Which camera provides the best shallow depth of field?

[Winston Vargas]

The reason for getting shallower DOF when you use the -3 setting is that now you are shooting with the aperture almost wide open. The DOF has nothing to do with the camera, it has to do with the size of the ccd and the focal length of the lens. As far as the film adapters one does not have better DOF then the other this also has to do with the focal length of the lens in relation to the size of the groundglass being used. A 50mm Zeiss lens will have the same DOF as a 50mm nikon lens. If you understand the DOF in still photography the same applies to all these 35mm adapters. More important is the accuracy of the adapter, the lens mount, the flatness of the groundglass and the proper distance between the lens and the groundglass and if you have close up lenses involved the final quality is going to suffer.

Originally Posted by David Lach

Correct, usually the smaller the CCD, the deeper the DOF. There is no way around by adjusting the in-camera settings, although I've read Chris Hurd say you can get a shallower DOF on the XL2 by shooting at a gain of -3db, but I honestly cannot understand why that would be.

The only way around with small CCD cameras is using a PS-Technik Mini35 adapter which will allow you to work with real 35mm DOF (and film lenses). But you better have deep pockets or great contacts if you want to use that beast (oh do I envy the lucky bastards that own one).

[Winston Vargas]

You're absolutely right, for many years people have tried to make video look like film with the frame mode and filters and what have you... NOTHING.. make video look like film. The closest we have come is not the 24P is the ability to control the DOF so that there is some depth to the picture. That's where film has it over video, the film adapters have changed all of that, but has also created it own problems. The film adapters are only as good as the groundglass, more emphasis should be placed on the groundlass rather then what lens you use. Remenber that a cheap Pentax 35mm camera for example has better resolution than a 2/3 inch video camera with a broadcast lens.

Originally Posted by David Lach

I wouldn't say it's overrated. It's not everything of course, but saying DOF is overrated is like saying lighting is overrated. It is one tool out of many we filmmakers have to tell a story. It's not even about which is better between deep and shallow DOF, it's about we have being able to effectively use it when you need it to tell your story and compose your image the way you want.

Now it could probably be argued that shallow DOF originated as a physical limitation rather than a particular aesthetic, but now it is so unconsciously linked in our conditioned minds to that film look everybody aspires to that it cannot simply be diregarded as some fancy gimmick. If most videographers felt that way, PS-Technik would be out of business.