the same distance apart and I don't know how much impact the narrower field of view of the longer lens would cause you to move back. It may be possible that for close up photos one lens has shallower depth of field and it swaps around as you move further away. Obviously depth of field is not everything. The 56mm will be better suited to indoors where there is typically less light and less space and will give a different 'look' compared to the 90mm. I am just not sure which look I prefer between the 56mm and 90mm. Thanks for any tips.
×
×
  • Create New...