Agree. f 1.6 in sun, you would have a very small slice of "depth of field", even when zoomed at 400+mm. - also old school (used a nikon f3, fm, or cheapest hasselblad i could find)
It's not zoomed in. There is no 400mm f1.4. There's a thing called compression when you use telephotos. A minute of looking for the other shots or just looking at the podium you'd know it's no more than a 50mm lens and that image was cropped. At a distance the depth of field grows regardless of crop.
Depends on ASA. If he was rating it at 2800 digitally, that would be about 3-4 stops faster than normal. F16 would be able to give better depth of field. Also with such a bright day, even at ASA 400 there wouldn't be a problem digitally.
Agree. f 1.6 in sun, you would have a very small slice of "depth of field", even when zoomed at 400+mm. - also old school (used a nikon f3, fm, or cheapest hasselblad i could find)
It's not zoomed in. There is no 400mm f1.4. There's a thing called compression when you use telephotos. A minute of looking for the other shots or just looking at the podium you'd know it's no more than a 50mm lens and that image was cropped. At a distance the depth of field grows regardless of crop.
I know
Depends on ASA. If he was rating it at 2800 digitally, that would be about 3-4 stops faster than normal. F16 would be able to give better depth of field. Also with such a bright day, even at ASA 400 there wouldn't be a problem digitally.