Is F/4 at 70mm (on 35mm film camera) enough for shallow depth of field for portraits?

Hey RFD,

I recently received a Minolta Maxxum 7000 35mm film camera. I'm using it for an art project (its not a very serious art project) and my plan is take candid photos of people. Unfortunately, the lens on the camera is only average. It is a 35-70mm f/4 - f/22 lens and I am worried about whether f/4 is large enough of an opening to create a shallow depth of field so that the background is blurred?

If it is, is f/4 at 70mm enough for focusing in on specific parts of the face? (eyes, nose, etc...?)

Also, I hear that telephoto lens are used for portrait photography, is 70mm sufficient for an amateur project?

Finally, if I use 400 or 800 ISO film, will the results be too grainy or would it be sufficient on film print (I'm thinking about going up to 11x 16, but mostly likely 8x10)

Thanks for all your help!

Yes, F4 is more than enough.

Originally Posted by snplow

Hey RFD,

I recently received a Minolta Maxxum 7000 35mm film camera. I'm using it for an art project (its not a very serious art project) and my plan is take candid photos of people. Unfortunately, the lens on the camera is only average. It is a 35-70mm f/4 - f/22 lens and I am worried about whether f/4 is large enough of an opening to create a shallow depth of field so that the background is blurred?

If it is, is f/4 at 70mm enough for focusing in on specific parts of the face? (eyes, nose, etc...?)

Also, I hear that telephoto lens are used for portrait photography, is 70mm sufficient for an amateur project?

Finally, if I use 400 or 800 ISO film, will the results be too grainy or would it be sufficient on film print (I'm thinking about going up to 11x 16, but mostly likely 8x10)

Thanks for all your help!

Portrait with DOF is perfectly fine too, just look at all the fashion magazine! Is the lighting being use that makes a real different. Of course low depth has the punch too, but nothing wrong with DOF as well....

I have a 7000 too, they're solid cameras. The 35-70mm f4 is very sharp. Keep it.

Originally Posted by KorruptioN

I have a 7000 too, they're solid cameras. The 35-70mm f4 is very sharp. Keep it.

I figure it would be sharp enough for the face. I was wondering if you know whether it can leave the background blurred? (I'm taking the pics probably indoors).

Thanks!

As long as you keep the lens set to F/4... there should be enough seperation between the subject and background.

Originally Posted by snplow

I figure it would be sharp enough for the face. I was wondering if you know whether it can leave the background blurred? (I'm taking the pics probably indoors).

Thanks!

Depends on how close the background is to your subject as well as how close you are to the subject and the focal length being utilized on the lens.

Hopefully a depth-of-field calculator might help you.
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

remember the more tele you go the more separation you will have. so try shooting at 70mm rather than 35. should be good enough though at f4.

*another vote for F4 being good enough

ok, can we stop beating a dead horse? F4 is more than enough, end of story. Heck, I've taken portraits at F8 and it's still enough.

Here is proof:

Taken at F4, 78mm, ISO 800, 1/320, +0.3EV. Distance to subject, approximatley 1 meter.

How is it a dead horse?

Originally Posted by KorruptioN

How is it a dead horse?

Agreed,

Thanks for all the comments! And thanks to CSAgent for posting a sample, but would you happen to have a portrait picture taken inside with f4? Most of my pictures are going to be indoors and since the walls are closer to the subject they may be more in focus thus not seperating the foreground and background as nicely.

Not enough for me. I usually go <2.8 for individual portraits. You can blur any background at any stop provided the background is far enough.

There are more compositional tools you can use to focus the attention on your subject. Such as leading lines and many lighting techniques like lighting your subject a stop or two brighter than everything else.

Portraits can be taken with any focal length. It's just been said that the longer lengths exhibit a flatter scene which renders people a little more flattering. ie preventing ugly people getting uglier. If your subject looks like Jessica Beil then no focal length will make her look ugly.

Originally Posted by CameraBill

Portraits can be taken with any focal length. It's just been said that the longer lengths exhibit a flatter scene which renders people a little more flattering. ie preventing ugly people getting uglier. If your subject looks like Jessica Beil then no focal length will make her look ugly.

Hahaha, true enough.

On the subject of lighting, unfortunately, I'm not in a controlled environment so I need to find ways to isolate the person of interest from everything else. Essentially, its the emotion that I'm trying to capture so everything has to be as naturalistic as possible. (I'm probably not even going to use a flash!).