Corsa_Quadz
Member
Registered: 24th Feb 08
Location:
User status: Offline
|
Sorry for the utterly noobish question just wondered is the higher the "F" number the larger the apeture on the lens??
Thanks 
|
Butler
Member
Registered: 2nd Jun 05
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
Higher the number the smaller the aperture
|
Corsa_Quadz
Member
Registered: 24th Feb 08
Location:
User status: Offline
|
Cheers mate 
|
xa0s
Banned
Registered: 4th Mar 08
Location: Dartford, Kent Car: Turbo'd Fabia vRS
User status: Offline
|
Bigger = better (in most cases).
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
That's not even close to being accurate, totally and wholly depends on what you are trying to do with the picture.
|
Adam_B
Member
Registered: 13th Dec 00
Location: Lancashire
User status: Offline
|
Thats like saying Ferrari make the best cars. Aperture wether is big or small has its purpose and use, you wouldnt take an F430 off roading.
|
Gaz
Member
Registered: 24th Aug 03
Location: Widnes, Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by xa0s
Bigger = better (in most cases).
what a plank
|
Butler
Member
Registered: 2nd Jun 05
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adam_B
Thats like saying Ferrari make the best cars. Aperture wether is big or small has its purpose and use, you wouldnt take an F430 off roading.
At first I thought you meant f/430
|
Graham88
Member
Registered: 16th Apr 07
Location: South East Kent Drives: E46 M3
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by John
That's not even close to being accurate, totally and wholly depends on what you are trying to do with the picture.
Got to agree...
Low aperture photos are awesome.
|
Gaz
Member
Registered: 24th Aug 03
Location: Widnes, Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Graham88
quote:
Originally posted by John
That's not even close to being accurate, totally and wholly depends on what you are trying to do with the picture.
Got to agree...
Low aperture photos are awesome.
 "low aperture photo" is not a term I have used before, Explain with a image please?
|
AndyKent
Member
Registered: 3rd Sep 05
User status: Offline
|
He means lots of DOF - taken wide open.
|
xa0s
Banned
Registered: 4th Mar 08
Location: Dartford, Kent Car: Turbo'd Fabia vRS
User status: Offline
|
What are you talking about?
The bigger aperture (lower f number) is better (in most cases). That's why a f/2.8 lens will always be more expensive than a f/4.0 lens. When buying a lens, most of the time the majority of people will want the lowest f number...
[Edited on 24-02-2009 by xa0s]
|
xa0s
Banned
Registered: 4th Mar 08
Location: Dartford, Kent Car: Turbo'd Fabia vRS
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gaz
"low aperture photo" is not a term I have used before, Explain with a image please?
With a big (wide would be a better word) aperture only the exact focus depth will be in focus. With a small (narrow) focus you can get a lot more in focus at different distances from the lens. I'm not sure what Graham means by a 'low' aperture but I'm fairly sure he's on about decreasing the f number to the lowest possible (biggest (widest) aperture)) to create a bokeh effect on the background of whatever he's focusing on.
Still, if Graham was picking a lens for normal and/or zoom photography, he'd want a lens with the lowest f number... Which is what my original statement said. Bigger (wider) = better (in most cases). I'm not sure what you're all disagreeing on.
[Edited on 24-02-2009 by xa0s]
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
When buying a lens, all other things being equal you would want it to open as wide as possible yes.
The way I, and everybody else, read what you said was that a bigger appeture is better when taking pictures, which isn't correct.
If you were buying the lens to do landscapes on a tripod you wouldn't need it to open that wide either so it's still incorrect anyway.
|
xa0s
Banned
Registered: 4th Mar 08
Location: Dartford, Kent Car: Turbo'd Fabia vRS
User status: Offline
|
I didn't explain myself properly then.
|
Gaz
Member
Registered: 24th Aug 03
Location: Widnes, Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
So you would use f2.8 for a landscape? Sunrise? Sunset? Crowd of people?
nope!
You would use F8-F16 most probally...
|
xa0s
Banned
Registered: 4th Mar 08
Location: Dartford, Kent Car: Turbo'd Fabia vRS
User status: Offline
|
I presumed he was looking to buy a lens and was confused about the aperture sizes. That's why I said bigger = better... I typed it quickly and didn't think that the comment could be applied to other meanings... I'm fully aware of how aperture works.
|
Scotty_B
Member
Registered: 11th Jun 03
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
Most lenses have sweet spots which are usually around F8-10.
I have a few F2.8 lenses and haven't yet used them at that setting as it's a bit too shallow for group shots and general shooting. However 2.8 lenses have better optics and therefore produce better pics at small apertures aswell.
Make sense? 
|
Graham88
Member
Registered: 16th Apr 07
Location: South East Kent Drives: E46 M3
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gaz
"low aperture photo" is not a term I have used before, Explain with a image please?
|
mattk
Member
Registered: 27th Feb 06
Location: St. Helens
User status: Offline
|
my best use of "low aperture"
[Edited on 25-02-2009 by mattk]
|
R1CH
Member
Registered: 28th Sep 03
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Graham88
quote:
Originally posted by Gaz
"low aperture photo" is not a term I have used before, Explain with a image please?
Graham I took that picture at F13 1/250 iso 800 and 66mm focal length
|
Graham88
Member
Registered: 16th Apr 07
Location: South East Kent Drives: E46 M3
User status: Offline
|
Fail 
|
xa0s
Banned
Registered: 4th Mar 08
Location: Dartford, Kent Car: Turbo'd Fabia vRS
User status: Offline
|
|
