Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-04-2015, 08:11 AM   #121
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,954
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Keeping all variables equal except sensor size which has more DoF?
85mm lens
F/4.0
10' subject distance


What is the DoF the K-3? FF? 645z?
I don't understand the question. I suppose the K3 probably has the least depth of field, but I always assume the same framing between shots, otherwise the exercise feels pretty futile to me. Keeping the same framing between shots means either using a different focal length (55-ishmm on APS-C) or backing up considerably.

04-04-2015, 08:42 AM   #122
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I don't understand the question. I suppose the K3 probably has the least depth of field, but I always assume the same framing between shots, otherwise the exercise feels pretty futile to me. Keeping the same framing between shots means either using a different focal length (55-ishmm on APS-C) or backing up considerably.
The problem is that some insist on normalizing everything to FF, hence excluding whatever properties other formats have, and thereby treat is as if such properties has no relevance. But if you turn this on its head and try to normalize everything to APS, you end with things FF cannot do; it is equally, if not more relevant.
It is true that FF will have about a stop less DOF at some focusing distances, but at others it won't and at some again it can't shoot anything in focus.

Now which lens will show the thinnest DOF at close focusing distance when the lenses (same type of lenses; prime vs. prime etc) show the same angle of view on their respective formats and shot at the same aperture; APS or FF?

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 04-04-2015 at 08:48 AM.
04-04-2015, 08:45 AM   #123
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,414
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I don't understand the question. I suppose the K3 probably has the least depth of field, but I always assume the same framing between shots, otherwise the exercise feels pretty futile to me. Keeping the same framing between shots means either using a different focal length (55-ishmm on APS-C) or backing up considerably.

You are changing multiple variables and saying APS-C has more DoF and that is false.


It is the 55mm lens that you switch to that is giving you the DoF of a 55mm lens and the FoV of an 85mm lens. Its not the sensor.
04-04-2015, 08:53 AM   #124
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,954
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
You are changing multiple variables and saying APS-C has more DoF and that is false.


It is the 55mm lens that you switch to that is giving you the DoF of a 55mm lens and the FoV of an 85mm lens. Its not the sensor.
Really.

The whole point of photography is the image. To me, that means maintaining a certain framing of your subject in comparison shots. Whether you want to achieve that by backing up, or switching lenses is immaterial to me. I just think that if you have nice framing with your full frame capture, you will have an odd composition when you maintain everything else the same, but switch to a crop sensor.

That said, I think for whatever reason people focus on the extremes with regard to aperture, where I seldom shoot. I just don't shoot with an aperture wider than f2 and certainly don't stop down past f11. If someone else does, than they are more likely to see differences when they are using a full frame camera.

---------- Post added 04-04-15 at 11:56 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
The problem is that some insist on normalizing everything to FF, hence excluding whatever properties other formats have, and thereby treat is as if such properties has no relevance. But if you turn this on its head and try to normalize everything to APS, you end with things FF cannot do; it is equally, if not more relevant.
It is true that FF will have about a stop less DOF at some focusing distances, but at others it won't and at some again it can't shoot anything in focus.

Now which lens will show the thinnest DOF at close focusing distance when the lenses (same type of lenses; prime vs. prime etc) show the same angle of view on their respective formats and shot at the same aperture; APS or FF?
This is of course true. You can't always get "equivalent" photos between formats. You will be able to frame a lot tighter on an APS-C camera at close focus distance, than on a full frame camera. While the theory assumes that everything you can do on APS-C you can do on full frame, you just need the "right lens."

04-04-2015, 09:15 AM   #125
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Surely in many situations with FF you could double the shutter time instead of increasing the ISO after stopping down to obtain the same DOF on FF as on APS-C? Of course this would often bring too many problems but there must be a fair portion of situations in which it would be fine.
Then you could double the shutter time of the APS-C camera too.

---------- Post added 04-04-15 at 09:17 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
But if you turn this on its head and try to normalize everything to APS, you end with things FF cannot do
Your premise is false. I have never taken a photo on, say, my K-5 that I couldn't also take with the A7R. The A7R is a superset of the APS-C capability.
04-04-2015, 09:21 AM   #126
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Really.

The whole point of photography is the image. To me, that means maintaining a certain framing of your subject in comparison shots. ... I just think that if you have nice framing with your full frame capture, you will have an odd composition when you maintain everything else the same, but switch to a crop sensor.
Correct, and I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand. What's the point of worrying about "DOF differences" if the framing, the shot itself is radically different to start with?

The same lens on two formats from the same position gives you a very different image. Any DOF difference there is moot and the last thing anyone would recognize as 'different' about the two images.



QuoteQuote:
That said, I think for whatever reason people focus on the extremes with regard to aperture, where I seldom shoot. I just don't shoot with an aperture wider than f2
Here's the best thing for you to do when you move to FF: just leave all your settings (besides FL) the same, just worry about exposure and shutter speed and framing as normal, and take what you get - and what you will get is the same images with 1.3 stops less DOF and about a stop better DR and noise (up from base ISO where it would be noticed, at least.) So you would't need to change anything, you could just realize the benefits.

When you run across a situation where you need more DOF, matching what you were used to with aps-c, simply stop down and you match the DR/noise of aps-c, and you will probably gain a little lens sharpness and contrast. f/1.8 vs f/2.8 or f/2.8 vs. f/4.5 on most lenses makes a noticeable difference.

So there ^ you have,

1) better DR/noise with 1.3 stops less DOF, *or* if you need to 'match DOF' and stop down,
2) same DR/noise with 1 stop better sharpness/contrast (at mid to high apertures at least.)

In addition to the above benefits, you're seeing the image magnified less, so the lens probably will seem slightly 'sharper' than you gave it credit for before, and you'll have a better VF, probably faster AF lock and more accurate AF, resulting in even more keepers... A newer/better body (presumably) used to get those better-IQ images.

That's it. Shoot like before, don't worry about it, adjusting FL only. See what you get. I'm 90% certain you'll like what you see more than before, and as time goes on you'll have a hard time giving up the difference.

.

Last edited by jsherman999; 04-04-2015 at 09:27 AM.
04-04-2015, 09:28 AM   #127
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote

Your premise is false. I have never taken a photo on, say, my K-5 that I couldn't also take with the A7R. The A7R is a superset of the APS-C capability.
Thats fine, but what you have or have not shot is irrelevant in this discussion.
You CAN shoot images on APS that you cannot do on FF with "equivalent" lenses and that is important when you compare formats.
Whats relevant is up to the user.
04-04-2015, 09:47 AM - 1 Like   #128
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,414
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The whole point of photography is the image. To me, that means maintaining a certain framing of your subject in comparison shots. Whether you want to achieve that by backing up, or switching lenses is immaterial to me.

Then use your 15mm as a portrait lens and just get close enough to keep the framing the same and see what happens. A 55mm lens can never render like an 85mm lens any more than a15mm lens can render like an 85mm. Different focal lengths render scenes differently. There more to lens selection than FoV.

04-04-2015, 09:54 AM   #129
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,912
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote

So there ^ you have,

1) better DR/noise with 1.3 stops less DOF, *or* if you need to 'match DOF' and stop down,
2) same DR/noise with 1 stop better sharpness/contrast (at mid to high apertures at least.)

In addition to the above benefits, you're seeing the image magnified less, so the lens probably will seem slightly 'sharper' than you gave it credit for before, and you'll have a better VF, probably faster AF lock and more accurate AF, resulting in even more keepers... A newer/better body (presumably) used to get those better-IQ images.

That's it. Shoot like before, don't worry about it, adjusting FL only. See what you get. I'm 90% certain you'll like what you see more than before, and as time goes on you'll have a hard time giving up the difference.

.
Yes, keep it nice and simple and enjoy any advantages from what you get, since there are advantages. I am sure this is the best approach, not making comparisons all the time.
04-04-2015, 09:55 AM   #130
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Then use your 15mm as a portrait lens and just get close enough to keep the framing the same and see what happens. A 55mm lens can never render like an 85mm lens any more than a15mm lens can render like an 85mm. Different focal lengths render scenes differently. There more to lens selection than FoV.
Thats right. There is in reality no true equivalence.
04-04-2015, 09:59 AM   #131
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
Thats fine, but what you have or have not shot is irrelevant in this discussion.
You CAN shoot images on APS that you cannot do on FF with "equivalent" lenses and that is important when you compare formats.
Whats relevant is up to the user.
If you provide an example, I will be happy to point out the error in your example.

---------- Post added 04-04-15 at 10:01 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Then use your 15mm as a portrait lens and just get close enough to keep the framing the same and see what happens.
Your implication is true.

QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
A 55mm lens can never render like an 85mm lens any more than a15mm lens can render like an 85mm. Different focal lengths render scenes differently. There more to lens selection than FoV.
If you allow different sensor sizes, your example is false. With equivalent settings, equivalent lens design, equivalent tolerances, etc., the two pictures will be indistinguishable.



(unless you're looking at quantum lengths, and I don't think your eyes can do that)
04-04-2015, 10:06 AM   #132
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You CAN shoot images on APS that you cannot do on FF with "equivalent" lenses and that is important when you compare formats.
so where are the examples of this phenomenon?
04-04-2015, 10:41 AM - 2 Likes   #133
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
so where are the examples of this phenomenon?
Crickets.

Actually he'll probably give a long-telephoto example and then declare it against the rules to simply choose a telephoto 1.5 longer on FF.
04-04-2015, 10:48 AM   #134
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,414
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
With equivalent settings, equivalent lens design, equivalent tolerances,
Which 15mm has an equivalent lens design to an 85mm and we will compare.
04-04-2015, 11:01 AM   #135
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,757
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Your premise is false. I have never taken a photo on, say, my K-5 that I couldn't also take with the A7R. The A7R is a superset of the APS-C capability.
Yes but you don't shoot telephoto... if you shoot all three lens lengths, telephoto, wide and standard, you might choose a different set of compromises. Your A7r only shoots 15 Mp in the crop area, a K-3 shoots 24 MP. So whatever your longest lens is, it would seem 1.5 times longer with a K-3, and you'd get about 20% more resolution doing on a subect that fits within the crop area, using the K-3. Which is why so many people who shoot wildlife, Nikon as well and Pentax, shoot crop sensors with their long lenses. Many of the shooters I know who have both use their APS-c for bird and small mammal images.

On many of our images we are cropping APS-c images. When you end up with a 7 MP image shooting full frame and I have a 12 MP image using a K-3, you're going to see a difference, and it's possibly going to be the difference between a saleable print and one that just looks good web size. People have experienced this.

Last edited by normhead; 04-04-2015 at 11:10 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
24x36mm, advantage, advantages, aps-c, background, benefit, body, cameras, distance, dof, ff, fov, frame, full-frame, identical, image, images, lens, pentax, people, photographer, position, sensor, share, shoot, shot, shutter
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
With only APS-C glass, does FF offer any advantages? Newtophotos Pentax Full Frame 27 09-23-2014 09:14 PM
What are the advantages and dis-advantages of using a Focusing Screen? HoBykoYan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 10-06-2011 12:28 PM
Advantages of 360fgz? AND flash future? FastPhotography Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 3 07-20-2008 11:59 PM
Advantages of buying Pentax DSLRs ckanthon Pentax DSLR Discussion 35 06-30-2008 09:10 PM
Advantages of Prime Lenses stafford588 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 12-29-2007 06:34 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:58 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top