Why Large Aperture?

[n0d3]

Does Larger aperture means faster lens?

Better performance in Night time photography (or Low Light)?:sweat:

Does it also cut down noise level comparing to the smaller aperture lens?:dunno:

For night photography you would usually use a tripod and also a small aperture to get a larger depth of field, so in night photography fast lenses don't usually matter. For low light conditions where you don't want to use the flash or where flashes aren't allowed e.g. in museums, certain places etc., a fast lens would be useful.

 

[roti_prata]

by defination, apature values r the ration of the apature opening diameter vs the focal length of the lens. so the longer the lens, wider the apature has to be to maintain the same f value, more glass is used and the manufacturing process is more difficult, thus the lens becomes more expensive. not sure y wide lenses tend to start from 1:4 though.

wider apature will make out-of-focus areas seem more out-of-focus(more blurry) so the subject becomes more isolated and the pic turns out nicer.

lenses r generally not the sharpest at their maximum apature. 1-2stops smaller is usually the sweetspot. normally its at 1:5.6 and 1:8

 

[Sun_Of_The_Beach]

For night photography you would usually use a tripod and also a small aperture to get a larger depth of field, so in night photography fast lenses don't usually matter. For low light conditions where you don't want to use the flash or where flashes aren't allowed e.g. in museums, certain places etc., a fast lens would be useful.

Just curious. Your small aperture is refering to the actual size, or f-stops?

If its size, isn't it better to have a better bigger aperture size to allow more light to come in for low light condition?

 

[roti_prata]

so wat if a bigger apature allows more light in? we can always use a long shutter. as said, when taken on a tripod, a 1/5 and 10sec exposure will hav no real difference(unless an elephant walks by)

ur forgetting that the overall exposure is a combination of apature, shutter speed and iso.

 

[n0d3]

Just curious. Your small aperture is refering to the actual size, or f-stops?

If its size, isn't it better to have a better bigger aperture size to allow more light to come in for low light condition?

I was referring to a small aperture. E.g. f/9 etc.

Depends on what situation it is. If you have to handhold your camera in a low light situation then defintely a larger aperture would help. But if you're talking about a tripod, it won't matter and you would use a larger aperture for a wider depth of field anyway. And if you're looking into creating certain effects, e.g. light trails/silky water then a small aperture would also be used.

 

[roti_prata]

you would use a larger aperture for a wider depth of field

narrower?:think:

 

[n0d3]

Typo, should be smaller aperture for a wider depth of field.

 

[UandMe]

Think the f4-f5.8 are the minimum f stops it has when using the lens from its lowest to highest focal length...so i think a 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 woul dmean at 18mm minimum aperture is 3.5 and at 55mm will be 5.6 am i right? HEE ;p

for lens which states only one aperture size (like AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8D IF-ED), does it mean the lens can produce max aperture of 2.8 for the whole range of focal lengths?

 

[pRoLoS3r]

for lens which states only one aperture size (like AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8D IF-ED), does it mean the lens can produce max aperture of 2.8 for the whole range of focal lengths?

If not I am not wrong .... Yes. :think:

 

[MDZ2]

for lens which states only one aperture size (like AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8D IF-ED), does it mean the lens can produce max aperture of 2.8 for the whole range of focal lengths?

you are absolutely right.

 

[user111]

the cost of making the lense is an exponential increase as maximum arpeture increases