I did it...Pics added...add some of yours...The Nifty Fifty thread.

[wenrob]

Can Sony join too?
F1.7, 1/20. ISO1600:

Love this one! Your kitty is giving you the same look my kids give me. An "Again with the camera?" kind of look, lol.

I don't have a nifty fifty, I'm contemplating the new 35mm 1.8 coming out. Any great tips you guys can give? With such a narrow depth of field and most likely having to open it all the way up for things such as a dark ride how do you decide where to try and focus? I hope that doesn't sound stupid, it's something that I've been intrigued by.

 

[boBQuincy]

Snoopy in Cary Players "You're a Good Man Charlie Brown"

Wally

 

[annnewjerz]

Love this one! Your kitty is giving you the same look my kids give me. An "Again with the camera?" kind of look, lol.

I don't have a nifty fifty, I'm contemplating the new 35mm 1.8 coming out. Any great tips you guys can give? With such a narrow depth of field and most likely having to open it all the way up for things such as a dark ride how do you decide where to try and focus? I hope that doesn't sound stupid, it's something that I've been intrigued by.

I obviously haven't been to WDW yet with my dslr, but from what I understand...such a shallow DOF doesn't really matter on the darker rides as much as it would if you were taking pictures of your child up close (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong). I took my 50 out at Christmas and took the picture below at 1.8 handheld. Ignoring the fact that it's a crappy photo, I focused on the woman in the center that was singing and was quite pleased that the people to the left and right of her came out reasonably in focus. In my experience, I've found that the further away the subject, the easier it is to shoot wide open.

 

[BorisMD]

Here's a quick shot I took tonight with the Canon 50mm f/1.8.

ISO 100
Shutter 0.3
f/1.8
Tripod

 

[PhotobearSam]

Are there any other lens out there that are this great a value for the $$$???

 

[PhotobearSam]

I had to look around for a pic from my fity...found this one i really liked...

I LOVE this pic...WOW.

 

[zackiedawg]

Love this one! Your kitty is giving you the same look my kids give me. An "Again with the camera?" kind of look, lol.

I don't have a nifty fifty, I'm contemplating the new 35mm 1.8 coming out. Any great tips you guys can give? With such a narrow depth of field and most likely having to open it all the way up for things such as a dark ride how do you decide where to try and focus? I hope that doesn't sound stupid, it's something that I've been intrigued by.

Thanks...I did snap about 40 shots of her, so that was likely what was on her mind!

Anne's basically right - the farther the subject is from you, the less impact the shallow depth of field has, at least to an extent. Sure, there will likely be some out-of-focus area, but it won't be as severe. What is an inch-wide focal area from a few feet away will spread to a few feet wide as you go 15-20 feet away...and the cutoff to out of focus tends not to be so severe as when shooting close portrait.

But it does help to be conscious of where you are focusing, and where you don't mind having softer focus...because it will still be there. Also, remember that even a great low light prime will tend to be a little softer overall when wide open compared to stopping it down to F8 or more, where most will be tack-sharp. It's part of the compromise, and to some like myself, even the allure, of shooting wide open...I don't mind the softness or shallow depth of field.

Now, these are NOT great dark ride shots - it was my first time shooting with the DSLR and 50mm in such conditions and in hindsight I probably would have backed from ISO3200 to ISO1600...and I should have used a touch more shutter speed even if it underexposed, and recovered in post...so excuse the overall quality here - this will give an idea of how the depth of field is on a wide-open low light lens:

The blur on the old man is mostly motion blur, as is the dog...but see how the lantern, Jack, and the background are all still at least fairly in the focal area...despite being several feet deep?:

You should be even safer with a 35mm's wider perspective.

 

[wenrob]

Thanks Ann and Justin those were the answers I was looking for.

 

[jann1033]

Thanks...I did snap about 40 shots of her, so that was likely what was on her mind!

Anne's basically right - the farther the subject is from you, the less impact the shallow depth of field has, at least to an extent. Sure, there will likely be some out-of-focus area, but it won't be as severe. What is an inch-wide focal area from a few feet away will spread to a few feet wide as you go 15-20 feet away...and the cutoff to out of focus tends not to be so severe as when shooting close portrait.


The blur on the old man is mostly motion blur, as is the dog...but see how the lantern, Jack, and the background are all still at least fairly in the focal area...despite being several feet deep?:

You should be even safer with a 35mm's wider perspective.

can't get your exif but wondering how do you know it's motion blur and not the actual focus is on jack. wouldn't it seem the whole shot would be blurred if it were motion blur? i ask cause the first time i used this lens was at a wedding and repeatedly i had focus behind what i thought i was focused on. ( i mean like 90 % of the photos and i know the focus light was on the subject) i assumed it was due to the shallow dof ( similar shots, probably 10+ ft away from subject, pretty close to wide open since it was the darkest reception hall i have ever seen) or due to my lens focusing not where i told it too....i of course just dumped these photos cleaning out my hard drive since "i'll never need these" so i can't post a photo( on the up side i found the bucket macro tripod photos i was looking all over my computer for so you win some, you lose some )

 

[zackiedawg]

can't get your exif but wondering how do you know it's motion blur and not the actual focus is on jack. wouldn't it seem the whole shot would be blurred if it were motion blur?

I'm not 100% sure, but I'm 95% sure it's motion blur. The shot is actually cropped a bit, and around the outer edges on the original, you can really see the rotational motion blur. I think the reason the focus is fairly blur-free in some parts of the photo has to do with my attempt to 'pan' against the motion of the boat to stay focused on the subject area - that particular scene is on a bend, and as the boat moved by, I was attempting to continuously pan the camera to hold Jack in the center of the crosshairs for focus. What resulted in the too-slow shutter speed (ISO3200, F1.7, 1/25) was the center of the shot fairly still, with the outer areas of the shot more blurred...which is why I cropped it out. And the drunk man's blur mostly results from his own motion, as his hand raises with the drink and he rocks back and forth.

You're right though...the focus is much more of a challenge with this shallow of DOF - and I've blown plenty of shots getting used to shooting wide open where I just missed the focus where I wanted. I tend to switch to center weighted or spot focus when shooting wide open to give a better chance to land the focus on the spot I want it!

 

[squee!! disney!!]

i don't have the data on this but i know it was taken with my 50mm. it was probably with f1.8. no flash, handheld, and probably at 400 iso. oh! and i shot it with my 5d.

 

[We-Luv-Disney]

Thanks sam! hers on i took today!

 

[madge]

and this one ... both from a local kids consignment sale

 

[Gdad]

Taken w/ Fuji S5 & 50/1.4

 

[jann1033]

ok so my 50 works good at f22, this is called Bright Lights, Blue City in honor of Cleveland making the top "dying cities " list
xt, 50mm 100 iso f22 30 sec shutter, tripod, timer cross processed in alien skin to make it blue

 

[jann1033]

ok i am really starting to love this lens as long as i use a smallish aperture.
yesterday at the bitterly frigid lake

100 iso 1/80 and at f22 it's sharp baby sharp and it's so easy to get a fast enough speed due to the mm without using my noisy high iso

 

[JoeDif]

I just joined the 50 club. This is my first effort

 

[kaffinito]

And here's why I love my 50mm f/1.8

Seagulls in flight at EPCOT.

 

[kaffinito]

And here's another reason why!

Lightpost in Morocco pavilion.

 

[jann1033]

went to the zoo today. part of it is modeled after the rain forest, very dark and odd light( the one floor is supposed to be during a thunderstorm and it's dark, the cases are worse than the aquarium section due to leaves and shadows, a real nightmare . wanted to try this lens in manual in low light to see if it was an auto focus problem. i should really have taken my monopod as i had a hard time getting it to 50mm even at f1.8 ( it's really dark and i don't want to use 400 if i can help it since it 's noisy) but i think it is an autofocus problem as the focus was fine( most were off due to motion blur, rather than not focused or i missed the head when they moved but the back was sharp as could be)
this is f1.8 1/50 iso 100 and considering how lousy my sight is it is pretty sharp

so even though using manual focus on rapidly moving reptiles in a dark cave like atmosphere isn't the greatest scenario, at least i know what is up with my lens.
now if i can figure out some way to actually see to manual focus period i'd be in business