1/2" vs 1/3" DOF difference at DVinfo.net

Stephen Eastwood · November 7th, 2007, 02:51 AM

Not sure if this is a good fit here but I am curious with the new sony coming what is the visible difference between 1/3 and1/2" chips? I know about depth of field in general, what I am curious about is what type of gain do you get from this change, how does it compare to 35mm? is it a big noticeable jump or barely going from 1/3 to 1/2?

Thanks

Robert Ducon · November 7th, 2007, 03:14 AM

Stephen, I have a 35mm adapter and a camera that has a 1/3" sensor. While I notice a large difference between my stock 1/3" shots and the shots I did with the 35mm adapter, I find it hard to tell the difference between 1/2" shots and 35mm when I watch shows on TV. Mind you, I'm watching SD TV, but still, I think a 1/2" chip would offer a great DOF advantage over a 1/3" sensor area.

I look forward to more companies moving their prosumer from 1/3" to 1/2". I'd take a single 1/2" CMOS sensor over three 1/3" sensors anyday.

Also, with the industry also making moves to combat CA (chromatic aberration) inside the camera, I think that larger single sensor cameras aren't hobbled as they have one appeared to be. The RED camera and Canon HV20 are good examples of single-chip cameras holding their own.

EDIT: I'd love to see side-by-side examples of DOF from 1/3" and 1/2" cameras at comparable focal-lengths to display the difference! If anyone can share, please do!

Stephen Eastwood · November 7th, 2007, 08:54 AM

as a follow up to that question, does anyone know if there is an advantage, or disadvantage, to using a converter in front of a lens such as a 1.6 or 2.0 teleconverter on a smaller chip which (assuming there is enough room to use it) would double or multiply the zoom without an increase in aperture, would that create a shallower depth of field since the f-stop has not changed yet the focal length has doubled or been increased? or would the depth not be altered by such a device?

If this worked out and you had to room to use a teleconverter what type (amount) of DOF change (reduction I assume, or would you get a greater DOF at a longer zoom) would be noticed?

November 7th, 2007, 02:51 AM	#1
Stephen Eastwood Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Great Neck, NY Posts: 291	1/2" vs 1/3" DOF difference Not sure if this is a good fit here but I am curious with the new sony coming what is the visible difference between 1/3 and1/2" chips? I know about depth of field in general, what I am curious about is what type of gain do you get from this change, how does it compare to 35mm? is it a big noticeable jump or barely going from 1/3 to 1/2? Thanks __________________ Stephen Eastwood http://www.StephenEastwood.com

November 7th, 2007, 03:14 AM	#2
Robert Ducon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Victoria BC Posts: 400	Stephen, I have a 35mm adapter and a camera that has a 1/3" sensor. While I notice a large difference between my stock 1/3" shots and the shots I did with the 35mm adapter, I find it hard to tell the difference between 1/2" shots and 35mm when I watch shows on TV. Mind you, I'm watching SD TV, but still, I think a 1/2" chip would offer a great DOF advantage over a 1/3" sensor area. I look forward to more companies moving their prosumer from 1/3" to 1/2". I'd take a single 1/2" CMOS sensor over three 1/3" sensors anyday. Also, with the industry also making moves to combat CA (chromatic aberration) inside the camera, I think that larger single sensor cameras aren't hobbled as they have one appeared to be. The RED camera and Canon HV20 are good examples of single-chip cameras holding their own. EDIT: I'd love to see side-by-side examples of DOF from 1/3" and 1/2" cameras at comparable focal-lengths to display the difference! If anyone can share, please do! __________________ Mac + Canon HV20

November 7th, 2007, 08:54 AM	#3
Stephen Eastwood Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Great Neck, NY Posts: 291	as a follow up to that question, does anyone know if there is an advantage, or disadvantage, to using a converter in front of a lens such as a 1.6 or 2.0 teleconverter on a smaller chip which (assuming there is enough room to use it) would double or multiply the zoom without an increase in aperture, would that create a shallower depth of field since the f-stop has not changed yet the focal length has doubled or been increased? or would the depth not be altered by such a device? If this worked out and you had to room to use a teleconverter what type (amount) of DOF change (reduction I assume, or would you get a greater DOF at a longer zoom) would be noticed? __________________ Stephen Eastwood http://www.StephenEastwood.com