f8 to f32 ?

[cphoniball]

Originally Posted by Bob Black

Thank you for all responses. Firstly, I would like to clear something up. My camera DOES accept other lenses, in fact I have 5 lenses that I can use and change out.

I didn't realize that f32 was bad? I thought it would give me a better depth of field to keep all of my up close 5-10inch shots in full focus. I know that if I used f2.8....the front and rear bumpers of a 1/25 scale model would not be clear in the same photo. f8 allows both bumpers to be crisp and clear...but other points such as the roof or rear corner...might be fuzzed...

My question was simple. Can I find a lens that will give me f32 results?

Simple questions in photography are rarely simple, given that most require a great deal of background information before another person can give a well-informed answer.

If you're using a dSLR I don't know of a lens that will stop down to a minimum of f8 - most stop at f22 or so, although I have heard of some that will stop down to f32. However, as other posters have mentioned, once you go past a certain aperture - usually around f16 on a DSLR - you start hitting a phenomenon called diffraction which severely limits the image quality of the picture. As far as I understand it, at the extremely small apertures light bends around the aperture blades this degrades the image quality. In essence, the benefit of the greater depth of field is ruined because your image is fuzzy. So you don't want to stop down to f32.

If you're looking for great DoF in a macro setting I'd suggest looking into some of the focus-stacking software that's available. If you look in the "how you took it" section of the forum I believe several other members have posted about how to use it.

[dcclark]

Originally Posted by maxharvard

I don't think I or anyone here was saying that.

The OP was suggesting (in his reply) that going to the minimum possible aperture was what he should be doing.

However, I wasn't implying that you or any other replies were implying that.

Plus, I was going for amusement factor. Alas...

[Bob Black]

Originally Posted by cphoniball

Simple questions in photography are rarely simple, given that most require a great deal of background information before another person can give a well-informed answer.

If you're using a dSLR I don't know of a lens that will stop down to a minimum of f8 - most stop at f22 or so, although I have heard of some that will stop down to f32. However, as other posters have mentioned, once you go past a certain aperture - usually around f16 on a DSLR - you start hitting a phenomenon called diffraction which severely limits the image quality of the picture. As far as I understand it, at the extremely small apertures light bends around the aperture blades this degrades the image quality. In essence, the benefit of the greater depth of field is ruined because your image is fuzzy. So you don't want to stop down to f32.

If you're looking for great DoF in a macro setting I'd suggest looking into some of the focus-stacking software that's available. If you look in the "how you took it" section of the forum I believe several other members have posted about how to use it.

Thanks for your reply. I am asking because I have a friend that uses a Canon digital that stops f32 and gets clean results. I would ask him, but he is out of state right now on a shoot.
I will check with him , but I don't consider him a God in photography...so my thoughts were to check with the general public for some answers as well.
In case anyone cares to see my camera's capabilities...here is a link to the specs.
Kodak EasyShare P850 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

I have seen the image stacking software, it's pretty amazing! I don't however, have the time to do that with 200 photos for one shoot. I usually turn in 3-4 shoots at a time with 100-200 photos in each. So with that said, image quality the first time around is important.
I do alright with f8, but curiosity...my mind is always hungry for knowledge!

[OsmosisStudios]

Sorry BobBlack, but that's still a Point-and-Shoot camera: what youre attaching are not "lenses" but "converters" that alter the view your camera sees

When stopping down past f/16 you do see diffraction, though you may have to get to 100% to see much. It's still there. That kind of need for DoF is really only necessary with macro shots. Even then, focus stacking is best and can be done with as little as 3 frames.

[Bob Black]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Sorry BobBlack, but that's still a Point-and-Shoot camera: what youre attaching are not "lenses" but "converters" that alter the view your camera sees

When stopping down past f/16 you do see diffraction, though you may have to get to 100% to see much. It's still there. That kind of need for DoF is really only necessary with macro shots. Even then, focus stacking is best and can be done with as little as 3 frames.

Ok, thanks for your reply. For now, this camera is great for what I do, but I will eventually buy something more complicated that I can go further with.