I want her face in focus but her feet out of focus

[RumDaddy]

I wanted to do a shot similar to this is one. But with more of her waist and feet in the image. I also wanted her face in focus and the further you travel from her face to her feet out of focus. I was using the 28-135 4.5 lens and could not get this effect. Since Im towering above her in a park standing on a picnic table I cant back up further away to play the zoom game.

I am capable of playing the blur game with smaller objects such as this necklace shoe shot. FYI I didnt take this photo, its just a example. But when I try to get up close on a subjects face or use larger objects other then small necklaces it just doesnt work.

I rehearsed it with beer cans and it did just fine. LOL! Larger objects like people not so much.

For instance I would have liked the wall to the right of her face to be a little more out of focus.

Id like to creativley bring more attention to a subjects face by blurring out a closer background and not something so far off like trees or skylines.

What lens for D 50d aps sized sensor will have this effect?

 

[Scuba]

to do what you are talking about with the first image you need to open the aperture up but also must move closer to the subject you want in focus. This will allow the background to be more out of focus.

As for the last image you could do the same to get the wall right behind her, but you will have to very close and it will be difficult to have her whole face in focus. I personally like the last image how it is. I could see maybe shortening the DOF a little to have the lines down the right fade into out of focus a little more.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

You probably need a lens that stops down more than f/4.5

Assuming you know the relation of Aperture size, and DoF.

 

[mrpink]

I believe you cannon guys call it the "nifty fifty".

Any lens shooting at a f/4.5 will not have a DOF shallow enough to blur someones feet while focusing the face, at least not enough to produce the effect you desire. You need something that will shoot at a f/2.8 or faster for that. The 50mm 1.8 will do this for you.

As for the wall pic, just have her take a few steps toward you and you should get a nice subtle background blur.




p!nK

 

[KmH]

Depth-of-field (DOF) is controlled by 4 factors:

1. the lens aperture
2. the lens focal length
3. the subject to camera distance
4. the subject to background distance.

Online Depth of Field Calculator

If you get the same focal length lens as close to her face as the table top shot the DOF would be the same.

But, that would be very close and she would probably find it to intrusive.

The solution is to use a longer focal length lens that can open to a wide aperture.

 

[RumDaddy]

Im some what familiar with aperture settings. I did have the aperture on the lowest 4.5 setting. I have only used the two lenses that came with my body and Im not familiar with any other lenses. Im trying educate myself on lenses and also trying to determine whether spending thousands of dollars on newer lenses that offer more control will be worth it as well as knowing which ones to get. I dont want to spend $800 on a NEW 24-135mm "2.8" to find out that there really isnt that big of a difference between the 24-135mm 4.5 I already own and the 2.8 Id like to own. If the 2.8 24-135mm is what I'm even looking for?

I feel I need new glass to take my photography to a more competitive or creative level. Just trying to determine which glass to get and Im TERRIBLY AFRAID THATLL ILL SPEND THE MONEY AND NOT GET WHAT IM LOOKING FOR.

Any input on what or which lens will improve my background control/DOF on close up subjects. People not necklaces.

 

[Vinny]

As I say this please keep in mind I am and will be living with kit lenses probably forever as I am only interested in taking photography to a certain level.

If you want to possibly improve your images you need to buy certain equipment. I say possibly as the photographer is just as important as the equipment. If you can live with whatever limitations your equipment has then if you become great with your present equipment that's as far as you will go, IMO there's nothing wrong with that. But to get outstanding photos unfortunately you need to get higher quality lenses. Zooms are not better than prime lenses for certain things and this is one area I believe a prime lens will help tremendously.

Getting a 1.4 or 1.8 f stop lens will give a definite better DOF and will contribute to a certain look ... possibly the look you're after. I'm in 99% agreement with mrpink, I'm not sure if the 50mm is the way to go.

 

[pbelarge]

I feel I need new glass to take my photography to a more competitive or creative level. Just trying to determine which glass to get and Im TERRIBLY AFRAID THATLL ILL SPEND THE MONEY AND NOT GET WHAT IM LOOKING FOR.

Any input on what or which lens will improve my background control/DOF on close up subjects. People not necklaces.

There are several letters in the sentence I highlighted that spell out the answer to your dilema.

Rent, rent, rent the lens you are thinking of.

Here, I will help you along...
LensRentals.com - Rent a Canon 50mm f/1.4

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Somebody should learn about and get a better understanding of the mechanical/technical aspects of photography.

Give a man a fish...


I patiently await the "What lens should I get next" thread.

 

[pbelarge]

Somebody should learn about and get a better understanding of the mechanical/technical aspects of photography.

Give a man a fish...


I patiently await the "What lens should I get next" thread.

I see the letters in your post that state what you really meant.

"stop the madness"

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Pierre, care to post what I am actually thinking?

 

[RumDaddy]

Somebody should learn about and get a better understanding of the mechanical/technical aspects of photography.

What better way to do it then then do some research on line and join a photography forum for beginners.

I reread my threads and disagree with some of the negative OMG comments some of you guys made. These are all decent topics for a beginners photography forum. One topic I shared some images and asked for a lens suggestion. OMG! Which Im sure some beginners out there will find interesting or useful. The other topic went over camera sensors and how fisheye lenses may interact differently with different size sensors and the other topic was discussing what youll get between a 2.8 and 4.5 lens and whether or not the money spent will be worth it. Lets face it. These lenses are very expensive. In the next 3-5 months I could easily spend well over $3000 on this stuff. And OMG, although their similar topics their all decent ones for a photographers beginner forum.

 

[D-B-J]

You need a WIDE aperture. But be careful, because i have read that 1.4 and 1.8 can be so short in DOF, that her cheeks will be in focus, but the nose will not.

 

[creisinger]

For $199 you can get yourself a workaround that works with any lens
Alien Skin Software: Bokeh

It just takes more time in the digital darkroom...

You cold also use a cheaper version of getting the shot at f4.5 and then adding a few layers blurred at different levels and blend them. Cheap man's way.

 

[creisinger]

... The solution is to use a longer focal length lens that can open to a wide aperture.

I wanted to say that too.