16 mm f/2.8. Depth of field from wide angle lens. Poor background. Not interesting.
16mm f/11. Depth of field from aperature and wide angle. Notice light pole is more sharp than 2.8
70mm f/10 Flat picture. Compress background, Everything virtually crisp.
70 mm f/2.8 Notice the compression of the car to the background. Depth of field helps seperate subject but background still distracting.
200mm f/10 background compression but more in focus due to narrow aperature.
200mm f/2.8 More narrow depth of field and bokeh starts to blur background.
400mm f/10 shows huge background compression (tree looks like it's just off the back bumper) but narrow depth of field, even at f/10, creates a soft backgroun.
400mm f/2.8 creates wonderful bokeh seperating the car from the background.
16mm f/11. Shooting up with wide angle distorts image. Can be powerful in sports photos.
16mm f/2.8. Distortion just doesn't work for this photo.
35mm f/2.8 shooting up and getting a bit of distortion.
35mm f/2.8 shooting flat and no real distortion.
16mm f/8 shooting flat with wide angle removes distortion. Wide angle shows the distance between objects in fore & background.
70mm f/2.8 shooting up with no distortion, narrow depth of field helps to create a soft background.
160mm f/2.8 Much better shot as the car is the subject and the background is very soft.
16mm f/10 shows same shot but almost everything is crisp due to small aperature.
16mm f/2.8 Shooting flat but signifiant distance portrayed between antenna and horizon. Depth of field from aperature and proximity to focal point.
35mm f/2.8 Very narrow depth of field due to closeness of focal point and large aperature. Bokeh (blur) cleans up the background.
35mm f/10 Has limited depth of field due to proximity of focal point, even at F/10
70 mm f/2.8 Shows narrow depth of field but compressed background (looks closer than the wide angle shot)
200mm f/2.8 Perfect bokeh, Great focus on the antenna.
16mm f/10 notice the depth of filed change.
16mm f/2.8 Narrow depth of field due to proximity.
200mm f/2.8 Compression of background but narrow depth of field.
200mm f/10 Vent in focus from end to end while wiper is soft. Much better shot to show the subject.
16mm f/2.8 Notice the cripness of the brakes and sense of distance.
35mm f/2.8 Brakes are soft and show less distance from spokes. Longer lenses compress the background and decrease the depth of field.
35mm f/2.8 shooting down with a bit of distortion.
16mm f/2.8. Proximity and wide open aperature gives some depth of field and is more interesting than the f/8 shot.
16mm f/8 shooting high also provides distortion with a wide angle. f/8 yields a flat pic due to depth of field.
16mm f/2.8. Proximity creates depth of field but shot lacks interest.
16mm f/8. Depth of field adds some interest to the mirror detail and background becomes more clear.
35mm f/8.0 35mm provides same field of view of the human eye. No distortion. Focused on the sunset.
16mm f/2.8 Better use of shooting up. Distortion starts to create a powerful look. Starting to get a feel for the use shooting up with a wide angle.
16mm f/2.8 Crazy looking distortion.
148mm f/10 bacground compression makes the car look flat. Depth of field creates crispness.
35mm f/2.8 Bumper shot as the eye would see it.
200mm f/2.8 Even with a short range between the star and the rest of the grill, notice the bokeh that blurs the background and creates focus on the star.
400mm f/2.8 shows tremendous background compression
GSU Panthers v South Alabama Jaguars Nov13