G
greg
Guest
Authur wrote, "I now wish all the reviews would explicity give a focal length multiplier value."
Authur ... Based on many sites on the web and Mike Kowalski's EXIF viewer the multiplier for 35mm equivalent is 5.35211267605634.
Authur ... Based on many sites on the web and Mike Kowalski's EXIF viewer the multiplier for 35mm equivalent is 5.35211267605634.
The whole dof issue has been an eye opener since I started getting
into digital photography. I've come to the opinion that 35mm
became the standard not just because of a nice compromise between
image quality and lens size and cost, but also because of the dof
issue. With 35mm you usually have enough exposure options to
choose between large or small dof. If I had a large format camera
I bet I'd be stuck with very short dof, and with too many digitals
I'm stuck with very long dof.
I now wish all the reviews would explicity give a focal length
multiplier value.
I agree. I do a lot of work in my digital darkroom to achieve theI think that his point may have been not that we should always
resort to PS to obtain a shallow DOF, but rather that having a long
DOF is not necessarily a handicap.
desired effects but you know as well as i do it's not always as
simple as a few clicks to get the picture you want.
No, it's only a traditional way to express creatively. I think it'sIt's taken for granted that
shallow DOF such as achieved in 35mm cameras is the only way to
express an image creatively.
great that we have available a variety of means to achieve the
final look we want. I think it's great that digicams have such a
long DOF in that it does allow us to have more info. than what may
be needed in the final result and that it allows us to control the
final composition. Let's just not make it sound simpler than it is
to achieve the end results.
Dave