I am using 50 mm 1.8 potrait lens with my canon 600D. But when i take a portrait with f1.8 on Av mode using autofocus, only subjects eyes are sharp and rest of the other face is slightly blurry. How to overcome this?
123482
What f/# do you use to photograph people, and why? I know this varies from shot to shot.  Let's suppose that you are photographing either a single person or a couple, that it it outside on a somewhat overcast day. What depth of field do you prefer to use, and why?  What about indoors in a more-controlled setting — what is typically used in studio photography?  What about in other conditions?
71844
Say you are using a crop body, and you have both 50mm/1.4 USM and 85mm/1.8 USM lens in your bag. Now, you want to take a portrait where there is adequate light and space, and you have decided to take the shot at f/2.2.   Now I want to know which lens will be good to use to take such a shot, and why.
27248
I have made a mistake with this image:    ISO 400 | 1/1700s | f/2  I used manual Aperture mode and set it to F/2 (now I believe this is too much). Kids were one meter away. It was light cloudy morning.  However, they came out blurred - and the trees behind appear in focus. I was using auto-focus mode, and I think the focus was in the middle of the photo - but between the kids :(  How come my camera auto-focused the trees behind with f/2 (i was expecting this aperture works for close objects?). Was this only a miss-focus, or my aperture was wrong as well? What should I do next time?
66799
Can you recommand me a software for doing this job? I shoot using Sigma 8mm lens and I would like to be able to obtain a normal image out of that. The camera is canon 550D.
37544
I have a Canon T2I, and also a good prime lens (50mm / f1.8) but I cannot seem to take close up portraits like I see in magazines. Do I need a better lens?
29518
I have a beginner photographer and I have spent a lot of time learning the basics (exposures, lenses, focal lengths, crop factor etc). It's all good except I'm not so sure when I need to buy lenses of different focal lengths.   With a short focal length (a lens like ), I can still use it to take landscape. It doesn't mean I can't take photo of things that are far away from me. So unless I need magnification why would I need any other lens?   Also, I read that for portrait lens I really want focal length of 80-85mm but again wouldn't I be perfectly fine to take portraits with the lens above?
50473
As an example, say you have two lenses:  300mm f/2.8 being used at f/8 300mm f/4 being used at f/8  My understanding is that by definition the amount of light coming through the aperture means that you will still have to take both shots at the same shutter speed (for the same exposure).  That said, why then pay for a lens that can work down to f/2.8 if, for example, you're going to use it regularly at f/8? (eg. at f/2.8 sometimes the depth of field can simply be too shallow - in the above example, take bird photography).  Some have told me the f/2.8 lens requires more glass to achieve f/2.8 and therefore it lets in more light and can shoot at a faster shutter speed at the same aperture - but I really don't think that makes sense.  The only other possibility that makes sense is that typically lens manufacturers will produce a better build quality on a lens that can achieve f/2.8, so, for example, you might get sharper images because of better build quality, but that has nothing to do with the lens' ability to stop to f/2.8.
98570
I know about depth of field but I have no clue how to set it to my liking.  Is there an add-on for those of us who aren't camera savvy about adjusting focus? Like a visual line to show what is in focus or a measured distance something like in focus from 1 meter to 10 meters?
28936
I am new to the photography field, there are few things which I am not able to understand. I am playing around with my Nikon D90 along with its kit lens (18-105mm).  While reading about Depth of preview, the author asks to do some basic exercise to better understand DOF, like this:   set your aperture to smallest number f/2.8, f/3.5, f/4 with 70mm or longer lens.   When I tried to set aperture to f/3.5, and tried to change focal length, my camera is setting aperture automatically in every possible mode (which I know of). It is changing aperture in the following fashion:  1. 18-24 ----&gt; 3.4 to 4 2. 18-35 ----&gt; 4.5 3. 18-50 ----&gt; 5 4. 18-105 ---&gt; 5.6   But if i set my aperture to 5.6 or higher, it does not change when I change the focal length of my camera. I know I am not doing some basic thing right, but I'm still not sure why this is happening. Can some one help me to understand this?
117859
I use Canon EOS 600D and I want a lens with a larger range. I found out Tamron 16-300 f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD Macro Lens, I added it into my wishlist. I did some research on it and I'm scared that it couldn't fit to my Canon EOS 600D.  I'm still a beginner... I'm confused with EF, EF-S and APS-C/DX. Can someone please explain it to me?
117985
I read following in a web site ()     Lenses with maximum apertures of f2.8 allow the camera to use all high   precision sensors. In low light or other situations that are hostile   to autofocus, that’s a big deal. Lenses with a maximum aperture of   f4.0 use only the center focus sensor in its “high precision” mode,   and use the other sensors in their “horizontal line” only mode. Lenses   with a maximum aperture of f5.6 use all sensors in their   “horizontal-only” mode, and lenses with a maximum aperture of f8 use   only the center sensor point, and that with horizontal sensitivity   only.   I want to understand if this is completely true? I am raising this because recently I have purchased a Nikon 70-200 f/4 lens and would like to understand if I have made a wise investment, or, should I collect some more money and buy a 70-200 f/2.8 VR-II lens.
1630
I have a Canon 7D and often take my camera on the road while traveling. In the past I've taken my Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 and my Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6, which means that I must switch out lenses quite a bit, depending on what I'm shooting. I get a much better overall image with the 70-300, but the 17-70 gets the big picture. Should I invest in a third lens for better travel portraits, close-up lenses to save space, or just a better lens overall (such as the Canon 24-105 f/4L)? I do love having low f stops for great focus and blur, but I also like having options, macro equipment, and reach. Perhaps there's no easy solution, but what would you do to travel relatively lightly in such a situation? Thanks!
79538
How do you have both the background and foreground in the image in focus at the same time?  Last week I was attempting a shot where I had the back of a hat in focus and in the distance you could see a mountain. I wanted both in focus, but could either focus on the mountain or the hat. I ended up taking the in-focus shots of both and merging them in Photoshop. While that isn't difficult I would prefer to shoot the shot as accurate as possible. From what I have read aperture is important in the depth of field but what are the techniques for keeping both the background and foreground in focus?  I am using a Nikon D5100 with a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 (standard kit lens) and a 55-200mm  f/4.5-5.6.    almost answers my question, but I am a bit confused. Can someone explain this a bit differently? Thanks!
69534
I have a fairly new Nikon D7000 (I've taken about 2000 pictures).   Something happened during my last trip, where thew viewfinder never gets sharp anymore. It always looks out of focus, regardless if i am in manual or automatic mode.   Pictures still come out sharp, and when I switch to the LCD screen I can see the focus, but not in the viewfinder.   Is there some sort of tuning that needs to be done?
51016
I've read   here on Photo SE, as well as the  on CA.  I understand that it is inevitable that some amount of chromatic aberration shows up for a particular lens, especially on the extreme cases: high contrast of colors/luminosity, etc.  But I'd like to know if there is any technique one can do to -minimize- this when some photo opportunity arises;    eg: if i'm visiting some place and want a picture of a building, for example. i can't go "meh, too contrasty, results won't be good."     Would stop down the aperture help? I haven't tested it, but according to the causes of CA, it could help (bigger DoF, more things in focus, less specific color in different focus).   Other than that, nothing comes to mind..   I already got a prime lens for the extra oomph of image quality, but i want more :)  please no "buy better gear" of "fix it in post" answers.. Obviously, i can fix stuff in post, AND I DO. But i'd like to make the most of my gear, and spend maybe a bit more time taking a picture, and less on lightroom.
23923
The viewfinder on my camera has diopter correction, but is there a "correct" way to set it up? In the past I've just allowed the camera to auto-focus on a distant point, and then make sure that is as sharp as possible, but this seems to be prone to error, and reliant on the auto focus of the lens. Is there a better way?
33302
I am aware of what hyperfocal distance is and the general principles behind it. However, most of the tutorials I have seen and read regarding it make use of lenses with focus distance indicators. Unfortunately, neither of my lenses (Nikkor 18-55mm &amp; 35mm f1.8) have indicators.  I have read that you can 'cheat' and simply focus a third of the way into the shot (which I have done previously simply by spot-focusing on the lowest focus point in my VF). I also assume you could pace out the distance and note an object to focus on when you get back to the camera (though that might be easier said than done).  Does anyone have any suggestions on how to achieve maximum sharpness from front to back without focus distance markers. A new lens is not an option; global economic crisis and all that!