Reading mode: Light Dark

What is missing in all digital cameras

Go to last post
H

HotCold

New member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I just bought a D50 and thought that I had solved all my picture problems. I have no complaints about the camera, such as it is, for it produces cracking pictures but it magnifies the problem of how to deal with depth of field. This results from having such a large chip as opposed to what I have been used to - (Fujilfilm 4900Z, bought six years ago when I joined the digital revolution). With this I have not been troubled with depth of field which is relatively large. There seems no way that I can set the D50 to near distance in focus extending to infinity or anywhere in between. I could of course stop the lens right down to f22, vaguely guess at the hyperfocal distance focus setting and hope. This is no way to take a picture!

It does seem to me, given the breathtaking technoloy that the camera has, that it should be possible for the camera to calculate the depth of field extremities and set the aperture and focus accordingly.
I see it something like this.
You are offered focus bracketing. Step one, you autofocus near and enter.

Step two, you autofocus far and enter. The camera then sets the focus point and aperture. Would'nt that be nice.
 
this is a disadvantage of a bigger sensor

folks who use DSLRs want to get narrow DOF for dreamy effects & short of doing a great deal of PS work, which is rarely satisfying, narrow DOF cannot be gotten with a small sensor P&S camera

DSLRs stopped down can get a good deal of DOF of course, but will always be at a disadvantage when compared to cameras using smaller sensors

of course the advantages in noise, especially at higher ISO, are considerable and folks who favor DSLRs by & large want the hands on control they offer

lots of good choices available now a days for photographers to get just what they want and the future looks exciting
--
pbase & dpreview supporter
Fuji SLRT forum member since 5/2001
http://www.pbase.com/artichoke
 
HotCold said:
I could of course stop the lens right down to f22, vaguely guess at
the hyperfocal distance focus setting and hope. This is no way to
take a picture!
Click to expand...
That's about the only option available, though there are plenty of resources scattered about the web that list hyperfocal distances and so on.
HotCold said:
It does seem to me, given the breathtaking technoloy that the
camera has, that it should be possible for the camera to calculate
the depth of field extremities and set the aperture and focus
accordingly.
Click to expand...
Canon SLRs used to have that feature, called DEP mode. As far as I know none of the digital ones have it, though I might be wrong.

--
Andy - http://www.caerphoto.com/
 
Caer said:
Canon SLRs used to have that feature, called DEP mode. As far as I
know none of the digital ones have it, though I might be wrong.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the first DigiRebel have it?

HotCold, it's an unfortunate conseqence of how autofocus lenses are designed that they lack a DOF scale but many of the primes still have them.

--
'When it's time to shoot, shoot, don't talk'
Tuco - Il Buono, il paparazzo, il cattivo
 
What you are describing is not an error of the camera but a wanted feature of DLSRs. It is more the lack of flexiblity in regards to the DOF of fixed lens cameras that makes DLSRs superior.

Fixed lens or point and shoot cameras are prone for enormous DOF even when shooting wide open (f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6). This is due to the small sensors and the therefore gained ability to use very short focal lengths of those lenses. The shorter the focal length the better the DOF.

In photography large DOF field is not always desired, e.g Portrait or macro photography. And its the ablity of the DSLRs to do both that enable one to unlimited creativity.

I am not sure about the D50, but there are Canon models that offer the features you are looking for, where the camera automatically selects the largest possible aperture for the desired DOF. This feature is surprisingly accurate, but you can with some practice get the same results manually.

Try to learn and to understand exposure settings of your camera in combination with hyper focal distance of you lenses, you will see that with a a few tweaks of the settings you will be able to get the desired results.
HotCold said:
I just bought a D50 and thought that I had solved all my picture
problems. I have no complaints about the camera, such as it is, for
it produces cracking pictures but it magnifies the problem of how
to deal with depth of field. This results from having such a large
chip as opposed to what I have been used to - (Fujilfilm 4900Z,
bought six years ago when I joined the digital revolution). With
this I have not been troubled with depth of field which is
relatively large. There seems no way that I can set the D50 to near
distance in focus extending to infinity or anywhere in between. I
could of course stop the lens right down to f22, vaguely guess at
the hyperfocal distance focus setting and hope. This is no way to
take a picture!
It does seem to me, given the breathtaking technoloy that the
camera has, that it should be possible for the camera to calculate
the depth of field extremities and set the aperture and focus
accordingly.
I see it something like this.
You are offered focus bracketing. Step one, you autofocus near and
enter.
Step two, you autofocus far and enter. The camera then sets the
focus point and aperture. Would'nt that be nice.
Click to expand...
 
The depth of field of the dSLR's is a much desired feature (for some anyway). To increase your depth of field you can:
  • use a smaller aperature, or
  • use a wider angle lens, or
  • both of the above
Declan
--
One night in Bangkok makes a hard man humble
One night in Bangkok and the tough guys tumble
I can feel an angel sliding up to me
 
No matter what features the makers include there will always be one
photographer who complains that one vital feature is missing. There is no
point in buying a DSLR unless you are somebody who is prepared to learn
about photography. DSLRs usually allow DOF preview so that you can see
in the viewfinder what is in focus and what is not. The D50 doesn't seem
to have this feature the D70 does.
 
My 20D set is pretty well up to speed, and it does a good deal more than the Nikon 35mm SLR's that it replaces. I have a very effective tool in the kit that is compatable with all of the 20D gadgets, except for the lenses. It ensures marvelous DOF, and produces images that are up to par with the 20D. It is a G-6.
 
Your D50 lacks a the Depth of Field Preview button - a very useful thing which the Nikon D70/D70s has. If you had bought a better dSLR rather than dumbed down toy, it would've helped I'd say.
 
What you need is DOF Preview, which the D50 doesn't have.

Since you just got the D50, why not check with the retailer and see if they'll let you upgrade to a D70 or D70s? I believe the D70/D70s has DOF preview.

If you don't want to pay that much, and if you're not married to Nikon, I think the cheapest DSLR now with DOF Preview, without going to a used model, is the Pentax *ist DS (not DS2) if you can still find it on clearance. See Pricegrabber:

http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=4797056

Looks like this place has it in stock for US$554:

http://www2.butterflyphoto.com/shop/product.aspx?ref=pricegrabber&sku=PEN-IST-DS

Good Luck,

Greg
 
Robotnik123 said:
Your D50 lacks a the Depth of Field Preview button - a very useful
thing which the Nikon D70/D70s has. If you had bought a better dSLR
rather than dumbed down toy, it would've helped I'd say.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't want to be without DOF Preview, but not everyone needs it enough to pay more for it. I wouldn't want to be without mirror lockup either, but many people get by without it.

Greg
 
Greg Lovern said:
I wouldn't want to be without DOF Preview, but not everyone needs
it enough to pay more for it. I wouldn't want to be without mirror
lockup either, but many people get by without it.
Click to expand...
Both features should be really cheap to add, since the mirror needs to lock up and the aperture needs to close during exposure anyway. Unfortunately some of the cheaper DSLRs lack both and confuse users with a bunch of exposure programs instead. Apart from shutter priority and aperture priority I don't see a real need for anything else than a high speed program for action. This did not change since I bought my film SLR.

Bye, Silvio
 
Considering that there is always only ONE specific distance that is "IN-FOCUS"; in an exagerated sence ... there is no such thing as "dof".

There is only ONE "sharpest-focus"; and everything else is "out-of-focus" ... again, in an exagerated sense.

Of course, depending on the f-stop, and size of sensor, and focal-length of lens .... it may go out of focus so "slow" that no one will notice; and it appears to be in focus .... there is a fourth-factor to the above and that is the size of the enlargement intended.

Considering that I ALWAYS shot my photos with the intention to enlarge to posters ... (and therefore has less DOF) ... I always focus on "something". I seldom use "hyperfocal" to an arbitrary point in the middle. I either focus at the (near) closest point or furtherest point ... and never in-between unless there is a specific object to focus on; (main-subject).

I therefore consider the above suggestion another extension of "program" modes ... which I very seldom use because I never consider them as providing an optimum expose. (or at least is out of my control)
HotCold said:
I just bought a D50 and thought that I had solved all my picture
problems. I have no complaints about the camera, such as it is, for
it produces cracking pictures but it magnifies the problem of how
to deal with depth of field. This results from having such a large
chip as opposed to what I have been used to - (Fujilfilm 4900Z,
bought six years ago when I joined the digital revolution). With
this I have not been troubled with depth of field which is
relatively large. There seems no way that I can set the D50 to near
distance in focus extending to infinity or anywhere in between. I
could of course stop the lens right down to f22, vaguely guess at
the hyperfocal distance focus setting and hope. This is no way to
take a picture!
It does seem to me, given the breathtaking technoloy that the
camera has, that it should be possible for the camera to calculate
the depth of field extremities and set the aperture and focus
accordingly.
I see it something like this.
You are offered focus bracketing. Step one, you autofocus near and
enter.
Step two, you autofocus far and enter. The camera then sets the
focus point and aperture. Would'nt that be nice.
Click to expand...
--
Thanks for reading .... JoePhoto

( Do You Ever STOP to THINK --- and FORGET to START Again ??? )
 
HotCold said:
I just bought a D50 and thought that I had solved all my picture
problems. I have no complaints about the camera, such as it is, for
it produces cracking pictures but it magnifies the problem of how
to deal with depth of field. This results from having such a large
chip as opposed to what I have been used to - (Fujilfilm 4900Z,
bought six years ago when I joined the digital revolution). With
this I have not been troubled with depth of field which is
relatively large. There seems no way that I can set the D50 to near
distance in focus extending to infinity or anywhere in between. I
could of course stop the lens right down to f22, vaguely guess at
the hyperfocal distance focus setting and hope. This is no way to
take a picture!
It does seem to me, given the breathtaking technoloy that the
camera has, that it should be possible for the camera to calculate
the depth of field extremities and set the aperture and focus
accordingly.
I see it something like this.
You are offered focus bracketing. Step one, you autofocus near and
enter.
Step two, you autofocus far and enter. The camera then sets the
focus point and aperture. Would'nt that be nice.
Click to expand...
There's nothing "missing in all digital camera's", hotcold.

However, there IS something missing in your knowledge though: many digicams have a Depth-of-Field Preview button.
Maybe even yours but you just don't know about it . . . ?

Have fun and good luck,
RS
 
becksi said:
What you are describing is not an error of the camera but a wanted
feature of DLSRs. It is more the lack of flexiblity in regards to
the DOF of fixed lens cameras that makes DLSRs superior.
Click to expand...
Well - one person's "superior" is another person's "different".
becksi said:
And its the ablity of the DSLRs to do both
that enable one to unlimited creativity.
Click to expand...
To one person, shallow DOF = "unlimited creativity", to another, it means "unlimited mush".

Shallow DOF is sometimes attractive, but its a wholly artificial effect which doesn't correspond at all with the way the eye/brain sees the world.

Its nothing to do with not having DOF preview - having DOF preveiw doesn't increase the DOF, it just shows you you've got a problem. A hyperfocal table for your shortest focal length, printed off the web, would be a better tool.
http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html

The problem with larger sensors is that you really have to work at it, to get very deep DOF, say from 5 feet to infinity, if that happens to be what you want (according to the above link, you can just about do it, with a '35mm' [equiv] lens and f22 and focussing on 10ft). I agree with others - the best way (or if you prefer, the simplest way) is just to pack a good small-sensor camera (such as the G6, as someone mentioned, or an old Nikon 5400 with its '28mm' lens) in your kit, alongside all that SLR clobber. Bulk and cost are negligible, in amongst all that other kit.

Francis
 
JoePhoto said:
There is only ONE "sharpest-focus"; and everything else is
"out-of-focus" ... again, in an exagerated sense.
Click to expand...
True, but often irrelevant. There is a limit to the diameter of the circle of confusion, such that any smaller CoC wouldn't be resolved by the camera anyway. For all practical purposes, the image has to be considered sharp as long as the CoC stays within this limit. Doing the calculations in your head is quite hard, though, while it would be easy for the camera's CPU to calculate the distance and aperture settings necessary for a given depth of field. Canon's DEP mode was very useful for this, and it is a pity they replaced it by the next-to-useless A-DEP or did away with it completely.
  • Michael
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.michael-hussmann.de
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top