I seem to avoid it.....
Do you shoot at f 22?
-
A
- Thread starter Ray Morgenweck
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale NIKON D800 (read)
- Started by Acere
-
Want to Buy WTB Konica Hexar RF
- Started by axestrata
-
For Sale Multiple Signed Photographic Books
- Started by tallenpatterson
-
Want to Buy Color by Beseler Print Processing Drums
- Started by logan2z
Forum statistics
Lenses for 35mm cameras are less sharp at f22 than at wider apertures, and they usually give enough depth of field at f11 or f16 to get everything in the scene in focus if you need it to be.
Large format, yes. Otherwise no. Not too many of my small format lenses even go to f/22.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,844
- Format
- Hybrid
sometimes, it depends what the intent of the photograph is.
I do whenever I need the depth of field. I wouldn't care about diffraction stuff when I need the DOF.
If you do shoot at f22, understand you are giving up a LOT of sharpness, especially on medium format and smaller formats. I would only use it when you seriously have no other option.
In large prints from 35mm negatives, critical sharpness begins to suffer at f/11. Every photographer should make test shots of various subjects with various lighting at different small apertures to determine their on tolerance for diffraction.
MattKing
Moderator
Yes, when necessary and other choices are not available.
Most often with longer lenses, and again when necessary.
When considering the question, it helps to keep in mind what you are trying for with the image. If, for example, you are panning and intentionally incorporating motion blur, there is little point in being concerned with diffraction.
Most often with longer lenses, and again when necessary.
When considering the question, it helps to keep in mind what you are trying for with the image. If, for example, you are panning and intentionally incorporating motion blur, there is little point in being concerned with diffraction.
When the only thing I didn't know about photography was the depth of my ignorance, I once shot an entire project stopped all the way down, on a tripod. I also chose to print on 20 x 16" paper. Despite my best efforts and a quality lens, the results were as murky as can be imagined. I rarely venture below f11 nowadays with 35mm. Printing at 10 x 8" is less demanding of diffraction.
Almost never. The two or three times I did use f/22, it was in close-up photography and f/16 just wasn't enough for the DOF I was looking for.
Not for 35mm, the sweet spot is around f/8 to f/11 and I like to stay around there. For medium format the sweet spot is f/8 to f/16 and on occasion I may go down to f/22 especially with the 250mm and 500mm if I can. Any smaller I leave for large format.
Very rarely with 35mm, usually when testing a lens that has that option. Certainly with large format, particularly 8x10 or larger.
I do have one or two old 6x9 medium format folders with very limited shutter speed selections where f/22 or even f/32 is sometimes necessary in order to get a realistic exposure.
I rarely enlarge past 8x10 and when I do it is almost always with 6x9 or larger film formats.
BTW, I am usually more interested in getting the image I am going for than worry too much about sharpness. If I were really into sharp images I would rarely ever shoot handheld since I suspect that is a bigger killer of sharp photos than diffraction ever was.
EDIT - I know, I know, all of you are rock steady and can take super sharp photos at 1/15s or slower. I can't
I do have one or two old 6x9 medium format folders with very limited shutter speed selections where f/22 or even f/32 is sometimes necessary in order to get a realistic exposure.
I rarely enlarge past 8x10 and when I do it is almost always with 6x9 or larger film formats.
BTW, I am usually more interested in getting the image I am going for than worry too much about sharpness. If I were really into sharp images I would rarely ever shoot handheld since I suspect that is a bigger killer of sharp photos than diffraction ever was.
EDIT - I know, I know, all of you are rock steady and can take super sharp photos at 1/15s or slower. I can't
Last edited:
Many times, even use f32 if I need it.
As with all the tools I use - and not just in photography, I exercise them to their limits just so I would personally know what can be achieved.
As photographers, we of all people know all about compromises and therefore have to know what the gear can achieve when needed.
As with all the tools I use - and not just in photography, I exercise them to their limits just so I would personally know what can be achieved.
As photographers, we of all people know all about compromises and therefore have to know what the gear can achieve when needed.
I always think that I will if I have no other option, but I usually abandon the shot. I don't like the feeling of disappointment I get when I develop and look at the film afterward.
I don't know why it bothers me. I'm not someone who thinks sharpness is everything, and some of my favorite photos are far less than ideal from a "technical" perspective.
I don't know why it bothers me. I'm not someone who thinks sharpness is everything, and some of my favorite photos are far less than ideal from a "technical" perspective.
For the types of shooting I do primarily (medium format stereo photography), I almost always value the increased depth of field over the slight loss in sharpness due to diffraction. I never find myself wanting more sharpness when I look at my medium format slides shot at f/22 through a ~3.5x magnification viewer. Except when I bump my tripod...
almost never.I hate diffraction.
Well, if you couldn't drive at 55, how can you shoot at f22?
I dont know, I think it was Ned? who shot with a pinhole while driving, picture looks pretty cool.
I try to use the appropriate f stop for what picture Im trying to do, seems weird never to use a certain f stop. I kinda like 2 ducks swimming, what about f32 or 16 are they ok.
I don't think of f-stops in terms of comfortability. In other words, I don't usually shoot, or not shoot, at any particular f-stop. Sure, sharpness is important. But it's only one part of the puzzle. Depth of field is also important. So is shutter speed, which can effect my f-stop choice indirectly. I choose my f-stop based on how I want to balance those aspects. I only prioritize sharpness if it's important to the photograph I have in mind. Sharpness is often overrated. But sometimes it's the most important attribute.
Having said all of that, I rarely shoot 35mm film at f22. Then again, I rarely shoot 35mm film for landscapes due to the low level of detail, which is usually important in 35mm. With 35mm digital, I can usually shoot at a lower f-stop and image stack and when I do need a smaller aperture, I can always sharpen in software. With large format, I frequently shoot f22 or higher.
Basically, the rules of photography tell me what to expect, not what to do.
Having said all of that, I rarely shoot 35mm film at f22. Then again, I rarely shoot 35mm film for landscapes due to the low level of detail, which is usually important in 35mm. With 35mm digital, I can usually shoot at a lower f-stop and image stack and when I do need a smaller aperture, I can always sharpen in software. With large format, I frequently shoot f22 or higher.
Basically, the rules of photography tell me what to expect, not what to do.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |