[pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: Jim Brick <jim@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:42:43 -0700
At 12:21 PM 10/29/2004, DarkroomMagic wrote:
>This will change the perspective, and I understood that he wanted to keep
>that.
Correct. You would have to use approximately a 1600mm lens and shoot
alongside the 35mm camera to fill the 4x5 frame with the same image that
fills the 35mm frame, and keep the same perspective. And you still lose ~
four stops of DOF.
Depending upon the subject matter, the number and type of focus planes,
swings and tilts can gain back some of the lost DOF. But one should never
forget that if you use a swing or tilt to gain DOF in one direction (x
axis,) you lose the same amount in the perpendicular direction (y axis.)
There's no free lunch!
:-)
Jim
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
- Follow-Ups:
- [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: Gene Johnson
- [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: DarkroomMagic
- References:
- [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: Jim Brick
- [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: DarkroomMagic
Other related posts:
- » [pure-silver] Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- » [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: Gene Johnson
- [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: DarkroomMagic
- [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: Jim Brick
- [pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: DarkroomMagic