Sareesh Sudhakaran, the creator of the wolfcrow channel, makes a bold claim that T2.8 is the best aperture for filmmaking, but is that true?
At first, this seems to be a very general conclusion that every photographer or filmmaker opposes instinctively. As we know, there are no "best" settings for any situation. This means there's no "best" aperture for every situation, even more so when we are talking about the entire movie industry. However, the arguments of Sudhakaran which support his statement are logical and sound and are backed up by the experience and visual decisions of cinematographers who shot movies we admire today. By the end of the video, I was convinced that it is indeed practical to use T2.8 (or f/2.8 in case you use a lens for still photography) for most situations. The fact that many fast lenses (having a maximum aperture value of f/2.8 or lower) start to diffract light above or f/11 must not be ignored, no matter if we shoot with high-end glass or not. Those of you that are new to the filmmaking world must know that one of your best friends is the ND filter, especially if you are going to shoot at such wide apertures.
Let us know if you agree with the statement that T2.8 is the best practical value for filmmaking.
After watching this video the only thing I leaned was how little I care about this. Advocating for a specific aperture is about as bland a topic as I can think of. I guess there wasn’t a celebrity being sued by a photographer for posting an image of themself.
I'm not going to watch that video because it's a completely BS claim that is so easily disproven. Look at all the film scenes shot at T1.4 or T5.6...
I tend to shoot video and pictures at f2.8 though my favourite lens is f1.8, unless I have a difficult light issue or other situations calls for a change. Overall this will be more of in the personal/artistic preference category for me.
Completely irrational thinking if you don't state your sensor size.
T2.8 on s S35, S16, Full frame or m43 sensors have complete different look.
And the depth of field at T2.8 on 50mm, a 16mm or at 200mm is also different.
And no; T2.8 is not the equivalent to F2.8.