Potential dead horse: how bad is FF's deep DoF disadvantage?

Started Mar 5, 2014 | Discussions thread
Dennis Forum Pro • Posts: 17,813
Re: Potential dead horse: how bad is FF's deep DoF disadvantage?

sportyaccordy wrote:

As someone explained to me in another thread, for equivalent photos this phenomenon cancels out larger formats' high ISO advantage for completely equivalent pictures.

True. But how often do you need completely equivalent pictures ? Particularly when you need deep DOF ? If you need to underexpose (i.e. raise ISO above base) to maintain a certain shutter speed and maintain a certain DOF, then yes, you're talking about equivalent pictures. But if you have the option of shooting at base ISO, either because you're in good light or because you can shoot at a slow shutter speed using IS or a tripod, then the larger sensor enjoys the advantage. It makes sense to choose one or the other depending on how you shoot. (I doubt many landscape photographers regularly bump up the ISO to shoot their landscapes with fast shutter speeds, though I'm sure there are times when it's appropriate).

So my question is, for folks who have used an array of different formats extensively, how much does this affect real world shooting? Did you ever find yourself frustrated with the inability to get deep DoF from larger formats, or is it not that big of a deal?

Dating back to years of shooting slow 35mm film, it's never been an issue.

It seems to me more and more like no format is superior to another... they all have advantages and disadvantages that make them better for different kinds of photography, with no clear all around winner

Very, very true.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow