Once chosen for one format, it's fixed in all other formats (scales linearly with sensor size).
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Shallow dof comparison - 5d vs 5dII
- Thread starter MAC
- Start date
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
dstahlmanphoto
New member
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 0
This has been covered well above with accurate definitions and formulas for all you pixel peepers. But I had to chime in because its getting out of hand
NO! the sensor size has nothing to do with the damn DOF. A lens of a given focal length, at a particular aperture will project the same cone of light, or circle, on an object of any size that is placed on a given focal plane, ie. a piece of film or your digital sensor.
This is why the size of the rear element is different between different focal lenths and especially between different formats IN SLR bodies. The exceptions are in view cameras and boxed ( Hassel. Mamiya, Bronica) bodies where the focal plane is further away from the rear element. But again, the DOF would be the same regardless of what is there.
The FF sensor's pixels do not respond as well to light striking them at angles which is why a FF vignettes at wider focal lenghts.
dstahlmanphoto
New member
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 0
Sorry Roy2001 I quoted you by accident
gdanmitchell
Veteran Member
DOF, bokeh, and diffraction blur will be exactly the same on any two FF bodies given the same lenses and apertures.
Dan
--
---
G Dan Mitchell - SF Bay Area, California, USA
Blog & Gallery: http://www.gdanmitchell.com/
IM: gdanmitchell
Leon Wittwer
Forum Pro
If you use the original and traditional definition of DoF, then the format size does enter into the result. The original definition of DoF speaks to an acceptable focus when viewed in something like an 8x10 print viewed at about a foot. "Acceptable" meant that a circle of diameter of about 1/100th of an inch on the above print still looked "close enough" to a point. This size when demagnified to the format size is the circle of confusion used in DoF formulas.
Now, I don't have any problem if you want to define another quantity but don't call it the DoF as that name is already taken and has been well defined and accepted for decades.
--
Leon
http://homepage.mac.com/leonwittwer/landscapes.htm
Now, I don't have any problem if you want to define another quantity but don't call it the DoF as that name is already taken and has been well defined and accepted for decades.
--
Leon
http://homepage.mac.com/leonwittwer/landscapes.htm
Beginner's Mind
Forum Enthusiast
There's always someone making this argument in every thread.
Of course sensor size affects DOF. Not in physical terms, but in practical terms. DOF comparisons are only USEFUL if you are comparing the SAME COMPOSITION. If you want the same composition with different size sensors, you have to change focal lengths. You also have to change acceptable CoC at the sensor (as pointed out in other posts in this thread) if you are assuming the same print size.
For practical purposes, a smaller sensor gives more depth of field as any wedding photographer who has used a "crop body" and a "full frame body" will tell you (and they don't want more). And notice how easy macro is with some of the tiny sensored digicams. Lots of depth of field. And notice how view camera users (and I am one) can't get away without using tilt for a landscape composition. Small depth of field (exacerbated by desire for larger print sizes).
I'm so glad that someone finally responded with the correct answer, I was beginning to worry.
http://www.timothyarmes.com
Bill MacBeth
Senior Member
To set this all straight:
Blurring (onset of depth of field limit) is the loss of sharpness, and is expressed mathematically by multiplying the MTF (modulation transfer function) of the lens by the MTF of the sensor.
The sensor size of the 5D and 5DM2 differ, so there will be slight differences.
Those who answered 'no difference' or 'it depends only on the lens' have to stay through recess.
--
Regards, Bill
Blurring (onset of depth of field limit) is the loss of sharpness, and is expressed mathematically by multiplying the MTF (modulation transfer function) of the lens by the MTF of the sensor.
The sensor size of the 5D and 5DM2 differ, so there will be slight differences.
Those who answered 'no difference' or 'it depends only on the lens' have to stay through recess.
--
Regards, Bill
And for those who still doubt, this page explains everything:
http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/dof.html
You can skip the the section on "Digital depth of field" to get straight to the point.
Tim
Bill MacBeth
Senior Member
OOPS - meant to say the pixel size (not the sensor size) of the 5D and 5DM2 differ. Sorry. I will stay through recess with you.
--
Regards, Bill
gdanmitchell
Veteran Member
So is it your contention that...
... if we make two photographs of the same scene with the same lens at the same aperture and both accurately focused, with one made using a 5D and one made using the 5DII, and then use optimal RAW conversion, post-processing, and printing techniques to produce two excellent prints of the same size...
... that you will see worse diffraction blur, resolution, and/or "bokeh" in one or the other print?
If so, I'd love to see the physical proof.
Dan
---
G Dan Mitchell - SF Bay Area, California, USA
Blog & Gallery: http://www.gdanmitchell.com/
IM: gdanmitchell
... if we make two photographs of the same scene with the same lens at the same aperture and both accurately focused, with one made using a 5D and one made using the 5DII, and then use optimal RAW conversion, post-processing, and printing techniques to produce two excellent prints of the same size...
... that you will see worse diffraction blur, resolution, and/or "bokeh" in one or the other print?
If so, I'd love to see the physical proof.
Dan
--
---
G Dan Mitchell - SF Bay Area, California, USA
Blog & Gallery: http://www.gdanmitchell.com/
IM: gdanmitchell
Daniel Browning
Senior Member
The DOF projected by the lens will never change, but the sensor, processing, and display methods can have a large effect on how that DOF is captured and presented.
In the case of the 5D2, for very large prints, close viewing distances, and lenses sharp enough to resolve additional detail in the in-focus area, more of the focus blur will be visible, which means the in focus area will be smaller, which means the DOF will appear thinner.
--
Daniel
In the case of the 5D2, for very large prints, close viewing distances, and lenses sharp enough to resolve additional detail in the in-focus area, more of the focus blur will be visible, which means the in focus area will be smaller, which means the DOF will appear thinner.
--
Daniel
renato
Leading Member
no text
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum