DFC Computer - Printable Version +- Opticallimits (https://forum.opticallimits.com) +-- Forum: Forums (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4) +--- Forum: Just Talk (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=17) +--- Thread: DFC Computer (/showthread.php?tid=3778) Pages:
1
2
|
DFC Computer - taketoshi ikegami - 07-29-2010 [quote name='photonius' timestamp='1280308081' post='1356'] Further update: It looks like it works. The impression that it is not updated changing from 2.8 to f1.8 and back and forth was that I didn't notice the small changes in the background, because, when you start out, the background is sharp, and I immediately associated it with the default values that are set in the panel when you come to that web site, which is not true. [/quote] Thank you for the comment. I do not understand well though I confirmed. It calculates with JAVASCRIPT, and this program switches, and displays the image. I think that the figure of Bokeh of subject 2 and Bokeh of background is accurate. However, the image is not in strictness because the image of the background has switched about 100 kinds. DFC Computer - canoman - 08-08-2010 [quote name='Rainer' timestamp='1280126690' post='1310'] It seems to me, that this DOF-Calculator might need some improvement ... at least, if I use the numbers and settings it starts with (7D,50mm,f/2.8,2.5,4,10) and then click "calculate", it does absolutely nothing. Also, if I change the settings to something reasonable and then click calculate, absolutely nothing happens. The only visible reaction is when I click the "reset" button. So, for now, I will stay with the wellknown ... [url="http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html"]http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html[/url] ... which at least does what I ask. So, it seems, there is always a bit room for improvement. Just my 2cts ... Rainer PS: I should add, that the browser in use was a Firefox 3.6.8 with javascript enabled. [/quote] The DOFMASTER is not all that clever. If you calclate in feet, the C of C remains metric. It would have been .03mm = .00118". |