A few words on Equivalence and comparing systems

Started Apr 2, 2013 | Discussions thread
Macx
Senior MemberPosts: 1,396Gear list
Like?
Re: A few words on Equivalence and comparing systems
In reply to Chez Wimpy, Apr 3, 2013

Chez Wimpy wrote:

Macx wrote:

In this context it means that the important thing your chosen aperture decides is the depth of field and the total light it will provide.

I still think we will be stuck (?) with "f2.8" when dialing in camera settings though... adjusting an absolute aperture metric in mm (circumference, diameter, radius, mm^2 "area"?) on the camera would be a non-intuitive regression.  Or do you have thoughts on how it might be implemented?

-- hide signature --

-CW

Oh definitely, but my argument was that the "f/2.8 is f/2.8", implying that the exposure value of two f/2.8 lenses are the same regardless of their physical aperture, would become less popular. I agree that we would still need values for the aperture. ...But since you ask... If I had my way, we would use a logarithmic scale for aperture as proposed in the APEX system with f/2 = 2, f/2.8 = 3, f/4 = 4.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow