4 ms·

I can recommend a full-frame Canon RP ($999) with RF 35mm f1.8 lens ($449) as a relatively inexpensive narrow FOV setup. Edited to add: Meant Narrow DOF when w

I can recommend a full-frame Canon RP ($999) with RF 35mm f1.8 lens ($449) as a relatively inexpensive narrow FOV setup. Edited to add: Meant Narrow DOF when writing this, but both are true if you sit close to it!

aaronharnly 4y ago
OP here was referring to webcams with narrow FOVs
- randerson 4y ago
  My bad, I read this as "narrow DOF", in which case a low f-stop helps.. Will leave the recommendation for anyone who wants a nice background blur. But perhaps go for a 50mm f1.8 if you want a narrower FOV.
foo92691 4y ago
"relatively inexpensive"
- maccard 4y ago
  Thats roughly my team's budget for a laptop.
  - munk-a 4y ago
    To be honest, 1.5k is a pretty decent budget for any non-gaming laptop. It's definitely a red flag to start at a company and get a bargain bin laptop, but giving out 5k laptops to every new hire is probably just being wasteful with about 3.5k. Chairs & desks are where penny pinching is an even more dreadful flaw. If you expect someone to sit for 8 hours a day give them a good chair lest they start having back issues after two months of employment.
phantomread 4y ago
Amateur photographer looking to learn more here. My initial impression is that a 35mm focal length on a full-frame/35mm film equivalent sensor would have a relatively _wide_ field of view (FOV). Or do I have that backwards? My other thought is that the suggested lens can stop down to f1.8, which would give a nice narrow depth of field (DOF) and add a pleasant background blur, but it would also be harder to stay in focus during a call. If the person on camera moves forward or backward very much at all when the lens is at f1.8, they would be pretty blurry. So perhaps they could get away with a lens that just stops down to f2.8 or so, albeit with worse low-light performance (smaller aperture, less light coming through). But take these comments with a grain of salt. It sounds like you have a setup that works well for you.
- randerson 4y ago
  Yeah, not enough coffee - got my DOF and FOV mixed up. In any case I find if you sit close to your camera, 35mm is a good FOV that will fit in your head and shoulders. The background blur for f/1.8 works well if you enable Servo Autofocus with Face Detect. It will momentarily get confused if you step out of the frame and back in again, but it can track a face pretty well after that.
  - phantomread 4y ago
    Just checked using a camera and you're right; a person right around "conversation distance" from the camera focusing at 35mm looks pretty natural in frame for a video call. It sounds like I underestimated modern continuous autofocus. Great info from you and the sibling comments, thanks.
- NikolaNovak 4y ago
  Not the OP but the GP, FWIW: On full frame I used 85mm 1.8 to get a a good FOV / DOF / proportions. But it sat on a tripod 1.5 meters behind my computer and made the room a nightmare to navigate :D 35mm on FF would indeed be mildly wide (just on wide side of "normal" 50mm lens)
- jakebasile 4y ago
  Most modern cameras have the ability to do constant autofocus in video mode, to varying degrees of quality and success. Usually they will try to follow anything that looks like a human face, or at least the brightest object in the field of view. That said, even the greatest autofocus isn't going to be able to keep up with a person who moves around a lot at f/1.8 - so it's reasonable to stop down a bit if that's the case for your subject.

aaronharnly 4y ago

OP here was referring to webcams with narrow FOVs

randerson 4y ago
My bad, I read this as "narrow DOF", in which case a low f-stop helps.. Will leave the recommendation for anyone who wants a nice background blur. But perhaps go for a 50mm f1.8 if you want a narrower FOV.

foo92691 4y ago

"relatively inexpensive"

maccard 4y ago
Thats roughly my team's budget for a laptop.
- munk-a 4y ago
  To be honest, 1.5k is a pretty decent budget for any non-gaming laptop. It's definitely a red flag to start at a company and get a bargain bin laptop, but giving out 5k laptops to every new hire is probably just being wasteful with about 3.5k. Chairs & desks are where penny pinching is an even more dreadful flaw. If you expect someone to sit for 8 hours a day give them a good chair lest they start having back issues after two months of employment.

phantomread 4y ago

Amateur photographer looking to learn more here. My initial impression is that a 35mm focal length on a full-frame/35mm film equivalent sensor would have a relatively _wide_ field of view (FOV). Or do I have that backwards? My other thought is that the suggested lens can stop down to f1.8, which would give a nice narrow depth of field (DOF) and add a pleasant background blur, but it would also be harder to stay in focus during a call. If the person on camera moves forward or backward very much at all when the lens is at f1.8, they would be pretty blurry. So perhaps they could get away with a lens that just stops down to f2.8 or so, albeit with worse low-light performance (smaller aperture, less light coming through). But take these comments with a grain of salt. It sounds like you have a setup that works well for you.

randerson 4y ago
Yeah, not enough coffee - got my DOF and FOV mixed up. In any case I find if you sit close to your camera, 35mm is a good FOV that will fit in your head and shoulders. The background blur for f/1.8 works well if you enable Servo Autofocus with Face Detect. It will momentarily get confused if you step out of the frame and back in again, but it can track a face pretty well after that.
- phantomread 4y ago
  Just checked using a camera and you're right; a person right around "conversation distance" from the camera focusing at 35mm looks pretty natural in frame for a video call. It sounds like I underestimated modern continuous autofocus. Great info from you and the sibling comments, thanks.
NikolaNovak 4y ago
Not the OP but the GP, FWIW: On full frame I used 85mm 1.8 to get a a good FOV / DOF / proportions. But it sat on a tripod 1.5 meters behind my computer and made the room a nightmare to navigate :D 35mm on FF would indeed be mildly wide (just on wide side of "normal" 50mm lens)
jakebasile 4y ago
Most modern cameras have the ability to do constant autofocus in video mode, to varying degrees of quality and success. Usually they will try to follow anything that looks like a human face, or at least the brightest object in the field of view. That said, even the greatest autofocus isn't going to be able to keep up with a person who moves around a lot at f/1.8 - so it's reasonable to stop down a bit if that's the case for your subject.