03-04-2015, 10:12 AM
These articles and forum threads seem to be one of the most argued about topics of the pros and cons of available formats and their characteristics, creating endless discussions about "understanding" field of view and "coming to terms with" focal length vs depth of field vs equivalence etc
.
No-one is "ever" agreed! Throw T stops and F stops into the equation and you can talk forever.
Add to the fact that it has now become "fashionable" to state we are becoming subject to a "DOF aperture scam" by camera manufacturers, use the words "conspiracy" and "hoodwinked" and "sold down the river" and you have a recipe for a veritable riot!
All this is accompanied by two explanatory example images, the first from an "Iphone" showing a fly's eye millimeters away from the lens with a backdrop of a distant mountain range all absolutely "tack sharp", the second is a portrait shot taken from a 10X8" plate camera at F0.5 with the focus point on the eye, the eyelashes of course are completely OOF and the subject is impossible to recognize from Adam.
I rarely read those threads just like I didn't really read this one!
.
No-one is "ever" agreed! Throw T stops and F stops into the equation and you can talk forever.
Add to the fact that it has now become "fashionable" to state we are becoming subject to a "DOF aperture scam" by camera manufacturers, use the words "conspiracy" and "hoodwinked" and "sold down the river" and you have a recipe for a veritable riot!
All this is accompanied by two explanatory example images, the first from an "Iphone" showing a fly's eye millimeters away from the lens with a backdrop of a distant mountain range all absolutely "tack sharp", the second is a portrait shot taken from a 10X8" plate camera at F0.5 with the focus point on the eye, the eyelashes of course are completely OOF and the subject is impossible to recognize from Adam.
I rarely read those threads just like I didn't really read this one!