GilesGuthrie
Staff Emeritus
- 11,038
- Edinburgh, UK
- CMDRTheDarkLord
It is true that lenses sharpen up a couple of stops below their maximum aperture, but I think that this is often because the depth of field increases, and becomes more "forgiving" of slight misfocus. It can be impossible to get a really sharp shot at < F/2.8 because of the crazy-thin depth of field.
Also, bear in mind that for a constant F/ number, DOF decreases with focal length, so a 200mm lens at F/2.8 will have the same DOF as a 400mm lens at F/5.6.
Most dSLRs can adjust for either 1/2 (basic) or 1/3 stop (more advanced). From memory, the stops go: 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 13, 16, 22. Once you get beyond F/16, you start to get diffraction within the lens body, which tends to leave the image less sharp. What you should do in this instance is "focus stacking", where you take multiple shots with different focal points, and rebuild in post.
Sharpness is the enemy of good photography. Everyone gets so uptight about how sharp their images are that they often present their sharpest work as their best, forgetting to make a nice shot. Plus of course, in some instances, razor-sharp images can be quite unflattering.
Also, bear in mind that for a constant F/ number, DOF decreases with focal length, so a 200mm lens at F/2.8 will have the same DOF as a 400mm lens at F/5.6.
Most dSLRs can adjust for either 1/2 (basic) or 1/3 stop (more advanced). From memory, the stops go: 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 13, 16, 22. Once you get beyond F/16, you start to get diffraction within the lens body, which tends to leave the image less sharp. What you should do in this instance is "focus stacking", where you take multiple shots with different focal points, and rebuild in post.
Sharpness is the enemy of good photography. Everyone gets so uptight about how sharp their images are that they often present their sharpest work as their best, forgetting to make a nice shot. Plus of course, in some instances, razor-sharp images can be quite unflattering.