digitalized people

santino · May 26, 2006

this question goes out to all digital camera users:

1. Doesn't the fact of the smaller chip bother you? (in case you aren't a user of a full 35mm frame chip DSLR). Your DOF changes extremely, a 50mm equivalent lens doesn't have the same DOF as a real 50mm lens. A real 50mm isn't a real 50 anymore, DOF control is more or less history.

2. Most lenses don't have a DOF scale, that sucks so much (no, I hate the DPF mode or whatever it's calles - EOS 1 series don't even have it).

bigfatbadger · May 26, 2006

1. I don't tend to think about it that often. I've never had any real problems with DOF

2. Most lenses on modern film SLRs don't have DOF scales, so it might not be a digital thing more of a reliance on modern equipment to take some of the manual labour out. Which, in some respects I'm all for. I quite like being able to drive 20 miles to work in my modern car, rather than having to walk it.

It has it's uses, often they're different from film.

santino · May 26, 2006

the DOF scale thingy isn't a digital thing, you're right (it's a major canon-lens thing).
but the DOF control bothers me alot. and the lack of DOF scale too. I prefer RF so I work a lot with that scale. IMO your comparision to a modern car isn't on spot here. a DOF scale is much faster and easier to use than to find spots that eventually can help your camera to choose the right f stop/focus combinaiton. I like the general idea of a digital camera, but with all respect, most of them are far away from my ideal camera. I can only speak out of my experience, it's a very controversial theme but I had to out my thoughts.

DocFrankenstein · May 26, 2006

Yes I do. I hate the thing, but I can't afford full frame. On the other hand I've never shot film before going digital, so I'm used to the way things are on the APS sized sensors. It's more of a challenge when using film - 28mm is soooo wide! lol

Thank god the canon has a short flange distance. I'll be able to use nice MF nikkors with a canon body... sometime... in the indefinite future...

darin3200 · May 27, 2006

1. I hate it, with a passion. I don't really like lenses beyond 50 or 85mm. A 28-105mm goes to a 45-168mm. The problem is that I don't want to invest in EF-S lenses because the next digital I'll buy will probably be full frame anyway.
DOF is tricky, but you can get some sweet bokeh.

2. I haven't seen a canon EF that has a DOF scale. Its not too big of a problem because I only use DOF scales when I'm shooting street and then I just use a rangefinder anyway.

Rob · May 27, 2006

1. I dislike this, but don't hate it. I'm still surprised what I see when I put the camera to my eye!!

2. Take practise shots and make your own DOF chart? I've done this for modelling!

Rob

Digital Matt · May 27, 2006

I hate both points you mentioned, and I also hate the limited dynamic range, but the benefits I think out weigh the negatives. (no pun intended)

bigfatbadger · May 27, 2006

Digital Matt said:
I hate both points you mentioned, and I also hate the limited dynamic range, but the benefits I think out weigh the negatives. (no pun intended)

You're right, for me, the biggest downer about digital is the lack of dynamic range. Massive lack of it without big photoshop efforts

thebeginning · May 28, 2006

santino said:
this question goes out to all digital camera users:

1. Doesn't the fact of the smaller chip bother you? (in case you aren't a user of a full 35mm frame chip DSLR). Your DOF changes extremely, a 50mm equivalent lens doesn't have the same DOF as a real 50mm lens. A real 50mm isn't a real 50 anymore, DOF control is more or less history.

2. Most lenses don't have a DOF scale, that sucks so much (no, I hate the DPF mode or whatever it's calles - EOS 1 series don't even have it).

like others have said, the lack of (or the lesser) a large dynamic range is my first complaint. if you expose correctly and know how to process a little then it's a little better though.

as far as what you mentioned...

1. yes, the 'changed' DoF gets annoying, but it's not that bad. I've compared 35mm shots with my 1.6 crop and the difference isn't really that big. hmm, not exactly sure what you meant by lack of DoF control...? I don't have any problem with DoF control, especially since you can see what you're going to get in the viewfinder most of the time.

2. yeaaah, this is a shame. a big shame. but, i deal with it pretty easily.

Tkraz · May 28, 2006

Personally I have only shot in digital so this is all a bit over my head.

Could someone please explain what is meant by full frame and this whole problem with DoF?

Bit confused by this

Digital Matt · May 28, 2006

Digital sensors are smaller than a 35mm negative. Most DSLR sensors are the size of an APS-C sized negative. When the sensor is the same size as 35mm, it's called "full frame". If the sensor is not full frame, the sensor does not record the entire field of few of the lens, so the image is "cropped". The dof (depth of field) is also altered.

Tkraz · May 28, 2006

Ah ok I see now.

So are all digital cameras no full frame or are there some exceptions to this?

Also if you dont mind, what is it that is altered in regards to the DoF?

Digital Matt · May 28, 2006

There are full frame DSLRs, but they are expensive. The best example is the Canon 1Ds MK II. With smaller sensors, there is more depth of field at any given aperture.