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

Started Mar 5, 2014 | Discussions thread
MediaArchivist Veteran Member • Posts: 4,459

lumigraphics wrote:

Engineering is about trade-offs. There is no way to design a product that is perfect for every use case.

I personally shoot full-frame DSLR partly BECAUSE of the ability to get shallower DOF than with APS-C. If I could afford it, I'd get my hands on one of the new Hasselblads with the Sony sensor and that would be a benefit.

I shot landscapes on 645 film for years and thought the tradeoffs were right for my usage. I know how to get shallow or deep DOF if I need it for a particular shot.

I don't understand the "I don't use/like/understand [insert style or technology], therefore based on my tastes it is bad/disadvantage/silly" proclamations. We'll just add "shallow DoF" to the list:

  • mirror
  • mirrorless
  • megapixels
  • OSS
  • IBIS
  • sensor size
  • ETTR
  • flash
  • HDR
  • PP
  • cropping
  • prime lens
  • zoom lens
  • BIF
  • portrait
  • landscape
  • IR
  • CPL
  • ...
-- hide signature --

Want a roXplosion!?

 MediaArchivist's gear list:MediaArchivist's gear list
Sony a99 II Sony 135mm F1.8 ZA Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* Sony 135mm F2.8 (T4.5) STF Sony 24mm F2 SSM Carl Zeiss Distagon T* Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +22 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