|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 9th, 2009, 08:15 AM | #61 | ||
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 613
|
I agree. This discussion is about 5DMkII vs GH1.
Quote:
To bring this back on topic, I had started earlier on in this thread about comparing the dof on GH1's smaller sensor size vs the 5DMkII's larger sensor size beginning here: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/1035594-post5.html It's been hashed out already. All things being equal, the depth of field will be shallower on the 5DMkII with the larger sensor. And that can be good or bad depending on your goal. p.s. Quote:
My math: 22mm sensor width on 400D divided by 36mm 5DMkII sensor size width = .6111 200mm lens x.6111 = 122mm
__________________
www.holyzoo.com |
||
May 9th, 2009, 08:51 AM | #62 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 80
|
Quote:
In the industry when you have bigger sensor, you tend to have bigger aperture (easier to build it that way beause of optic manufacturing limitations), but in fact only aperture matters for DOF control. |
|
May 9th, 2009, 09:05 AM | #63 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 613
|
On a technical level, looks like I'm wrong.
Depth of Field and the Small-Sensor Digital Cameras - photo.net Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography Meanwhile, it's been far easier to think in terms of sensor sizes relating to dof. My 1/3" and 1/2" sensor size cameras have a deeper dof than my 35mm sensor size cameras. Have fun figuring it all out!
__________________
www.holyzoo.com |
May 9th, 2009, 09:44 AM | #64 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brunei
Posts: 140
|
The way I see it, you can use a normal 35mm lens to create an image on the sensor, but it would mean the focal length of the lens in relation to the sensor would be say for a 20mm FL will be probably 4 times that (just a random figure plugged out of the air) for the sensor. Just like a 20mm FL lenses will be approximately 32mm on a cropped 1.6x sensor.
That 80mm FL on the 1/3" sensor might not be practical for normal shooting. For instance on my 350D and using a 50mm lens, we are talking about 80mm equivalent. I had to move back more than 2m just to get the subject in frame. Imagine how far you will have to move away from the subject in order to frame subject on a 1/3" sensor. I hazard to say the design of the lens on a 1/3" sensor would be different as compared to a DSLR to take into account of the smaller sensor. Anyway I could be way wrong but it make sense to me. |
May 15th, 2009, 02:26 AM | #65 | |
New Boot
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: sweden
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
It's the focal length and aparture. Nothing else. But a 50mm focal length is extreme tele on smaller sensors. (cropped full frame and zoomed in) |
|
| ||||||
|
|