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

Started Mar 5, 2014 | Discussions thread
rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 24,539
Equivalence is the dead horse IMO

Except for FL translation, most other aspects of equivalence are irrelevant for most people, so larger means better, generally, in IQ aspects. Why is more DoF better than less Dof? Ask a wedding or a sports photog and they will tell you that shallow DoF is required for their business. Many PJs also like to isolate politicians and personalities, so events shooters will also like less DoF. Many landscapers, otoh, will like more DoF.

People with brand/format agendas are the ones that like to bring these "equivalence" findings to the fore.

-- hide signature --

OnExposure member
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
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