LUMIX S5 II - LIMITED OFFER - FROM £1699* GET FREE ACCESSORIES WORTH £££’S

Depth of field

dudler

Time for an update: I still use film, though. Not vast quantities, but I have a darkroom, and I'm not afraid to use it.

I enjoy every image I take: I hope you'll enjoy looking at them.
...Read More
Profile

  
  

Depth of field

4 Nov 2020 10:34AM   Views : 490 Unique : 340

11864_1604485972.jpg

And my mind’s been working hard since I wrote yesterday’s blog. The words keep on whirling round my head, like the introduction to my least favourite school book, Clement V Durrell’s 'O' Level Algebra tome… My maths teacher thought Durrell was wonderful: I… looked for a more helpful text.

11864_1604485991.jpg

Anyway, the pragmatist in me took two cameras out for my morning walk, intent on a real-life comparison. And my findings are that it’s not the biggest deal ever, but there’s just a little less depth of field with a bigger sensor, all other things being equal.

11864_1604486010.jpg

My comparison was between an Olympus OM-D EM-1 with a 45mm f/1.8 Olympus lens and a Sony Alpha 7R III with a Sony 85mm f/1.8 lens. I shot as near identical frames as I could with the two cameras, at a variety of apertures. Some of the results are here.

11864_1604486033.jpg

My conclusion is that the good Professor is making a point about close-up and macro pictures, rather than photographs in general. And I need to tease it out a bit more. But given my relationship with algebra, I shall leave most of the maths to other people…

11864_1604486053.jpg

From the top: Sony, f/1.8; Olympus f/1.8; Sony f/5.6; Olympus f/5.6; Sony f/22; Olympus f/22.

11864_1604486072.jpg

Take care out there!

Recent blogs by dudler

Focus scales

If you’ve been taking pictures since before autofocus arrived, you’ll be very familiar with focus scales – they are one of the primary controls on an old-school camera, and just one more of the things that you really needed to get right. With autof...

Posted: 27 Dec 2022 7:01AM

Porcelain processing

People commented on the look in my last post and it seems like a good idea to share the secrets for Christmas. I learned the technique several years ago: a model’s boyfriend told me about it, and a website that described it in detail: I tried it, l...

Posted: 23 Dec 2022 10:47AM

You develop your own films don’t you?

If you have your own darkroom, or if you use film cameras regularly, there are always a few people who mention the attic. As in ‘Grandpa’s cameras are in the attic. I don’t even know if they have film in them!’ This leads me to ask if I can have a l...

Posted: 16 Aug 2022 11:17AM

Choose your pond

There’s an old saying about being a big fish and a little pond. Do you want to be the most important person in a small organisation, or are you content being a relatively small cog in a big machine? It’s the same in photography. With relatively mo...

Posted: 3 Jun 2022 2:25PM

Graduated filters

This is for Hannah, and anyone else who has come across the casual way that a lot of togs talk about one or two types of filter that landscaper photographers use a lot: graduated filters and neutral density filters. A graduated filter is one that i...

Posted: 25 Apr 2022 12:18PM

All blogs by dudler

Comments

dudler Avatar
dudler Plus
20 2.1k 2048 England
4 Nov 2020 10:35AM
Not convinced? Go on - try it yourself. You may learn something interesting and useful about how your own lenses work...
James124 Avatar
James124 Plus
8 81 59 Portugal
4 Nov 2020 10:55AM
Another difference is the Olympus lens/sesnsor combination is just a touch warmer than the Sony.
AltImages Avatar
AltImages 3 4
4 Nov 2020 11:07AM

Quote:Not convinced? Go on - try it yourself. You may learn something interesting and useful about how your own lenses work...


Yes. That's the important bit. People can produce technically better images than Cartier-Bresson, Weston etc with their phones. But the best photos come from the photographer's brain not the camera. That's where the Professor was correct in his article, when he said what's inside the camera doesn't matter!
Last modified by AltImages on 4 Nov 2020 11:07AM
dudler Avatar
dudler Plus
20 2.1k 2048 England
4 Nov 2020 11:39AM
Quite what the differences between the sensors are is not so clear: apart from the f/5.6 shot, I'd left the Olympus on something other than daylight, and therefore had to correct in the RAW conversion. The Sony images are as shot.

Overall, I feel that the Sony gives me colours I like better than the Olympus, and WB is more predictable, but this is all very personal, and correctable in camera or in editing.

The search, as Paul suggests, is for a way to channel brain-stuff through the camera...
dark_lord Avatar
dark_lord Plus
19 3.0k 836 England
4 Nov 2020 12:47PM
A very interesting comparison John, and exactly right as the framing and content are identical. The difference is most visible in the background detail.
That, for photographers in practical and results terms is what's important.

Looking at this from a different angle, and it's likely the maths will bear it out (my brain shuts down when maths are involved), the images would look identical (colour resonse aside) if the aperture in both cases was the same (I'm talking physical size in mm). Essentially meaning a higher f number is needed on the larger sensor for the same 'look'.

I reckon a very similar principle would apply to a comparison with full frme and medium format.
dudler Avatar
dudler Plus
20 2.1k 2048 England
4 Nov 2020 2:02PM
I THINK that what the good Professor was saying may be that if the 'size of the hole' is the same, and the angle of view is the same... Still working on it. Happy to email a scan if you want.
Login

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join for free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.