DLBlack
Forum Pro
Neat Idea!!!
Dave
Dave
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
How about this idea for inclusion in the next camera
- Thread starter Lance B
- Start date
Fair enough, but how do you relate them to what you see in your frame?
Have you ever used an old fashioned 35mm film camera with a good viewfinder? (Excuse this rhetoric question) My point is, that I used to be perfectly able to judge DOF stopped down to F11 or F16 while taking landscape pictures. Little of it was ever done in very dim light I admit, but what is the percentage of frames one would take, where DOF is totally critical while it is very dark? I guess in such critical situations my workarounf has always been to determine near and far focus at open aperture and then choose required F-stop based on DOF scale on lens. Bummer we don't get those anymore on those fancy DA and DA* lenses.
Seriously, I don't enjoy digital photography as much as I used to enjoy taking slides. Part of the reason is, that all this extra technology makes it actually really hard to focus on the essentials, as there are framing, focus point, f-stop, and exposure.
I doubt, that your technology would be a good workaround for the lack of a good viewfinder (FF). Being devils advocat here and not saying, that you ridea isn't interesting.
Cheers,
Torge
--
More of my pictures are here: http://www.pbase.com/torge/
Various tags to clarify what your message is about...
HELP: having difficulty with camera
TIP: stuff you've figured out how to do and want to share
IMGP: images posted to the forum for enjoyment of all
TECH: technical talk and rumors
CHALLENGE: for all our various challenges
ORG: anything issues about the forum
CR: please critique my images
CHAT: This place is so great, I love you guys! etc.
OT: Off the Topic of Pentax DSLR photography
LINK: links to other sites
You would focus on a point and the camera then advises how much in front and behind that point would be in focus by giving you an actual distance in say cms, or what ever measurements you would like to use. Armed with that information you could determine whether you needed to use a smaller aperture size/higher aperture number and/or whether you need to focus further or closer to the subject.
Yes, I have, and the trouble is even with the biger brighter VF when stopping down it was still difficult to accurately judge to DOF due to the VF going dark. Yes, you could see the subject but to me it was still a little difficult to actually judge precisely what was and what wasn't in focus.
A flower in the undergrowth maybe, or a dark afternoon/morning, or where you are using a flash?
You really don't need an aperture ring as this can still be determined with a DA lens without an aperture ring. I do this with my DA14 prime lens as DOF markings for each aperture are on the lens. At the moment, to determine critical DOF, I regularly focus on the nearest point I require to be in focus, then the furthest point(assuming it is not a landscape where almost infinity is required) and then use an aperture that encompasses these distances with reference to the lens markings(this cannot be achieved on a zoom as they do not have these markings). With my new idea, the camera would calculate these distances for you with the focal length selected, focus distance and aperture selected so there would be no need for all this checking.
I agree to a point. I loved taking slides on those big bright viewfinders, but I love the post processing and the freedom tha digital affords us now. I would never want to go back to the old system as I like to be able to control all aspects of photography from photo taking to post process and printing rather than leave it up to somebody else's interpretation, something I could never dream of with slide taking.
As I say, this is idea is not to replace a big bright viewfinder and a DOF preview button, but can be used in conjunction with these tools
In many situations, it would be good to be able to preset the aperture knowing full well what the DOF will be at a given distance without having to look up tables.
Cheers,
--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
GMT +10hours
One issue is that depth of field is not absolute. In this digital era, you would find that the images at both ends of the traditional DOF scale do not appear very sharp if you pixel peep at 100% crop. So for SOME people, their "acceptable" DOF range may be significant smaller than others.
Luminous landscape had an article on this very issue:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/Digital%20Focusing.shtml
So what constitutes acceptable sharpness and DOF could be an issue in implementing this function.
Luminous landscape had an article on this very issue:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/Digital%20Focusing.shtml
So what constitutes acceptable sharpness and DOF could be an issue in implementing this function.
I understand well where you want to go, but I don't think it would be practical in field use. Ok, if you have tripod all set up, have a measuring tape, and don't mind walking back and forth from camera to subject and back - fine, that might then work for you.
For that reason I never used a split prism in slide days and might have been spoiled by the really excellent VF of the LX which allowed me to easily determine focus. Now I have a Katz Eye in my DSLRs, as I have a hard time focussing my old lenses using the small viewfinder. Split prisms on the other hand do get totally black if you stop down. They also cover a much larger area of the smaller viewfinder (in relation) which renders the whole DOF preview buisiness with cropped sensors rather difficult.
Don't have a flash myself, but in dim light and stepped down a tripod is required anyways. With the old fashioned method of determining close and far focus point at open aperture and focussing using the middle between the two readings at appropriate f-stop is just fine and likely more accurate than the tape measure approach.
Guess you are right, some of the DA lenses still have some kind of markings. I only have a couple DA zooms though.
Here I have to agree, as post processing can be fun. Unfortunately it makes us sit in front of the PC even longer.
A firend of mine impressed me the other week by being the only one still showing slides at our annual slide show. The quality of his slides blew us all away, although I know, that this is actually nore related to the shortcomings of digital projection right now. Anything regarding printing I start to prefer a digital workflow.
Anyway, I want Pentax or Hoya or whoever produced DSLRs for the K-mount in the future to focus on some classic values of taking pictures, like simple classic operation, like aperture ring, shutterspeed dial, lockable ISO dial, DOF preview for real in big, bright FF VF. I couldn't care less for multiple program modes, useless RAW buttons, settings hidden in menus, small viewfinder, etc. (not saying that Pentax is particularly bad at this, to the contrary).
Cheers,
Torge
--
More of my pictures are here: http://www.pbase.com/torge/
Various tags to clarify what your message is about...
HELP: having difficulty with camera
TIP: stuff you've figured out how to do and want to share
IMGP: images posted to the forum for enjoyment of all
TECH: technical talk and rumors
CHALLENGE: for all our various challenges
ORG: anything issues about the forum
CR: please critique my images
CHAT: This place is so great, I love you guys! etc.
OT: Off the Topic of Pentax DSLR photography
LINK: links to other sites
If you read my post fully you would have seen this sentence:
"You could even set the circle of confusion parameters in the camera's menu to suit your own requirments."
--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
GMT +10hours
The purpose of the idea was not to replace the other instruments for DOF checking, but rather to augment them or to make some measurements quick and easy for some situations. IMO, an instance would be a quick portrait of somebody which even using the DOF preview can be a little cumbersome in some respects whilst you search over the persons face to see whether it is sufficient or too much DOF.
Basically, with my idea, you would select aperture and focus on the subject(which is done anyway) and then press a button which instantly advises of how much is in focus, in mm or cm, infront and behind the focus point. You can quickly judge in your mind whether that is satisfactory or not.
In this sort of situation I would find it much quicker than pressing the DOF preview button and then looking over the persons face to ascertain whether there is sufficient DOF or not as I can more quickly judge this by actual measured distance than searching the VF.
The other benefit is that you can preselect focus and aperture for a subject and instantly know that you have sufficient DOF without even using the DOF preview button before you take the photo as the camera has provided the information.
As I pointed out and I stress again, this is not a replacement of other DOF aiding functions, but as another way of doing things that can assist in many situations.
--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
GMT +10hours
Basically, with my idea, you would select aperture and focus on the subject(which is done anyway) and then press a button which instantly advises of how much is in focus, in mm or cm, infront and behind the focus point. You can quickly judge in your mind whether that is satisfactory or not.
In this sort of situation I would find it much quicker than pressing the DOF preview button and then looking over the persons face to ascertain whether there is sufficient DOF or not as I can more quickly judge this by actual measured distance than searching the VF.
The other benefit is that you can preselect focus and aperture for a subject and instantly know that you have sufficient DOF without even using the DOF preview button before you take the photo as the camera has provided the information.
As I pointed out and I stress again, this is not a replacement of other DOF aiding functions, but as another way of doing things that can assist in many situations.
--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
GMT +10hours
bduncan
Leading Member
I like the idea. There are situations where it'd be nice to know how much to stop down to get everything into focus. DOF preview as you say, doesn't always work well.. All this spare computing power in the camera, why not? SMOP (simple matter of programming)..
--
Bill, Toronto, Canada
--
Bill, Toronto, Canada
Mike Muizebelt
Veteran Member
Thanks Lance, day 4 has just startedGood on you, and good luck, mate. My thoughts are with you in this
difficult time!
Quitting is easy, I should just not light a ciggy anymore!
--
--
'Best wide angle lens? Take a few steps back and look for the WoW effect.'
http://www.pentaximaging.nl
dieda
Well-known member
Hi,
I thought about that too, but I believe the focus rotation range is different in each lens, and it is not scaled to subject distance. The camera only knows in which direction to turn the focus ring and it checks if it has achieved focus by checking the contrast change. All in all, I think the camera does not know the focus distance and therefore cannot calculate the DoF. I think it would be saved in the Exif, would it not? There you cannot find but.
Am I wrong?
David
--
http://www.dieda.extra.hu
I thought about that too, but I believe the focus rotation range is different in each lens, and it is not scaled to subject distance. The camera only knows in which direction to turn the focus ring and it checks if it has achieved focus by checking the contrast change. All in all, I think the camera does not know the focus distance and therefore cannot calculate the DoF. I think it would be saved in the Exif, would it not? There you cannot find but.
Am I wrong?
David
--
http://www.dieda.extra.hu
Why use numbers to describe DOF, when you can see it using the DOF preview? It's practical usability relies on a persons ability to judge distance with some degree of accuracy.
Having a numerical readout may be useful to some, but I think the optical & digital preview works better. It's quick & you can actually see where the zone of focus is.
Personally it'd be a feature like the RAW button on the K10D. Sounds more useful on paper than it is in reality.
--
Dave Savage
GMT +8:00 hrs
Having a numerical readout may be useful to some, but I think the optical & digital preview works better. It's quick & you can actually see where the zone of focus is.
Personally it'd be a feature like the RAW button on the K10D. Sounds more useful on paper than it is in reality.
--
Dave Savage
GMT +8:00 hrs
I don't see why it couldn't be done. the camera knows its own Circle of Confusion, the calculation is pretty simple then. This would be a great feature, one that I'd love to see in a DSLR.
Pentax has a way of designing clever GUI ideas, this could very well be one of them.
--
bdery
Québec city, Canada
C A N O N S 2
C O O L P I X S Q
http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n13/bdery/
Pentax has a way of designing clever GUI ideas, this could very well be one of them.
--
bdery
Québec city, Canada
C A N O N S 2
C O O L P I X S Q
http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n13/bdery/
just thought of my trusty old (by digicam standards) Panasonic LX-1.
I seem to remember, that it actually offers exactly that feature. I remember being impressed by the idea and the way Panasonic has it implemented.
It makes totally sense on a non (D)SLR. However, I remember playing around with it a little but finding it too fiddly for everyday use. Still a perfect workaround for such a camera.
Cheers,
Torge
--
More of my pictures are here: http://www.pbase.com/torge/
Various tags to clarify what your message is about...
HELP: having difficulty with camera
TIP: stuff you've figured out how to do and want to share
IMGP: images posted to the forum for enjoyment of all
TECH: technical talk and rumors
CHALLENGE: for all our various challenges
ORG: anything issues about the forum
CR: please critique my images
CHAT: This place is so great, I love you guys! etc.
OT: Off the Topic of Pentax DSLR photography
LINK: links to other sites
I seem to remember, that it actually offers exactly that feature. I remember being impressed by the idea and the way Panasonic has it implemented.
It makes totally sense on a non (D)SLR. However, I remember playing around with it a little but finding it too fiddly for everyday use. Still a perfect workaround for such a camera.
Cheers,
Torge
--
More of my pictures are here: http://www.pbase.com/torge/
Various tags to clarify what your message is about...
HELP: having difficulty with camera
TIP: stuff you've figured out how to do and want to share
IMGP: images posted to the forum for enjoyment of all
TECH: technical talk and rumors
CHALLENGE: for all our various challenges
ORG: anything issues about the forum
CR: please critique my images
CHAT: This place is so great, I love you guys! etc.
OT: Off the Topic of Pentax DSLR photography
LINK: links to other sites
Franka T.L.
Veteran Member
Well even the camera owner / user might not know about it , but even back with film days this can be done and the camera that actually put this to work is the Film 7 body from Minolta. It had an option to display in Plain text your DOF ( with the setting the lens are )
--
--
- Franka -
Ironically, because of my glasses I actually find viewfinders on old film SLRs hard to compose with as I can't get my eye close enough to see the edges of the frame.
Regardless that lenses have differing focus rotation range, the lens can still be configured to "tell" the camera at what point of focus it is at. When you look at your lens you will see that the distances are marked on the focus ring and therefore these distances can be relayed to the camera. It would be more useful at closer focus distances where it is more critical to get DOF correct.
--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
GMT +10hours
Why not? I can judge that better than looking through a very dark VF after the DOF preview button is pressed. As I keep saying, it is NOT a replacement for the DOF preview button, but can be used in conjunction with it especially in those times where it is too dark to see the DOF via the DOF preview when shooting at f8 or f11 in a darkened enviroment.
But that is like many functions of cameras, they all rely on the persons ability to some degree to be competent enough to use them. This is just another tool to be used in conjuction with the DOF preview butoon for added convenience and can possibly be made to do more than the DOF preview button be automatically setting the correct focus for a given aperture and subject to camera distance.
I really fail to see why anyone would be against it if it doesn't affect other functions and can be implemented in conjuction with not as a replacement. Would you really say that it should not be implemented to stop many people from using what maybe a useful function to them just because you do not like it or think you wouldn't use it?
Seeing many of the positive responses here it would appear that others share my belief that a numerical readout would be a good idea.
Not all the time. As I pointed out previously, there are times when it is difficult to see the DOF via the DOF preview button as the VF goes too dark to accurately see DOF. This function would allow a reasonable idea of DOF.
I do not require the RAW button, but I can see by the many positive respondants here that they also would find it a useful feature.
I also do not find the Sv function all that useful, but I can see why many others do and I would not ask that it be removed or not included just because I do not find it such a useful feature. I may even find it useful one day myself in some situations. Better to have it and not want it than to not have it and maybe want it.
--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
GMT +10hours
Good point, Franka. I can't see why it isn't implemented with a modern DSLR.
--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
GMT +10hours
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum