lancsoatcake
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 197
- Name
- Daniel
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi All,
I'm looking to purchase a lens for landscape pictures, and I have seen the aforementioned lens.... BUT 2 versions.
One with f3.5 throughout focal length, one that is f4-5.6 (I think)
But it got me thinking, as a very keen, but very amateur photographer (I don't feel right even referring to myself as a photographer really hee hee) I can't quite see the advantage of an f3.5 lens on such short focal length when really focus oriented DOF (in my mind at least) isn't what's expected. It's more about the perception of depth created by having a lot in the shot.... Isn't it?
Wouldn't you want to cone down to f11 and lower to try and keep as much focus as possible throughout the image?
There is a difference of £100 or so in the lens.
I'm using a 7D, both are well within budget (the f3.5 is £400) and I'm hoping that somebody may be able to explain the advantage of one versus the other...
Your help is highly appreciated,
Thanks,
Dan
I'm looking to purchase a lens for landscape pictures, and I have seen the aforementioned lens.... BUT 2 versions.
One with f3.5 throughout focal length, one that is f4-5.6 (I think)
But it got me thinking, as a very keen, but very amateur photographer (I don't feel right even referring to myself as a photographer really hee hee) I can't quite see the advantage of an f3.5 lens on such short focal length when really focus oriented DOF (in my mind at least) isn't what's expected. It's more about the perception of depth created by having a lot in the shot.... Isn't it?
Wouldn't you want to cone down to f11 and lower to try and keep as much focus as possible throughout the image?
There is a difference of £100 or so in the lens.
I'm using a 7D, both are well within budget (the f3.5 is £400) and I'm hoping that somebody may be able to explain the advantage of one versus the other...
Your help is highly appreciated,
Thanks,
Dan