Reading mode: Light Dark

Landscape mode infinty default-focus

Go to last post
I get your idea sanpete,
but I think the AF is much more accurate than the whole depth of field -
there are three methods of focussing
1. AF
2. MF with visual selection (with magnifier)
3. MF with focus indicators.....

3. (the latter) seems to be the most sensitive device.

the focus indicators seem particularly sensitive and the good focus indicator (circle) will be precice to about 1 or 2 degrees turn on the focusing ring. ie a small nudge either way......!!

this is a very good tool but skill is needed in using it eg the touble that I had

with the (bad) 1st take.... the hole in the hedge through which I was trying to focus - had several branches from the hedge going across it....

although I wanted to focus on the chevrons, - both the chevrons and the branches at 50 metres were in the focus box and it is difficult to be sure which one the focus assist has seized on....

whatever is seized on is detected with much more acuracy than the whole DOF as you are suggesting/worrying ......

regards ga-ga
Sanpete said:
If the DOF is, say, 30-90m, how does the camera distinguish between
levels of focus within that range? Given the limits of resolution
(camera and eye) that underlie the whole idea of DOF, won't an
object near the front or back of the range of focus give just as
much contrast as a similar one at the exact focus distance?

Put another way, if you point the camera at the tree at 50 m and do
AF, why should the theoretical focus point given the physics of the
lens position turn out to be 50 m? Why couldn't it be 35 or 75 m,
as long as that would have the tree in focus? How would the camera
know the difference?

My earlier idea on this was that the camera could use an algorithm
to get close to perfect focus, even though the difference between
perfect focus and near perfect isn't detectable by the camera or
the eye (except in terms of DOF) because of resolution limitations.
This could work by noting where contrast begins to change in each
direction, i.e. as the focus point moves towards and away from the
subject. Then it could split the difference, as it were (though I
don't know if half would work--might be a more complex
calculation). Otherwise, I don't see why the theoretical perfect
focus distance should match the one the camera settles on at all,
as long as the actual focus distance keeps the subject within the
DOF.

Antbody getting this?

On the specific issue of the 70 mm shot with both the tree and the
chevrons in focus, I still suspect, in line with some of Ian's
comments below on disc of confusion and such, that the chevrons
aren't really in the DOF, only close enough to fool us. To settle
the question, a better target would be needed, one in which degrees
of focus are more evident. And a crop at 1:1 of the relevant
targets would also help. One possible set of targets would be a
straight street with regularly spaced street lamps.

Interesting discussion, all.
ianR said:
In that case either the CoC is the same as a D-60, or the real
focal length of the lens at telephoto is about 32mm or the F no at
the telephoto end is really 5.6, or some some of combination of
inaccuracy of all three. Huge discrepencies.
There is something very seriously wrong here in any case. I'd
really like to know what's going on here.
What I was trying to say is this: is it at all possible that you
focused on the tree at 50mtrs but the lens backfocused to about
75mtrs? That could squeeze it just, but otherwise I'm totally
stumped. There just has to be one of those factors that's seriously
wrong and that's very disturbing.
regards
Ian
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
What you say may well be true, but how do we know? How would the difference be apparent to us? Maybe I misunderstand the whole concept of DOF, but isn't it supposed to be the range in which such things would be undetectable? Or is it just the range within which focus differences are close enough for everyday use but still visible?

Also, how much more accurate is the AF than the whole DOF, normally consrued? There must be some range within which the camera can't detect any difference in contrast.
ga-ga said:
3. (the latter) seems to be the most sensitive device.
the focus indicators seem particularly sensitive and the good focus
indicator (circle) will be precice to about 1 or 2 degrees turn on
the focusing ring. ie a small nudge either way......!!
this is a very good tool but skill is needed in using it eg the
touble that I had
with the (bad) 1st take.... the hole in the hedge through which I
was trying to focus - had several branches from the hedge going
across it....
although I wanted to focus on the chevrons, - both the chevrons and
the branches at 50 metres were in the focus box and it is difficult
to be sure which one the focus assist has seized on....
whatever is seized on is detected with much more acuracy than the
whole DOF as you are suggesting/worrying ......

regards ga-ga
Sanpete said:
If the DOF is, say, 30-90m, how does the camera distinguish between
levels of focus within that range? Given the limits of resolution
(camera and eye) that underlie the whole idea of DOF, won't an
object near the front or back of the range of focus give just as
much contrast as a similar one at the exact focus distance?

Put another way, if you point the camera at the tree at 50 m and do
AF, why should the theoretical focus point given the physics of the
lens position turn out to be 50 m? Why couldn't it be 35 or 75 m,
as long as that would have the tree in focus? How would the camera
know the difference?

My earlier idea on this was that the camera could use an algorithm
to get close to perfect focus, even though the difference between
perfect focus and near perfect isn't detectable by the camera or
the eye (except in terms of DOF) because of resolution limitations.
This could work by noting where contrast begins to change in each
direction, i.e. as the focus point moves towards and away from the
subject. Then it could split the difference, as it were (though I
don't know if half would work--might be a more complex
calculation). Otherwise, I don't see why the theoretical perfect
focus distance should match the one the camera settles on at all,
as long as the actual focus distance keeps the subject within the
DOF.

Antbody getting this?

On the specific issue of the 70 mm shot with both the tree and the
chevrons in focus, I still suspect, in line with some of Ian's
comments below on disc of confusion and such, that the chevrons
aren't really in the DOF, only close enough to fool us. To settle
the question, a better target would be needed, one in which degrees
of focus are more evident. And a crop at 1:1 of the relevant
targets would also help. One possible set of targets would be a
straight street with regularly spaced street lamps.

Interesting discussion, all.
ianR said:
In that case either the CoC is the same as a D-60, or the real
focal length of the lens at telephoto is about 32mm or the F no at
the telephoto end is really 5.6, or some some of combination of
inaccuracy of all three. Huge discrepencies.
There is something very seriously wrong here in any case. I'd
really like to know what's going on here.
What I was trying to say is this: is it at all possible that you
focused on the tree at 50mtrs but the lens backfocused to about
75mtrs? That could squeeze it just, but otherwise I'm totally
stumped. There just has to be one of those factors that's seriously
wrong and that's very disturbing.
regards
Ian
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Thats an interesting book Ian - but an unconventional alternative approach - I've not fully digested it yet but came accross this outline today that is probrably more the conventional view and easier to digest if anybody is interested....
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/dof.shtml

another thought struck me the recently - in regard to the (bad) shot.. and so much being "in-focus" - we don't know exactly how the AF system works.... sometimes peole have refered to spot focus - and I have interviened saying the fuji only has a spot alternative on exposure -

but my uzi did have 2 choices of focusing method - spot and averaged of the whole screen - I wonder if its posible that the 602 does any averaging out within the AF area - I don't think so but its possible......??

regards ga-ga
ga-ga said:
ga-ga said:
ianR said:
ga-ga, have a look at what Merklinger says in his book 'The ins and
outs of focus'
available here in .pdf
http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/download.html
Have a look at chapter 5 about disks of confusion, I admit I swim
in all those equations though.
What he seems to be saying is that an object in the field will
appear in focus at twice the focusing distance if it's at least the
size of the working diameter of the lens, and at half the focusing
distance if it's at least half the size of the working diameter of
the lens. That would mean when focused at 50m, about 6mm at 25M and
12mm at 100M. I don't know if it doubles after that.
He also explains elsewhere that we don't neep as much resolution on
distant objects for them to appear acceptably in focus. Our minds
don't expect them to be as distinct and as long as they are sharp
enough to make out what they are, our brains do the rest.
See what you make of it. At least part of the answer might be here.
regards
Ian
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Well I tried to perform the same test today and made a right mess of it.

Bitterly cold winds blowing the tripod about and freezing temperatures. I made a few mistakes but I've put the best of what I got here.
Basically, I got very similar results to ga-ga and the 602.
http://www.action-bookmark.fr/ian/DOF/

A few notes.

All at 2.8 of course and some using Fuji add-on lens at 70mm. All shot at 6mp to avoid any possibility of straying into digital zoom.

The building with the clock face is just over 500mtrs away. I paced the distance from the fence to the tripod at 400mtrs. I couldn't measure the other side of it.

The stick in the ground to the left is exactly 200mtrs from the statue, 225mtrs from the fence and 75mtrs from the camera
The fifth tree is 50mtrs from the camera (the nearest tree is just over 30mtrs)

The trees are all an exact distance apart and as far as I can tell, about 5.2mtrs (Odd! Probably divided the distance by 50 trees or something. Didn't count them.)

I took 2 shots in landscape mode. One on the clock and one on the sky. The shot on the sky showed the 'AF' warning so in my judgement, the 6900 defaults to infinity in landscape.

There are no shots of the tree at 50mtrs at 70mm because they were all awful. The wind was blowing really hard and I didn't realise the tripod was moving so much.

I used a custom white balance for the shots and it's a bit red. The Landscape mode of course is Auto WB.

Hard sharpening because I was messing with it after Tom's test and forgot all about it so a bit noisy

Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah! It was just too bl* y cold to hang around and check everything. I hope some of it is useful.
regards
Ian
 
Ian, I shared your suffering. Allmost freezed my b*lls off! Thanks ga-ga! Next time choose summer for these kind of tests! O.K, here is what I did: started with landscape mode, wide, lenscap on, quick-focus, take pic; zoom to tele, take pic; lenscap on, quickfocus, take pic; zoom out to wide, take pic. Repeat the whole sequence in AUTO mode. Last two pictures autofocus wide + autofocus tele. (ofcourse I took the lenscap off when taking pictures, before some clever-dicky comes telling me that!!!). No meters counted, but I guess the first truck was appr. 60 meters away. Rougly the same results as ga-ga.

conclusion 1: there is a big difference in default focus with landscape mode and tele

conclusion 2: it is still very hard to define where the focus point is, my guess is still at hyperfocal distance.

How did you guys manage to keep f2.8 in landscape mode: just lucky or did I miss that trick?

Here are the pics (all 6M files):
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee/test_landscape_focus

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
 
Well ga-ga, Ian and Tom, lots of data now, but still some murkiness about the DOF. It is nice to know about the landscape default being long instead of short. I wonder if the sharpening algorithm is interfering with the results, making more appear to be in focus than really is. Nice work, in any case.
TomCee said:
Ian, I shared your suffering. Allmost freezed my b*lls off! Thanks
ga-ga! Next time choose summer for these kind of tests! O.K, here
is what I did: started with landscape mode, wide, lenscap on,
quick-focus, take pic; zoom to tele, take pic; lenscap on,
quickfocus, take pic; zoom out to wide, take pic. Repeat the whole
sequence in AUTO mode. Last two pictures autofocus wide + autofocus
tele. (ofcourse I took the lenscap off when taking pictures, before
some clever-dicky comes telling me that!!!). No meters counted, but
I guess the first truck was appr. 60 meters away. Rougly the same
results as ga-ga.

conclusion 1: there is a big difference in default focus with
landscape mode and tele
conclusion 2: it is still very hard to define where the focus point
is, my guess is still at hyperfocal distance.

How did you guys manage to keep f2.8 in landscape mode: just lucky
or did I miss that trick?

Here are the pics (all 6M files):
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee/test_landscape_focus

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
 
Sanpete said:
I wonder if the sharpening algorithm
is interfering with the results, making more appear to be in focus
than really is.
Click to expand...
hmmm, I don't think so. But to be sure I didn't use program mode, and I think all the auto and scene programs use 'normal' sharpening. Can't see any sharpening difference in my test pic's. As we have seen before in landscape mode there is some sort of gamma correction. Can't find out what it exactly is.

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
 
I see a fair amount of difference between the soft and normal sharpness in your 6 MP test charts. I imagine the only way to avoid in-camera sharpening is to set the sharpening to soft. In trying to see what is in focus, if soft lines are sharpened, won't that be misleading? I know in theory they're all sharpened equally, I suppose, but it does seem to be a complicating factor.
TomCee said:
Sanpete said:
I wonder if the sharpening algorithm
is interfering with the results, making more appear to be in focus
than really is.
Click to expand...
hmmm, I don't think so. But to be sure I didn't use program mode,
and I think all the auto and scene programs use 'normal'
sharpening. Can't see any sharpening difference in my test pic's.
As we have seen before in landscape mode there is some sort of
gamma correction. Can't find out what it exactly is.

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
 
Yes, that's what bothered me too in the testpics ga-ga took: he used different metering methods and perhaps different sharpening methods. I think the chevrons in his pic's looking sharp is an optical illusion due to the black/white contrast. You can notice the same in my testshots, parts with bigger contrast look sharper. You can discuss though that parts which aren't sharp, still can be in focus. (example: take a soft sharpened image, it can still be in focus although the edegs are not 'sharp'. Anyway, in the landscape mode there is no choice: you have to use the normal sharpening.

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
 
did I.........??
what?..
ga-ga
TomCee said:
Yes, that's what bothered me too in the testpics ga-ga took: he
used different metering methods and perhaps different sharpening
methods. I think the chevrons in his pic's looking sharp is an
optical illusion due to the black/white contrast. You can notice
the same in my testshots, parts with bigger contrast look sharper.
You can discuss though that parts which aren't sharp, still can be
in focus. (example: take a soft sharpened image, it can still be in
focus although the edegs are not 'sharp'. Anyway, in the landscape
mode there is no choice: you have to use the normal sharpening.

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
 
Hi John,

in landscape mode the metering method is matrix (you can't change that). In your MF chevrons 46,8 mm it is multi spot. Also, in landscape the sharpening is standard set to normal. But I don't no which one you used in MF chevrons 46.8, you used P mode, but with which sharpening??

Any comments on the testing Ian and I did??

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
 
Well that's a good set of samples and yes, landscape is clearly doing something different to .

Whether it's on the hyperfocal distance or just at infinity, it's an incredible depth of field isn't it?
I can't explain why yours didn't stay at F2.8 on landscape. Very strange

By the way, this is what I could see 180° in the other direction. That's why the wind was so strong and cold! (Spot the famous but tiny object 20miles away.)



Ian
TomCee said:
Ian, I shared your suffering. Allmost freezed my b*lls off! Thanks
ga-ga! Next time choose summer for these kind of tests! O.K, here
is what I did: started with landscape mode, wide, lenscap on,
quick-focus, take pic; zoom to tele, take pic; lenscap on,
quickfocus, take pic; zoom out to wide, take pic. Repeat the whole
sequence in AUTO mode. Last two pictures autofocus wide + autofocus
tele. (ofcourse I took the lenscap off when taking pictures, before
some clever-dicky comes telling me that!!!). No meters counted, but
I guess the first truck was appr. 60 meters away. Rougly the same
results as ga-ga.

conclusion 1: there is a big difference in default focus with
landscape mode and tele
conclusion 2: it is still very hard to define where the focus point
is, my guess is still at hyperfocal distance.

How did you guys manage to keep f2.8 in landscape mode: just lucky
or did I miss that trick?

Here are the pics (all 6M files):
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee/test_landscape_focus

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
--
6900
 
Hi Ian,

it's a little bit the other way around: I can't understand why yours stay at 2.8; in landscape mode it will try to get the biggest f number possible (to gain greater DOF).

Funny little picture you put up there, but it is impossible for me to guess what object you are talking about :). Is this your hometown? Which one is it??

Ian, if you see these great DOF's, it makes one wonder how it is possible to get pictures out of focus, doesn't it?? It is allmost as fixed focus.

It still puzzles me which is the real focus point. In my test pics I would say somewhere around 60 meters (the first truck) is the sharpest. But if it was the hyperfocal distance, it would be the second truck. I can't think of any method to do more accurate tests (that will give better answers).

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
 
Hi Tom

Yes, I think a lot of the problem people have is with shake. That or perhaps their cameras just have a focusing problem. I have wondered about that many times, partly because of the enormous discrepencies we're seeing in low light focusing. Some seem to just focus better than others.

Occasionally, someone has 2 or 3 cameras and they too have seen differences. Not always of course.

We'll have to do some more tests but when it's warmer. I didn't realize it was so cold in the wind so I wasn't wearing anything remotely warm enough.

The city on the other side of the hill is Paris. You can't see it of course but you can just see the top of the Eiffel Tower in the distance. Where I took the picture is about 700mtrs from where I live.
No good pictures today!
regards
Ian
TomCee said:
Hi Ian,

it's a little bit the other way around: I can't understand why
yours stay at 2.8; in landscape mode it will try to get the biggest
f number possible (to gain greater DOF).
Funny little picture you put up there, but it is impossible for me
to guess what object you are talking about :). Is this your
hometown? Which one is it??
Ian, if you see these great DOF's, it makes one wonder how it is
possible to get pictures out of focus, doesn't it?? It is allmost
as fixed focus.
It still puzzles me which is the real focus point. In my test pics
I would say somewhere around 60 meters (the first truck) is the
sharpest. But if it was the hyperfocal distance, it would be the
second truck. I can't think of any method to do more accurate tests
(that will give better answers).

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
--
6900
 
Hi Tom,
I've been letting it soak in.........
I can't make much from most of your pics......

the reason why I put the TL extension was to make it more obvious where focus was sharpest by minimising DOF.
but today I've encountered this......!
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml
which flies in the face of thigs like Dofmaster....
(did I say it was more conventional...??)

I am not ready to accept the Luminous thing just yet I think it has some relevance but I don't think its entirely correct....

if you look at the bambi figure on the patch of grass behind gizmo... I think it is sharper in the 17mm image than the 28mm image.......

but it does make a point that its the effect of telephoto that is making distant objects apparantly larger that is emphasizing the off focus....
going back to your samples .......

the WA don't help because at least becasue its harder to see if they are out of focus...

and some of them you've zoomed after quick focusing which has taken them way out of focus........ you're on a different agenda there......

so really the only one that can give any conclusions is 3 the landscape tele quick focus - can you confirm distances of the first lorry, second lorry and end of the street......??
and what your tele is.......

sorry I'm going ga-ga, again.......!!
TomCee said:
Hi John,

in landscape mode the metering method is matrix (you can't change
that). In your MF chevrons 46,8 mm it is multi spot. Also, in
landscape the sharpening is standard set to normal. But I don't no
which one you used in MF chevrons 46.8, you used P mode, but with
which sharpening??

Any comments on the testing Ian and I did??

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
 
Hi Ian I guessed it!.......
the EYE-ful tower.......!¬!

I couldn't tell a lot from your pics either - can you decide where the default focus is coming?....... I can only download 800x600 and its hard to tell.....
see my reply to tom too.......

remember my thoughts were it might be different depending on manufacturing tollerances.......!!

regards ga-ga......
ps I've been having fun with a shampoo bottle and flashgun....!!

lol....
ianR said:
TomCee said:
Hi Ian,

it's a little bit the other way around: I can't understand why
yours stay at 2.8; in landscape mode it will try to get the biggest
f number possible (to gain greater DOF).
Funny little picture you put up there, but it is impossible for me
to guess what object you are talking about :). Is this your
hometown? Which one is it??
Ian, if you see these great DOF's, it makes one wonder how it is
possible to get pictures out of focus, doesn't it?? It is allmost
as fixed focus.
It still puzzles me which is the real focus point. In my test pics
I would say somewhere around 60 meters (the first truck) is the
sharpest. But if it was the hyperfocal distance, it would be the
second truck. I can't think of any method to do more accurate tests
(that will give better answers).

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
--
6900
Click to expand...
 
Yes, I've read that before ga-ga and from what I understand it's right but it doesn't make a scrap of difference.

The DOF thing is based on enlarging an image from a sensor of a given size to produce a print of a given size. DOF is determined by when a sharp point becomes noiceably unsharp.

Well if you're going to crop a bit out of the image from the sensor and blow it up to the same print size then naturally you are enlarging it more and you are going to reach the blur point quicker, so you get the same result. A crop from a 35mm produces the same DOF as a 200mm when they are manipulated to end up the same size? Of course!
That's my take but maybe I need to reread it again.
regards
Ian
ga-ga said:
sorry I'm going ga-ga, again.......!!
TomCee said:
Hi John,

in landscape mode the metering method is matrix (you can't change
that). In your MF chevrons 46,8 mm it is multi spot. Also, in
landscape the sharpening is standard set to normal. But I don't no
which one you used in MF chevrons 46.8, you used P mode, but with
which sharpening??

Any comments on the testing Ian and I did??

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
6900
 
I can't tell where it is either! This camera is crazy.

Did you see in the thread about ISO ratings, tblue I think, suggested that it varies with the photometery setting. I've checked it and he's right! Spot has twice the shutter speed of matrix at the same ISO.

My point being we should give this camera a nickname 'Stingray' because anything can happen in the next half hour (I'm showing my age now!)

A shampoo bottle and a flashun? Is this for a diffuser? Have you tried a plastic milk bottle, one of the big ones? It's supposed to work really well.
regards
Ian
ga-ga said:
regards ga-ga......
ps I've been having fun with a shampoo bottle and flashgun....!!

lol....
ianR said:
TomCee said:
Hi Ian,

it's a little bit the other way around: I can't understand why
yours stay at 2.8; in landscape mode it will try to get the biggest
f number possible (to gain greater DOF).
Funny little picture you put up there, but it is impossible for me
to guess what object you are talking about :). Is this your
hometown? Which one is it??
Ian, if you see these great DOF's, it makes one wonder how it is
possible to get pictures out of focus, doesn't it?? It is allmost
as fixed focus.
It still puzzles me which is the real focus point. In my test pics
I would say somewhere around 60 meters (the first truck) is the
sharpest. But if it was the hyperfocal distance, it would be the
second truck. I can't think of any method to do more accurate tests
(that will give better answers).

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
--
6900
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
6900
 
ianR said:
I can't tell where it is either! This camera is crazy.
Did you see in the thread about ISO ratings, tblue I think,
suggested that it varies with the photometery setting. I've checked
it and he's right! Spot has twice the shutter speed of matrix at
the same ISO.
My point being we should give this camera a nickname 'Stingray'
because anything can happen in the next half hour (I'm showing my
age now!)
Click to expand...
yeah!. its enough to drive you ga-ga........??

I've thought for some time the 602 is over exposing - it may just be down to the multi setting
see this spreadsheet..... http://www.gbpo.fsnet.co.uk/fuji.xls
ianR said:
A shampoo bottle and a flashun? Is this for a diffuser? Have you
tried a plastic milk bottle, one of the big ones? It's supposed to
work really well.
regards
Ian
Click to expand...
thats it!...

but if you go down to ....(the woods today)...supermarket you can find some loverly shaped translucent white bottles with a rectangular base that might fit over the head.......

my idea was to find something that stood up quite a distance and then send light all the way up it giving an illuminated lamp shade...... lets face it not many of us think a bare light bulb gives good lighting in a room...
anyway I'll post some pics in due course.......

regards ga-ga
ianR said:
ga-ga said:
regards ga-ga......
ps I've been having fun with a shampoo bottle and flashgun....!!

lol....
ianR said:
TomCee said:
Hi Ian,

it's a little bit the other way around: I can't understand why
yours stay at 2.8; in landscape mode it will try to get the biggest
f number possible (to gain greater DOF).
Funny little picture you put up there, but it is impossible for me
to guess what object you are talking about :). Is this your
hometown? Which one is it??
Ian, if you see these great DOF's, it makes one wonder how it is
possible to get pictures out of focus, doesn't it?? It is allmost
as fixed focus.
It still puzzles me which is the real focus point. In my test pics
I would say somewhere around 60 meters (the first truck) is the
sharpest. But if it was the hyperfocal distance, it would be the
second truck. I can't think of any method to do more accurate tests
(that will give better answers).

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
--
6900
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
6900
Click to expand...
 
I think Luminous may be correct. It is not the DOF that is actually changing, just our perception if what is and is not in focus. When you look at the wide with the tower small it does look a little more in focus but when he blew up the picture and the background tower was shown larger, you can see that it remained still out of focus, about the same as the tele shot (as he mentioned in the article).

It is probably just our eyes correcting for what we think is in focus and what is not. Being further away and smaller, it takes up of less space in our vision, less resolution in our view therefore less area of blur and we sense a sharper image. Just like resolution of the camera where you can see the image with a finer depth; where lower resolutions may just hide artifacts.

Like in the post of the guy that thought the 602 was no good because of noise and then realized that it was actually better than his other image from another camera because it was not noise but the dots that had made up the original poster image. Maybe sometimes too much resolution is no good.

Anyway, its just my opinion.
ga-ga said:
sorry I'm going ga-ga, again.......!!
TomCee said:
Hi John,

in landscape mode the metering method is matrix (you can't change
that). In your MF chevrons 46,8 mm it is multi spot. Also, in
landscape the sharpening is standard set to normal. But I don't no
which one you used in MF chevrons 46.8, you used P mode, but with
which sharpening??

Any comments on the testing Ian and I did??

--
Regards,
Tom
(FinePix S602z)
http://www.pbase.com/tomcee

S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/mkaplan

Visit the S602Z FAQ:
http://www.marius.org/fuji602faq.php
 
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