> The big problem with a 1280mm lens combo, is the incredible lack of Depth of > Field. > > Out at Tunkwa, the day before yesterday, I saw a marmot... > > See: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt and then click on Featured Photo. > > This shot is sharp as a tack ... see his (her?) right (our left) eye. Yet the > DOF is so small at such focal lengths, > that the nose and teeth are fuzzy, to the point where the entire photo looks > unsharp. And closing down does > not seem to make any appreciable difference, at least until you get to the > point where you can't use the view > finder, and it all becomes pointless. I have this DOF problem with much shorter lenses too, but then I'm using a much lower ISO and larger apertures. The best work-around for me has been to get the crucial elements of the critter all in the plane of focus: http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/thrushes/mobl00.html This was made with a 250mm lens, cropped slightly, at f/4. Critical focus on the eyes is essential, but I also wanted the rest of the bird's head and as much plumage as possible in focus too. One of the Really Big Things I like about the SL's viewfinder is that I can quickly and accurately tell what parts are in focus no matter where the bird is in the viewfinder. By shifting my position slightly I'm often able to place the plane of focus on as much of the bird as possible. This is one of the blessings of using a shorter focal length, and one of several reasons I'd rather not use extreme focal lengths: with a shorter lens, the change in position required to shift the angle of the plane of focus is smaller. Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com ========================================================= To Unsubscribe: Send email to leica-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field. The acknowledgment that you then receive MUST be replied to per instructions. You may also log in to the Web interface to unsubscribe.