| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/22/2003 08:28:52 AM · #1 |
This Article sheds some light on how this process differs from film photography...
|
|
|
|
05/22/2003 08:47:02 AM · #2 |
| Thank you. Good read. It's nice to see formulas in an article instead of someone just ranting on how things should be 8) |
|
|
|
05/22/2003 09:04:09 AM · #3 |
To add to the confusion:
The article on photo.net is comparing a digital SLR to a film SLR.
Here's another article that states that DOF on a digital camera is 5 stops greater than the equivalent f-stop on a film SLR. i.e. f2.8 on a digital camera has the equivalent DOF as f16 (the article says f14 -typo I believe) on a SLR film camera. I've read this elsewhere as well but don't remember the link.
//wrotniak.net/photo/dof/
|
|
|
|
05/22/2003 09:11:59 AM · #4 |
I haven't read the article you posted, but I have heard to add 5 to your F number as a reasonable adjustment... not 5 stops... I have shot a lot of film on an SLR and F2.8 on my digital is very shallow compared to F16 on film. F16 is acutally very deep depth of field in most cases on film if the subject is at least a couple feet from the lens....
|
|
|
|
05/22/2003 09:24:39 AM · #5 |
Thanks. I'll have to do some comparisons myself and also do some more digging on the internet.
Now I know why this is called the field of confusion.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/26/2025 06:21:13 PM EDT.
