Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

iq and sensor size

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

55% OFF new PortraitPro 12 - use code EPHZROS414.

Attention!

This topic is locked.
Reason: subject of complaints
bainsybike
24 May 2013 - 2:20 PM


Quote: As long as the size of a teacup on two A4 images is the same and lens aperture was say 5.6 - DOF will be almost exactly the same too

I'm afraid that's not the case. Take a picture of a teacup with a full frame camera from, say, 5 feet away. Then take the same picture with a camera with a 1.6 crop factor (eg a Canon 7D). In order to get the same framing, ie for the teacup to appear the same size on the two images, you will need to be 8 feet away (1.6 x 5). The depth of field will be different - see here

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
24 May 2013 - 2:20 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Steppenwolf
24 May 2013 - 2:39 PM


Quote: ...
And what is your estimate of DOF for FF camera with 35mm lens focused at 5m , f2.8 cropped 1.4x?

epz edit - insult removed

Like I said:

The DoF of the Nikon D800/35mm lens/f2.8/5m distance is 3.9m. (FF)
The DoF of the Canon 7D/35mm lens/f2.8/5m distance is 2.29m (1.6 crop factor approx)
The DoF of the Sony A77/35mm lens/f2.8/5m distance is 2.42m (1.5 crop factor approx)
The DoF of the Canon 1d/35mm lens/f2.8/5m distance is 2.83m (1.3 crop factor approx)

So the DoF of a 1.4 crop camera would be between the last two cameras - it would be about 2.7m.

Last Modified By Moderator Team at 24 May 2013 - 11:28 PM
strawman
strawman  1021991 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
24 May 2013 - 8:04 PM

I just remembered why I stopped taking part in these threads. People may have correct or incorrect views and opinions and it can be explored in a reasoned debate but there is no need for the personalised attacks, especially from someone who has a poor grasp of technical issues and has been wrong so many times before.
I used to take the time to try and debate the issue but it looks to be of no value.

Photography has technical and artistic content. There is no harm in debating and exploring any of those aspects and each will take their own point of enough is enough. But why can it not be done with respect.

For the record I think having cameras with different properties adds to the experience. And many artists take what is called a technical flaw or limitation and use it in their art. How about enjoying the differences and not having a go at people.

Farewell again, off to the real world. Life calls.

Last Modified By strawman at 24 May 2013 - 8:05 PM
LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62359 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
24 May 2013 - 8:15 PM


Quote: All that happens in between (sensors, films, etc.) has absolutely no relevance to final image DOF - it is defined by a lens aperture alone and the size of final image.

There is a limit to how many times you can be told and choose not to check the facts with a reliable source that you are wrong with the first part of your statement and wrong with the second part of your statement; without being perceived in a very negative way.

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1214383 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
24 May 2013 - 8:18 PM


Quote: Photography has technical and artistic content. There is no harm in debating and exploring any of those aspects and each will take their own point of enough is enough. But why can it not be done with respect

Nicely put John Smile

Its time people got past the stage that bigger is always better, what really matters is what is best for you.

I`m happy using M4/3, after all this is pretty much what 35mm lenses were designed for Smile

MichaelMelb_AU
24 May 2013 - 10:34 PM


Quote: I just remembered why I stopped taking part in these threads. People may have correct or incorrect views and opinions and it can be explored in a reasoned debate but there is no need for the personalised attacks, especially from someone who has a poor grasp of technical issues and has been wrong so many times before.
....

You just had me to join the club.Sad

lobsterboy
lobsterboy Site Moderator 1013936 forum postslobsterboy vcard United Kingdom13 Constructive Critique Points
24 May 2013 - 10:43 PM


Quote: it can be explored in a reasoned debate but there is no need for the personalised attacks,

Exactly there is absolutely no need for such behaviour, ideally people would report such behaviour straight away so us moderators get a chance to nip it in the bud.
Any more personal attacks will result in immediate expulsion from the site.

MODERATOR POST
StrayCat
StrayCat  1014200 forum posts Canada2 Constructive Critique Points
24 May 2013 - 10:45 PM

It was obvious from the start where this thread was going.

Steppenwolf
25 May 2013 - 8:46 AM


Quote: I just remembered why I stopped taking part in these threads. People may have correct or incorrect views and opinions and it can be explored in a reasoned debate but there is no need for the personalised attacks, especially from someone who has a poor grasp of technical issues and has been wrong so many times before.


Moderator: do I detect I slight element of hypocrisy in strawman's post? He says there is no need for "personalised attacks" and then accuses me of having a "poor grasp of technical issues blah blah". I find this far more insulting than the very mild rebuke I posted. It's far more insulting than calling someone a "buffoon". Or maybe I misunderstand the forum rules.

Maybe strawman can remind me of where I have "been wrong so many times before". If he can justify that statement then it's fair comment. Otherwise it's abuse. Disagreeing with some of strawman's more eccentric opinions does not necessarily constitute being "wrong".

lobsterboy
lobsterboy Site Moderator 1013936 forum postslobsterboy vcard United Kingdom13 Constructive Critique Points
25 May 2013 - 9:23 AM

I did not single out the actions of any single individual, the comment was directed at everyone on the thread.
Debate the issue without resorting to attacking the individual holding them and everything will be fine.

MODERATOR POST
Steppenwolf
25 May 2013 - 11:32 AM


Quote:
You just had me to join the club.Sad

Before you sign off, Mr Melb, maybe you could explain how it is that the 1.4 crop camera has a DoF of 3.9m, while the 1.5 crop and 1.3 cameras (in the example I gave above) have a DoF of 2.4m and 2.8m respectively. Is there some kind of anomaly that I'm not aware of with 1.4 crop cameras?

Strawman, I've looked back at a few of our old discussions. I think the main disagreement was about diffraction. Do you still hold to the statement that there's no point in APS-C cameras having more than 12Mp because diffraction is the limiting factor in their resolution? It doesn't look like many of the manufacturers agree - or the DPR reviews. Oh, of course, it's just cynical marketing.

Last Modified By Steppenwolf at 25 May 2013 - 11:34 AM
MichaelMelb_AU
25 May 2013 - 12:25 PM

Here you will find all the explanations you need. I would not put it any better. This time I will abstain of any conclusions for (inter)personal reasons.

Steppenwolf
25 May 2013 - 1:28 PM


Quote: Here you will find all the explanations you need. I would not put it any better. This time I will abstain of any conclusions for (inter)personal reasons.

I'll take that as an admission that you're wrong.

Next time, when someone tries to explain something to you, don't accuse them of "illiteracy". Some people have a short fuse.

MichaelMelb_AU
25 May 2013 - 2:57 PM


Quote: Here you will find all the explanations you need. I would not put it any better. This time I will abstain of any conclusions for (inter)personal reasons.

I'll take that as an admission that you're wrong.

Next time, when someone tries to explain something to you, don't accuse them of "illiteracy". Some people have a short fuse.

I suggest that after having warnings from moderators you stop trying to provoke a conflict. I did not make any confessions to you and not going to. I did not ask for your explanations to start with. As for the matter of the discussion - a lot of confusion was caused by similar, but different matters of depth of field and depth of focus. Alas, even in theory there's is a lot of misreading for each of them. I suggest we stop here. Take it as you wish.

Last Modified By MichaelMelb_AU at 25 May 2013 - 3:04 PM
saltireblue
saltireblue Site Moderator 33366 forum postssaltireblue vcard Norway22 Constructive Critique Points
25 May 2013 - 3:40 PM

This thread has degenerated into a 'handbags at 5 paces' affair and has been ruined for sensible debate.
Complaint and counter-complaint have been made - they will be dealt with off-forum.
Meanwhile this thread is closed.

MODERATOR POST

Attention!

This topic is locked.
Reason: subject of complaints