Is DOF really important?

[RubberDials]

No, you are right. It is a legacy feature. It has been made redundant in digital photography by the ability to review the actual image and by its inaccuracy at large apertures due to the focussing screen being less opaque than film cameras.

Wrong, it's not a legacy feature.

We know DOF on the OVF is not accurate as fast apertures (but it's still useful at other ones)

Lots of things are useful. If you carry a ladder around with you I guarantee you will find a use for it, but I wouldn't advocate doing it.

By removing the DOF preview, users can no longer stop the lens down..meaning
They get no optical DOF preview
And they get no sensor based LV DOF either..

Thus at least one useful part of LV is wiped out..

Nice ;-)

A 'live' sensor DOF preview function is not what we were discussing, I am in favour of that. We were talking about an inferior digital presentation of a mechanical/optical function.

Still think it's a "legacy feature"??

lol

Yes. Almost every aspect of DSLR design is dictated by legacy issues. Even the body shape still mimics a 35mm cassette and take-up spool. This is done to keep conservative customers happy.

 

[liquid stereo]

Those complaining about missing shots.... I wonder how many shots they "miss" while trying to gauge the depth of field. I'm sure they say none.

 

[WaltKnapp]

Yes. Almost every aspect of DSLR design is dictated by legacy issues. Even the body shape still mimics a 35mm cassette and take-up spool. This is done to keep conservative customers happy.

The shape of the body also helps in steadying the body to avoid motion blur. The body is already moved away from what it would take to hold the cassette, not enough room on the L side anymore.

Calling them legacy only ignores that they have current functions, often just as valuable as ever.

Walt

 

[gpr2020]

[please explain in what circumstances you have used the DOFP and what advantage it has over starting at one apature, take a photograph, step down or up and taking a few more a seeing which one you prefer?

If the moment has passed..retaking the shot won't be an option.

Same can happen when you checking your DOF, the moment's gone by the time you want to press the shutter.

--
In reviews we do not trust !

 

[RubberDials]

Yes. Almost every aspect of DSLR design is dictated by legacy issues. Even the body shape still mimics a 35mm cassette and take-up spool. This is done to keep conservative customers happy.

The shape of the body also helps in steadying the body to avoid motion blur. The body is already moved away from what it would take to hold the cassette, not enough room on the L side anymore.

Calling them legacy only ignores that they have current functions, often just as valuable as ever.

Walt

It's true that there has been some very slight alteration to the 'classic' film SLR shape, but it remains in use for the same reason they put pictures of tomatoes and the Italian flag on spaghetti packets: The SLR shape is a signifier of professional quality photography in semiotic terms.

It is certainly outmoded in design terms, and I would argue wasn't the best design even in the days of film - the Rollei 6000 series bested it in my view.

 

[WaltKnapp]

It's true that there has been some very slight alteration to the 'classic' film SLR shape, but it remains in use for the same reason they put pictures of tomatoes and the Italian flag on spaghetti packets: The SLR shape is a signifier of professional quality photography in semiotic terms.

To those of us who do a wide range of advanced photography it's not a symbol, it's useful and works, that's why we use it.

And this from someone who's shot with quite a few alternative body designs.

It is certainly outmoded in design terms, and I would argue wasn't the best design even in the days of film - the Rollei 6000 series bested it in my view.

However the Rollei did not change the designs of others. It will only be outmoded when something more versitile across a wide range of photography comes along.

One of the disasters occuring right now is the modern lens. Bloated bigger and bigger, it's far from a ideal shape. Bodies also need to go on a diet to get to a ideal DSLR shape. Maybe something like the shape of the old MF SLRs, and lenses to match.

Walt

 

[tom55604]

See my preceeding post. I explain how I use DOF preview. Obviously if I am taking a snap-shot (not a snapshot) where I can't plan, I don't use DOF preview. But I also don't use post view on the LCD because the moment is over and I either got it or not. Usually when I am anticipating such shots, I'll keep the camera set on multisegment-P-mode, and let the Minolta/Sony programing set the aperture and DOF based on its scene recognition. I believe that only works with Sony and Minolta lenses (based on tests I've done) and possibly some Tamrons.

Most of the time I preplan my shots and I can use DOF preview.

Tom

 

[tom55604]

Obviously there are people who feel VF DOF Preview is useless, and so it is for them. There are those who use it successfully and so its not useless for them, in fact it is important for the way they work.

Same with large VF, same with LV, same with MLU, same with video, etc, etc ,etc.

As long as Sony produces some with and some without, the user can select a camera based on what features they want. That's the way it was during the film days, and thats how it should continue. If a camera doesn't have a feature I feel is necessary, I won't bother with it. It may mean that I have to buy a more expensive camera, even one that has features I feel are a waste.

The problem I have is when they don't even offer the feature through their entire line. I know some feel that way about Video (I don't care about it as long as adding it doesn't screw up a feature I need), I feel that way about eliminating auto exposure with non-chipped lenses in all their cameras, even in their flagship cameras, which are those that an advanced user would be more likely to interface to a microscope or telescope.

 

[Hope1943]

David_Anderson has a very valid question - Why so adamant? So what if everyone doesn't shoot like you or wants or, heaven forbid, even uses a feature you don't value nor use. What's the skin off your nose? Say your opinion, of course. Let others say theirs without trying necessarily trying to convert him/her in your next post. There are also some snipers here that try to play policeman. There are a couple of folks for example, who go after Barry no matter what he says - like they are doing their best to shut him up. So what if he says he likes MLU or DOFP a hundred times? I do too, both of them - and it seems there are others who like them as well. Why is it so offensive to some that Barry and others state their opinions about it? Also the love it or leave it argument is just patronizing. Vote with your wallet will eventually happen, some sooner, some later, but many of those bemoaning the obviously missing features on many Sony DSLRs sincerely want Sony to succeed. They're not bashing Sony out of some malice, but throwing out loud and clear warnings that Sony is not pleasing many of its customers and potential customers. Sony, take note. And, some of you Paladins of the Sony castle, lighten up a bit. Discussion is fine, but you don't always have to seek to dominate, especially with sarcasm and name calling. Peace and respect to one and all.

 

[Zamac]

[please explain in what circumstances you have used the DOFP and what advantage it has over starting at one apature, take a photograph, step down or up and taking a few more a seeing which one you prefer?

If the moment has passed..retaking the shot won't be an option.

Same can happen when you checking your DOF, the moment's gone by the time you want to press the shutter.

true but ...

just making a fine adjustment to the DOF before shooting can often be done in the two to four seconds that I find one typically gets while an insect hovers or before it crawls out of frame. The shoot and review method takes much longer. It all depens on on the specific circumstances.

Arguing "from extremes" really does not contribute much to the discussion in a forum.

 

[Zamac]

Obviously there are people who feel VF DOF Preview is useless, and so it is for them. There are those who use it successfully and so its not useless for them, in fact it is important for the way they work.

Same with large VF, same with LV, same with MLU, same with video, etc, etc ,etc.

As long as Sony produces some with and some without, the user can select a camera based on what features they want. That's the way it was during the film days, and thats how it should continue. If a camera doesn't have a feature I feel is necessary, I won't bother with it. It may mean that I have to buy a more expensive camera, even one that has features I feel are a waste.

The problem I have is when they don't even offer the feature through their entire line. I know some feel that way about Video (I don't care about it as long as adding it doesn't screw up a feature I need), I feel that way about eliminating auto exposure with non-chipped lenses in all their cameras, even in their flagship cameras, which are those that an advanced user would be more likely to interface to a microscope or telescope.

In addition ...features that are appropriate for a specific level of photography should be included in the camera at that level. The customer will not buy, or cannot afford, a camera at twice the price just to get one missing feature - and in the case of the A550, give up features he does want. The only result will be a switch to another make, or a build up of resentment towards the manufacturer. A hobbyist who just wants to shoot a few insects in his back yard is not going to sell his A550 and buy an A900 (or even an A700) just to get DOF preview. DOF preview is probably less essential for the A900 user anyway, since A900 users are mostly professional-level photographers who have the experience to judge DOF without the need to actively preview it.

For me, DOF preview is an integral part of manual LV focusing. Leaving it out achieves nothing, probably not even a minor cost saving, and if it distinguishes between "levels" of camera, it does so to no purpose.

 

[gpr2020]

[please explain in what circumstances you have used the DOFP and what advantage it has over starting at one apature, take a photograph, step down or up and taking a few more a seeing which one you prefer?

If the moment has passed..retaking the shot won't be an option.

Same can happen when you checking your DOF, the moment's gone by the time you want to press the shutter.

true but ...

just making a fine adjustment to the DOF before shooting can often be done in the two to four seconds that I find one typically gets while an insect hovers or before it crawls out of frame. The shoot and review method takes much longer. It all depens on on the specific circumstances.

Arguing "from extremes" really does not contribute much to the discussion in a forum.

Well same can be said for the guy checking his LCD. At the end the ones that need DOF find it useful and the ones that do not need it find it useless, so if you need DOF buy a camera that has it, and if you do not need it buy a camera that does not have it or just do not use it.
--
In reviews we do not trust !

 

[Zamac]

[please explain in what circumstances you have used the DOFP and what advantage it has over starting at one apature, take a photograph, step down or up and taking a few more a seeing which one you prefer?

If the moment has passed..retaking the shot won't be an option.

Same can happen when you checking your DOF, the moment's gone by the time you want to press the shutter.

true but ...

just making a fine adjustment to the DOF before shooting can often be done in the two to four seconds that I find one typically gets while an insect hovers or before it crawls out of frame. The shoot and review method takes much longer. It all depens on on the specific circumstances.

Arguing "from extremes" really does not contribute much to the discussion in a forum.

Well same can be said for the guy checking his LCD. At the end the ones that need DOF find it useful and the ones that do not need it find it useless, so if you need DOF buy a camera that has it, and if you do not need it buy a camera that does not have it or just do not use it.
--

Even ignoring the cost implications, Sony does not have a camera with both real MFLV and DOF preview. It is the combination that is important. So I cannot buy a Sony camera with what I want, and I have too many lenses to think of switching makes.

Perhaps, if I complain loudly enough, Sony will include both in the A750, and then, only then, can I think of buying another camera.

I consider DOF an integral part of focusing. When focusing, there is a region of increasingly sharp focus which then (unless focused on infinity) decreases. For many circumstances, focusing on an object is supplemented (at an almost intuitive level) by one's experience of how far acceptable focus will extend (or by a quick look at the scale on the lens). But there are other circumstances where I need the preview, where my experience is inadequate, and the lens scale not precise enough. So if MFLV is included, so should on-LCD DOF preview . They are part of the same thing even if they can be used separately.

 

[Dave_Anderson]

Whenever this comes up I always wonder why some portion of the posts are always from people who are adamant that they don't need DOF preview, or that they always have the leisure to check the exposure on the LCD.

It is a whole lot easier for the DOF preview haters to ignore the feature, than for the people who rely on the feature at times to make do without it.

Again, why so adamant? What do any of you stand to lose if DOF preview, or MLU for that matter, are included on a camera body?

i personally have seen any haters on here of MLU or DOFP and i would be happy to have it on my camera and there maybe moments when i would use them, but i dont have it...but i think the so called haters have started speaking up because of the obsessive "lovers" and repeaters keep talking about the same subject what ever the post is. and some how wish to magic it on to cameras that dont have it and seem to be suggesting that they are not real SLR's unless they have such facilities. So as that great song writer said - BM,"every action has are-action"

I don't agree with that side of the discussion either; my own opinion is that at some point in the range it should be standard. Not every camera can or should have every feature, else how would they differentiate the different models? I would think that a midrange or better camera should have it. You could argue that the a700 is midrange because its intro price was half that of the a900, but IMO if you're paying $1K for a camera it ought to have it, so it's a bit disappointing to not see it in the 5xx cameras. Plenty of reasons besides that to avoid the 5xx series though!

 

[gpr2020]

Even ignoring the cost implications, Sony does not have a camera with both real MFLV and DOF preview. It is the combination that is important. So I cannot buy a Sony camera with what I want, and I have too many lenses to think of switching makes.

Perhaps, if I complain loudly enough, Sony will include both in the A750, and then, only then, can I think of buying another camera.

I consider DOF an integral part of focusing. When focusing, there is a region of increasingly sharp focus which then (unless focused on infinity) decreases. For many circumstances, focusing on an object is supplemented (at an almost intuitive level) by one's experience of how far acceptable focus will extend (or by a quick look at the scale on the lens). But there are other circumstances where I need the preview, where my experience is inadequate, and the lens scale not precise enough. So if MFLV is included, so should on-LCD DOF preview . They are part of the same thing even if they can be used separately.

In life nothing is perfect and at some points people have to make choices. Complaining all day is one of them, changing is another one. it all depends of what you are looking for and the way you chose to live.

Luckily, I do not care about any form of LV because it does not make my photography better and I always hated using LCD to take pictures. I like VF. And regarding features, I only buy cameras that have the features I need. I do not buy what does not fit my needs, and switching is always an option. Thanks god we have several manufacturers.
--
In reviews we do not trust !

 

[Zamac]

In life nothing is perfect and at some points people have to make choices. Complaining all day is one of them, changing is another one. it all depends of what you are looking for and the way you chose to live.

Complaining is not a choice, it is a duty!

For me, complaints about my products is valued feed-back (even if the products are software not hardware in my case). Praise may bolster the ego, but criticism improves the product.

Besides, who complains all day ? (you, grp2020, seem like expressing things as extremes - great rhetoric but poor argument). Mostly we, even B...y, make our little complaint and then get out there and take some pictures.

 

[gpr2020]

In life nothing is perfect and at some points people have to make choices. Complaining all day is one of them, changing is another one. it all depends of what you are looking for and the way you chose to live.

Complaining is not a choice, it is a duty!

For me, complaints about my products is valued feed-back (even if the products are software not hardware in my case). Praise may bolster the ego, but criticism improves the product.

Besides, who complains all day ? (you, grp2020, seem like expressing things as extremes - great rhetoric but poor argument). Mostly we, even B...y, make our little complaint and then get out there and take some pictures.

Duty??? LOL LOL LOL !!!

That's too funny. The best way to tell a manufacturer you ain't happy is not complaining on the net. It is to write a letter to the boss and tell him how disappointed you are with the product/service and buy from another manufacturer. When I have a problem with Sony, I do not moan on the board, I take the matter to Sony directly by writing to the concerned person and I get my problem solved. Very efficient. I recently had a problem with their service center, took it to the boss and now I am getting what I was ready to pay for free and delivered to my home at the time I fixed. Moaning on DPR would have not solved my issue. And by the way, I may have poor arguments, but you have actually none, what is worst. Looking forward to see your and B...y beautiful pictures !
--
In reviews we do not trust !

 

[beakydave]

Those complaining about missing shots.... I wonder how many shots they "miss" while trying to gauge the depth of field. I'm sure they say none.

Well, I would not say 'none'.

But the honest truth is very few. Yes, I've missed quite a lot of shots in my time, but very few that I would attribute solely because of checking DOF. The way I use it adds virtually nothing to the shot time.

 

[RubberDials]

One of the disasters occuring right now is the modern lens. Bloated bigger and bigger, it's far from a ideal shape. Bodies also need to go on a diet to get to a ideal DSLR shape. Maybe something like the shape of the old MF SLRs, and lenses to match.

Walt

I'd have to agree with you and Sony is one of the biggest offenders here. I believe you own the 70-400G? An example of where the Sony minimalist lookie-Leica styling does nothing to aid the usability. A more organic style similar to the 70-200G (or some of the canon styles) would be preferable in my view.

 

[Barry Fitzgerald]

One of the disasters occuring right now is the modern lens. Bloated bigger and bigger, it's far from a ideal shape. Bodies also need to go on a diet to get to a ideal DSLR shape. Maybe something like the shape of the old MF SLRs, and lenses to match.

Walt

I'd have to agree with you and Sony is one of the biggest offenders here. I believe you own the 70-400G? An example of where the Sony minimalist lookie-Leica styling does nothing to aid the usability. A more organic style similar to the 70-200G (or some of the canon styles) would be preferable in my view.

No thanks, I like a real grip..those older MF ones had almost nothing.

the modern SLR is far more comfortable IMO

Buy a compact if you want small ;-)