Show me-don't talk about DOF FF vs u4/3

Started May 25, 2012 | Discussions
Detail Man
Forum ProPosts: 14,971
Like?
Re: Shallow DOF can be attained with any system.
In reply to Great Bustard, May 25, 2012

Great Bustard wrote:

It's simply that FF systems have more DOF options than systems with smaller sensors.

And that is all that I have ever seen Joe attempt to say about the possibility of FF approaches.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DRabbit
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,566Gear list
Like?
Thanks Russ and Jim :) --nt
In reply to JimLindner, May 25, 2012
-- hide signature --

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.
Google+: http://gplus.to/DangRabbit
Twitter: http://twitter.com/DangRabbit
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/DangRabbitPhotography
PAD Project: http://www.DangRabbit.com/photography/pad
Gallery: http://www.DangRabbit.com/photography

 DRabbit's gear list:DRabbit's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Leica M8 Pentax K-5 Olympus PEN E-PM1 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,313
Like?
Re: Show me-don't talk about DOF FF vs u4/3
In reply to MAubrey, May 25, 2012

Very nice flowers, especially the last one

And the truth is that with all those macro shots, the problem is to get enough depth of field to keep important parts in focus. The OP chose really bad subject to demonstrate the need for FF camera.

MAubrey wrote:

Not all a flowers...

-- hide signature --

--Mike

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Agitprop
Regular MemberPosts: 314
Like?
Re: Show me-don't talk about DOF FF vs u4/3
In reply to Peter Nelson, May 25, 2012

Not much terribly artistic going on here, but here's a voightlander f0.95 example. 25mm @ f0.95 - 3200 ISO. Yes, the eyes aren't in focus. I only had the camera fot a couple days at the time and didn't have my diopter set correctly.

Here is a detail of a rifle I've just sold... Panasonic 20mm @ f2.0. Note the carpet in the bg. Rifle was about 10 inches away, carpet about 2.5 - 3 feet.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
szlevi
Contributing MemberPosts: 932Gear list
Like?
So oversized it's impossible to see anything meaningful even in 1900x1200 (nt)
In reply to Agitprop, May 25, 2012
-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

 szlevi's gear list:szlevi's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Spectacle99
Regular MemberPosts: 115
Like?
Re: Show me-don't talk about DOF FF vs u4/3
In reply to Peter Nelson, May 25, 2012

Of course you're right that FF cameras are able to get you shallower depth of field with big apertures when shooting at wider angles.

But I find it odd that you chose this photo to make your case. The depth of field in your shot isn't very shallow at all, and the image is really noisy. If you want to make your case, you should have gone for a clean image, where the background slides into creamy bokeh almost immediately, with virtually no details visible in the background at all.

I routinely get much cleaner, shallower DOF shots than this with my pocket superzoom and even my iPhone 4S. And both have sensors much, much smaller than that of my m43 cameras or APS-C DSLR, not to mention FF. It's really just a matter of knowing your lens, focal lengths, and focus. For example:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/53400673@N08/7150473867/in/set-72157629311262086/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/53400673@N08/6450582007/in/set-72157629311262086/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/53400673@N08/6913377107/in/set-72157629311262086/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dags
Senior MemberPosts: 1,381
Like?
Re: Show me-don't talk about DOF FF vs u4/3
In reply to Agitprop, May 25, 2012
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ollie 2
Senior MemberPosts: 1,364Gear list
Like?
Re: that I can afford should be something that anyone can reason out without being to
In reply to Peter Nelson, May 25, 2012

Peter Nelson wrote:

I only want people who do not see FF images to at least see what they can look like. Hence my post. I was deffensive at the onset because I just knew there would be many insults without comprhending what I wrote.

Peter

Anyone who has ever opened a magazine has seen an FF image. The people here are photographers - amateur and pro. What on earth would lead you to believe that there would be anyone here who was not completely familiar with FF photography?

 Ollie 2's gear list:Ollie 2's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Olympus PEN E-P2 Fujifilm X-Pro1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 +16 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,890
Like?
Ollie 2: Usage is different than reading a magazine
In reply to Ollie 2, May 25, 2012

The way they talk leads me to think they have never used a FF DSLR. That's different than looking at a picture someone else took for a magazine.
-Peter

Ollie 2 wrote:

Peter Nelson wrote:

I only want people who do not see FF images to at least see what they can look like. Hence my post. I was deffensive at the onset because I just knew there would be many insults without comprhending what I wrote.

Peter

Anyone who has ever opened a magazine has seen an FF image. The people here are photographers - amateur and pro. What on earth would lead you to believe that there would be anyone here who was not completely familiar with FF photography?

-- hide signature --

Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,890
Like?
Amy: Show me-don't talk about DOF FF vs u4/3
In reply to DRabbit, May 25, 2012

I have 3 m4/3 cameras so I can get shallow DOF at F/8 just like you Amy. I agree that DOF is nice on FF. That's actually why I posted. I was so surprised at how even the one violet in focus has areas that are soft due to shallow DOF even at f/4.

I was really surprised. I guess f/8 and be there still makes sense. I can only wonder what that violet would look like at f/1.4 and the 20 or so inches between the lens and flower.

Thank you for being a nice person and helping me to focus this thread about cameras and not personalities.

I am an artist and I do have those moods when I say things that I know I should be more carefull than I am and hence I get servrd a dish of crow.
-Peter

DRabbit wrote:

Peter Nelson wrote:

Amy while these are nice they do not really give me a feeling of great DOF. They do have some DOF that's for sure.

The first few weren't wide open, or meant to melt away the background, just give me the subject isolation I was after. The last few have completely blurred backgrounds -- best selection I could find on short notice

Again, not at all trying to argue. I really do think we can get what we need with our tools of choice... and that's really the rub isn't it?

Sorry about my attitude. But as I was writing my OP to ask for comparasons from FF vs. m4/3 I could already hear trhe taunts and insults and that got to me. I just want people to see FF comparasons before they loose even more popularity. Remember my shot was at f/4.

Full frame cameras offer greater options for DOF control -- no one can (or should) argue it really. But it's pros vs. cons. For example, you wanted the flower in focus and the background somewhat blurred. You shot at f/4 on a 50mm. My 25mm at f/2 could have produced a very very similar shot... and the kit would be half the size. For me that's important.

(Okay, maybe it wouldn't be half the size compared to a FILM camera... I'll give you that!)

Where I'd run into limitations is if you made your example shot at f/1.4... that I couldn't replicate easily, from the same distance, with m4/3. But in reverse, if you needed to shoot something at f/16 to get a lot of DOF, I'd only need to shoot it at f/8 -- so it can cut both ways.

It's like if someone say's something that is not popular here we all know ahead of time that people will insult that OP.

eh, no need for insults. We are all into photography (assumably!)... I went through it a while back when I criticized the GH2, so you're in good company

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.
Google+: http://gplus.to/DangRabbit
Twitter: http://twitter.com/DangRabbit
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/DangRabbitPhotography
PAD Project: http://www.DangRabbit.com/photography/pad
Gallery: http://www.DangRabbit.com/photography

-- hide signature --

Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Agitprop
Regular MemberPosts: 314
Like?
Re: So oversized it's impossible to see anything meaningful even in 1900x1200 (nt)
In reply to szlevi, May 25, 2012

You can always click zoom out...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bluephotons
Senior MemberPosts: 2,586Gear list
Like?
Re: Ollie 2: Usage is different than reading a magazine
In reply to Peter Nelson, May 25, 2012

I for one never knew there were more formats other than m 4/3! Now that you found your way here I hope you join the other non m4/3 users that stick around here, we need to be enlighten, welcome home!
--
Bluephotons
Ah, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now. Bob Dylan

 Bluephotons's gear list:Bluephotons's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,890
Like?
Nice photo's JimLinder: I'll throw two in the ring.
In reply to JimLindner, May 25, 2012

I had a Large Format camera for years and somehow when we moved I never found it. What a loss. I used a flat bed scanner on it and it made a nice stills digital camera. Well the phot did have interlaced lines, which I got used too and this never bothered me. But yea, DOF is better with Med and Large Format.

BTW, I think I was kinda cranky. I get like that on line at least once every two years. I don't enjoy the fighting so I am usually more carefull with my words.
-Peter

JimLindner wrote:

Peter Nelson wrote:

Even if you are really old at 62 like me.

Sorry for my attitude in my OP. But I knew ahrad of time I was going to be insulted and ridaculed and this got to me and gave me an attitude.

All I wanted was to see some comparasons. I think people should look at FF before it becomes even less popular. I really like my Kodak SLR/n.
-Peter

No, problem Peter us old coots are allowed to get cranky once and awhile. I have had a SLR but not a DSLR, I love four-thirds for MY use but every system has it's limits. Your FF Kodak is like my u43 to those medium format guys!

-- hide signature --

Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Detail Man
Forum ProPosts: 14,971
Like?
It is high time for us all to sell our smaller than Full Frame Cameras ...
In reply to Detail Man, May 25, 2012

... as it is simply on it's face categorically futile to debate "the most interesting man in the world":

http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/1324579698/in/photostream

"Stay thirsty, my friends" ...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,890
Like?
Bluephotons: Usage is different than reading a magazine
In reply to Bluephotons, May 25, 2012

If only this were true!

I actually like all my cameras, m4/3, FF, crop, p&s, 35mm film and my (now lost when we moved) Large Format Fim camera.

Every once in a while I get an ipifany (spelling check please) like I just got for my FF Kodak DSLR the SLR/n. I guess when a person uses multiple formats, and then uses one more thant the others, going back to the others is such a pleasure. It opens one's eye's.
-Peter

Bluephotons wrote:

I for one never knew there were more formats other than m 4/3! Now that you found your way here I hope you join the other non m4/3 users that stick around here, we need to be enlighten, welcome home!
--
Bluephotons
Ah, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now. Bob Dylan

-- hide signature --

Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,890
Like?
MAubrey: I'm getting dizzy from the shallow DOF in your images
In reply to MAubrey, May 25, 2012

Thanks for sharing these.
-Peter

MAubrey wrote:

Not all a flowers...

-- hide signature --

--Mike

-- hide signature --

Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,890
Like?
markintosh13: Show me-don't talk about DOF FF vs u4/3
In reply to markintosh13, May 25, 2012

These are really nice. Thanks for posting.
-Peter

markintosh13 wrote:

-- hide signature --

Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LincolnB
Senior MemberPosts: 3,662Gear list
Like?
whatever
In reply to Peter Nelson, May 25, 2012

 LincolnB's gear list:LincolnB's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Fujifilm X-E1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II ASPH Mega OIS +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,890
Like?
Detail Man: Show me-don't talk about DOF FF vs u4/3 - The "Pinhead Perspective"
In reply to Detail Man, May 25, 2012

Nice photo's of flowers thanks for sharing.

My image? The viole just bloomed and I kind of like the overall composition. Including the red brown of the flower pot that you would rather not have in the field of view. I especially like the way the single violet is just floating in sharp focus in the soft air and surrounding soft blur and bokeh at f/4. Looking closely at that violet I can see the DOF resulting in some softness even at it's focal plane. F/5.6 would have cleared that up.

I have way too many images showing just the flower and almost nothing ekse. So perhaps that's why I like this one as a change of pace.

Just so you do not pitty the flowers it was about to rain when I took this image. Yesterday both my wife and I took turns hydrating them all. Hope we didn't over do it. It has been almost 90 deg F for a few day's, a hot spell in May here in Tennessee.
-Peter

Detail Man wrote:

Peter Nelson wrote:

Man, that is one sickly little flower, sport ! Did the "rule of thirds" somehow compel you to include that distracting flower-pot with a stick poking up out of it. Got any healthy, hydrated flora to find ?

Your original post has led to the posting of some rather nice images, indeed, however. Thanks.

So show me your flower images that you like. We can compare.

Here come those pinead-sensor people (ranging from a 1/2.5" form-factor to a 1/1.7" form-factor):

My personal philosophy is why not actually find some interesting and complementary backgrounds - rather than getting all hung up on obscuring all backgrounds altogether in a creamy smeary haze ?

... I also think I will hold IQ as the most important aspect pf my personal photography.

Probably surely "beats" holding some other things in your hands ! Hope that you enjoy these ...

-- hide signature --

Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Anders W
Forum ProPosts: 17,096Gear list
Like?
Re: Show me-don't talk about DOF FF vs u4/3
In reply to DRabbit, May 25, 2012

DRabbit wrote:

I'm not up for an argument, but I'm always up for sharing photos.

I will say that I can usually get the shot I'm after using the tool I'm equipped with. I'm not interested in full-frame mostly because of size. On top of that, I did shoot Canon for a while and the one thing they aren't known for is fast lenses that are sharp wide open, so what would be the point if I have to stop it down anyway?

Good points Amy, especially the one about lenses that are actually sharp wide open, but above all some very good shots. I particularly like the first, second, and fourth. The seagull is masterly!

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads