Does focal length change diffraction, or is it determined only by f-number?
Asked 9/24/2011
9 views
2 answers
0
I’m trying to understand whether diffraction depends on the physical aperture diameter or on the f-number. For example, f/18 on a 24mm lens gives a physical aperture of about 1.3–1.5mm, while f/18 on a 180mm lens gives about 10mm. If diffraction is caused by light passing through a small opening, why do discussions usually say diffraction depends on f-number rather than focal length? I’m shooting APS-C and wondering how this applies in practice, including with a macro lens that stops down to very small apertures.
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
14y ago
2 Answers
9
Excellent question. It boils down to the nature of F-number, which is focalLength/physicalAperture, and the fact that longer focal lengths magnify more. Keep in mind that light projected through an aperture still has to travel from the aperture to the sensor. The greater the distance from aperture to sensor, the greater the magnification...including magnification of the airy disc. The difference between a 180mm lens and a 24mm lens is about 7.5x. To get the same amount of diffraction from a 180mm lens as you would from 24mm lens at f/18, the 180mm lens would need a physical aperture of about 11.25mm in diameter. Given that 180/18 = 10mm, the amount of diffraction present at the sensor is actually a little bit more than with the 24mm lens.
Regarding the Sigma 105/2.8 lens you mention. I believe that is a macro lens. When it comes to macro photography, things change a little bit. You tend to focus extremely close to your subjects with macro photography, so close that depth of field is incredibly small...sometimes millimeters thick. In such situations, it is often more desirable to deal with some diffraction softening as a trade-off for increasing depth of field. In other words, you trade perfect sharpness at the focal plane for additional sharpness beyond the focal plane.
Apertures of f/32 or even f/64 are sometimes necessary to even get a shot at all when involving extension tubes. Additionally, at macro scale, particularly with extension, the effective aperture is usually greater than the actual aperture, thereby requiring exposure compensation to get a proper exposure. A general rule of thumb is that you will need 2x the exposure to compensate at macro scale. This is true for 1:1 magnification, however if you add any extension, you will likely need more. The formula for computing effective aperture at macro scale is as follows:
Ne = N * (M + 1)
Where N is the selected f/#, M is the current magnification (i.e. 2x, 5x) and Ne is the effective aperture number. For the 105mm macro lens with enough extension tubes to produce 2x magnification, at an actual aperture of f/4, the effective aperture from an exposure and diffraction standpoint would be f/12. Most modern cameras will compensate for this automatically, given that they have built in metering. It is still useful to understand exactly how macro photography affects aperture, though...and the possible implications from a diffraction standpoint.
Generally, you will want to set an aperture that gives you the effective aperture (not the actual, or physical, aperture) you need to get the exposure and DOF you want, at an acceptable level of diffraction. For a 1:1 macro lens, you have to double the actual aperture to get the effective aperture. On the Nikon D300s, which has a 12.3mp APS-C sensor, the diffraction limit kicks in at around f/11, and becomes a visible problem by around f/22 or so. At f/32, diffraction will likely be a real problem. If you want to take a macro shot at f/22, you would need to set the actual aperture to f/16.
Originally by user124. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user124
14y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
For image diffraction at the sensor, f-number is the main factor, not focal length by itself.
Why: the physical aperture does matter, but focal length also changes how much the diffraction pattern is magnified onto the sensor. A longer lens at the same f-number has a larger physical opening, but it also projects the image over a longer optical distance / higher magnification. Those effects balance so that diffraction blur at the sensor is governed primarily by the f-number.
That’s why photographers discuss diffraction in terms of f/11, f/16, f/22, etc., rather than the aperture diameter in millimeters.
In practical terms, stopping down more increases diffraction regardless of focal length. On an APS-C camera, very small apertures such as f/22, f/32, or f/64 will show increasing softness from diffraction, even if they may still be useful when you need extra depth of field. Macro work is a special case because effective aperture can become smaller at higher magnifications, making diffraction more noticeable.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI14y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why does a smaller f-number mean more light, even if the aperture diameter stays the same?
Why do cameras record f-number instead of the actual aperture diameter?
For astrophotography exposure, does aperture diameter matter more than f-number?
Is a lens’s light-gathering determined only by aperture, or also by physical size?
Does close focusing or focus breathing reduce a lens’s effective aperture?