Aperature Problems

[skraw]

Yet another question for you pros. One day, I will have answers for somebody... but until then.

I do a lot of product photography with lighting. I did a shoot recently where I wanted all the picture in focus. I set my camera at F36, thinking this would do the job. The whole picture was in focus, but the quality was horrible. There was no detail when viewed at 100%. The subject was about 4 feet away. If I change my camera to F13, it is very detailed with only a little blurred background. This setting works OK, but what is the point of having F36 on a camera? Do you sacrifice quality and clarity for a wider range of focus?

[Ronald S. Jr.]

F/22-32, etc. is there for when you really need it, and pretty much just because you "can". However, stopping down below f/16 or so generally gives you an unwelcome effect of diffraction. Just a property of lenses by design. I really don't know what to tell you to do about it. I'd say get a longer lens and move further away. Generally, people try to afford themselves a tilt-shift lens if they'll be doing product photography a lot. It allows you to use narrow apertures, yet you can move the plane of focus in a way that the subject will still be in focus. They're around $1000 for the Canon system, and come in 24, 45, and 90mm lengths. It's the real solution, but rather expensive. If it's "what you do", you may want to consider it.

Best of luck.

[savona]

I agree with Ronald here, not maybe people shoot f36 (unless your shooting large format landscapes). All lenses have a sweet spot, a spot in their focal range and aperture range where you will get your best results. Anything in the REALLY WIDE or REALLY NARROW (f/1.2 or f/32) you are going to sacrific image quality. Most lenses are really nice between f5.6 and f16 or so.

If you are 4 feet from a subject f8 should get you a good depth of field, I can't see any reason for going to f32.

What lens and camera are you using?

[mommymomo]

As long as your shutter speed is set accordingly, you should not hqave an issue. But shooting at an F stop of 36 is kind of extreme. But I am no expert. Do you have a light meter on your camera?

[skraw]

All lenses have a sweet spot, a spot in their focal range and aperture range where you will get your best results. Anything in the REALLY WIDE or REALLY NARROW (f/1.2 or f/32) you are going to sacrific image quality. Most lenses are really nice between f5.6 and f16 or so.

Good point, that makes a lot of sense to me. Thats what I assumed, but it is nice to get other opinions. I usually find F13 is the best for product photography. I'm using a Rebel XT and the stock 18-55mm.

[studio206]

The only time i have ever used the higher number f-stops was for landscapes and/or with strobes, depending on the lights i am using. i have never had a problem with getting detail with the smaller aperture... so, i really don't know what to tell you about your problem because even though it was close to you, you shouldn't of had any problems either way because at f36, or whatever u used, (unless you were using a telephoto lens you could of been too close) everything from your foreground to your background should of been in focus. it's possible that you missed focus or you didn't set your lens to infinity or maybe the compression from shooting in JPEG format lost all that detail information because it was too much for a JPEG... but if you were shooting in RAW and it happened, you could of over exposed... there are a lot of factors that could of played apart in lose of detail... but i doubt that it was your f-stop alone because I've shot portraits at f-22 and f-32 and i haven't had a problem with lose of detail.