If f22 or f32 isn't quite good enough...

Medium FormatPro · 06-29-2012, 05:56 AM

Are there options of what Pentax owners can do if f22 or f32 isn't a small enough aperature??

bdparker · 06-29-2012, 06:09 AM

In what terms? DOF or Exposure?

Mareket · 06-29-2012, 06:10 AM

If it's still letting too much light in: Get an ND filter

If DoF isn't enough: Focus stack and stitch elements together in PP.

Medium FormatPro · 06-29-2012, 06:22 AM

I've been told that F64 or even F128 lens and/or filters do exist, but... At that aperature they would not even need really great optics.

Eulogy · 06-29-2012, 06:36 AM

Originally posted by Medium FormatPro

I've been told that F64 or even F128 lens and/or filters do exist, but... At that aperature they would not even need really great optics.

At that aperture, you wouldn't need optics. Just a hole in your body cap.

Na Horuk · 06-29-2012, 07:00 AM

Try a pinhole lens. But at that aperture the IQ will be pretty low. I can't really imagine a scenario where f22 wouldn't be enough, though. Especially with crop sensors.
Are you talking about macro? Because in macro people usually do focus stacking (which can also introduce all sorts of mistakes and oddities, but hey, it solves the DoF problem)

Anvh · 06-29-2012, 07:01 AM

Originally posted by Eulogy

At that aperture, you wouldn't need optics. Just a hole in your body cap.

Indeed diffraction will already be all over the place anyway.

Since the OP isn't giving as any information its quite pointless to discuss this further until we know more.

Na Horuk · 06-29-2012, 07:19 AM

Maybe OP just wants to be in the f64 club

Also, as mentioned, if you want long exposures it is better to use an ND filter than to use tiny apertures.

**ChrisPlatt** · 06-29-2012, 07:21 AM

If you find yourself in that neighborhood often invest in some ND filters.
With most lenses it's better to work closer to middle apertures, with or without filters.

Chris

eddie1960 · 06-29-2012, 07:29 AM

For macro I could understand why you may want it (though the dof gain will be badly offset by sharpness loss) focus stacking seems to be the popular solution (and some people do a fantastic job of it)
For shooting other than macro though (ie landscapes) i can't see much need for more than f22 from a dof standpoint on apsc (maybe 32) light may require it but that is what ND filters are for.
Medium format of course you see F32 commonly and even F64 occasionally because the format may need it for a landscape (large format lenses that go to F128 are about as well) a Tinkerer like Rio Rico would like just use a 80-100 year old large format lens adapted through mad scientist wizardry

Clavius · 06-29-2012, 07:30 AM

Originally posted by Medium FormatPro

I've been told that F64 or even F128 lens and/or filters do exist, but... At that aperature they would not even need really great optics.

Really? Any examples? Not that I need such a lens, but I'm always interested in the "oddballs".

eddie1960 · 06-29-2012, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

Really? Any examples? Not that I need such a lens, but I'm always interested in the "oddballs".

look at large format lenses, quite a number have that kind of F stop. Only place i think you would want it would be large format. aon apsc beyond F22 will have too much diffraction, on ff f 32 may be acceptable (it is on my 645)
It would be a good reson to get a Tilt shit setup allowing you to capture the deepest DOF with the least diffraction.
Unfortunately T/S lenses are pretty rare

VictorDA · 06-29-2012, 08:38 AM

Also, on a more trivial note, I believe the kit 18-55 lens goes at leat to f/44 when zoomed at 55mm. Too lazy to check the exact value now... But it is probably also applicable to other variable aperture consumer zooms.

lytrytyr · 06-29-2012, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by Medium FormatPro

I've been told that F64 or even F128 lens and/or filters do exist

Even RioRico would have a challenge adapting this to Pentax!

Mareket · 06-29-2012, 10:47 AM

Actually yeah I've got an old autographic that goes to f/128.

06-29-2012, 05:56 AM	#1
Medium FormatPro Banned Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Charleston & Pittsburgh Photos: Albums Posts: 1,668	If f22 or f32 isn't quite good enough... Are there options of what Pentax owners can do if f22 or f32 isn't a small enough aperature??

06-29-2012, 10:41 AM	#14
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by Medium FormatPro I've been told that F64 or even F128 lens and/or filters do exist Even RioRico would have a challenge adapting this to Pentax! Last edited by lytrytyr; 06-29-2012 at 10:47 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lens greater than F32	schitzengiggles	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	06-09-2012 11:59 AM
Carl Zeiss Lens, 35-70mm F2.8-F22	ozlizard	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	10-06-2011 04:48 AM
What about this? Tokina is good stuff isn't it?	Raptorman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	04-22-2010 02:39 PM
Macro at f32! And some other stuff...	codiac2600	Post Your Photos!	10	07-01-2007 01:34 PM
landscapes... which lens is sharpest at F16 to F32 etc?	slip	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-06-2007 07:41 PM

06-29-2012, 06:09 AM	#2
bdparker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 307	In what terms? DOF or Exposure?

06-29-2012, 06:10 AM	#3
Mareket Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Chester Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 719	If it's still letting too much light in: Get an ND filter If DoF isn't enough: Focus stack and stitch elements together in PP.

06-29-2012, 06:22 AM	#4
Medium FormatPro Banned Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Charleston & Pittsburgh Photos: Albums Posts: 1,668 Original Poster	I've been told that F64 or even F128 lens and/or filters do exist, but... At that aperature they would not even need really great optics.

06-29-2012, 06:36 AM	#5
Eulogy Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Fredericton, New Brunswick Photos: Gallery Posts: 632	Originally posted by Medium FormatPro I've been told that F64 or even F128 lens and/or filters do exist, but... At that aperature they would not even need really great optics. At that aperture, you wouldn't need optics. Just a hole in your body cap.

06-29-2012, 07:00 AM	#6
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Try a pinhole lens. But at that aperture the IQ will be pretty low. I can't really imagine a scenario where f22 wouldn't be enough, though. Especially with crop sensors. Are you talking about macro? Because in macro people usually do focus stacking (which can also introduce all sorts of mistakes and oddities, but hey, it solves the DoF problem)

06-29-2012, 07:01 AM	#7
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by Eulogy At that aperture, you wouldn't need optics. Just a hole in your body cap. Indeed diffraction will already be all over the place anyway. Since the OP isn't giving as any information its quite pointless to discuss this further until we know more.

06-29-2012, 07:19 AM	#8
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Maybe OP just wants to be in the f64 club Also, as mentioned, if you want long exposures it is better to use an ND filter than to use tiny apertures.

06-29-2012, 07:21 AM	#9
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,696	If you find yourself in that neighborhood often invest in some ND filters. With most lenses it's better to work closer to middle apertures, with or without filters. Chris

06-29-2012, 07:29 AM	#10
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	For macro I could understand why you may want it (though the dof gain will be badly offset by sharpness loss) focus stacking seems to be the popular solution (and some people do a fantastic job of it) For shooting other than macro though (ie landscapes) i can't see much need for more than f22 from a dof standpoint on apsc (maybe 32) light may require it but that is what ND filters are for. Medium format of course you see F32 commonly and even F64 occasionally because the format may need it for a landscape (large format lenses that go to F128 are about as well) a Tinkerer like Rio Rico would like just use a 80-100 year old large format lens adapted through mad scientist wizardry

06-29-2012, 07:30 AM	#11
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by Medium FormatPro I've been told that F64 or even F128 lens and/or filters do exist, but... At that aperature they would not even need really great optics. Really? Any examples? Not that I need such a lens, but I'm always interested in the "oddballs".

06-29-2012, 07:36 AM	#12
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	Originally posted by Clavius Really? Any examples? Not that I need such a lens, but I'm always interested in the "oddballs". look at large format lenses, quite a number have that kind of F stop. Only place i think you would want it would be large format. aon apsc beyond F22 will have too much diffraction, on ff f 32 may be acceptable (it is on my 645) It would be a good reson to get a Tilt shit setup allowing you to capture the deepest DOF with the least diffraction. Unfortunately T/S lenses are pretty rare

06-29-2012, 08:38 AM	#13
VictorDA Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Lyon area, France Posts: 718	Also, on a more trivial note, I believe the kit 18-55 lens goes at leat to f/44 when zoomed at 55mm. Too lazy to check the exact value now... But it is probably also applicable to other variable aperture consumer zooms.

06-29-2012, 10:47 AM	#15
Mareket Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Chester Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 719	Actually yeah I've got an old autographic that goes to f/128.