digital p&s lenses

[cp_ste.croix]

From all that I can see, they are all very wide in order to compensate for sensor crop...is there a digital camera out there that is relatively small and has the ability to take photos with nice, shallow dof? I'd love a digital version of the GSN or something simmilar. I'm thinking about digital recently because of the environmental impact thread...that and an m6 and lenses is still way out of my budget.

 

[cp_ste.croix]

no one at all?

 

[Avotius]

Short answer, no. There should be though but im sure camera makers are more concerned with selling to the general crowd. If there was a camera out there with a fixed 35 or 50mm equivalent lens and a f1.4 or 1.8 or something like that, for instance a digital GSN then I would buy one the moment they came out. I think the lens on the ricoh grd is a 28mm 2.4 but there is no shallow dof there...

 

[jobo]

Is there a digital camera out there that is relatively small and has the ability to take photos with nice, shallow dof?

No, unfortunately not. For a given field of view, the DOF depends on the physical size of the aperture (e.g., measured in mm), so there is an inherent contradiction between shallow DOF and small size.

Worse, to get the FOV and DOF effects of an f/2.8 lens on 35mm film on a normal digicam (6x crop) it would need a f/0.5 lens, which is physically impossible to build.

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/tech/dof.html

2c, /J

 

[ywenz]

The Sigma DP 1 is the only digital P&S that can give your shallow DOF. If the M6 is out of your price range, then the DP1 will probably be as well... Exact pricing is not out yet, but will most likely be well over $1K

 

[ampguy]

depends on how shallow or narrow you're looking to get. It's much easier to get narrow dof with say a panasonic lumix fz3 which has f2.8 throughout a long zoom range, than the fuji f30, but it's still possible with the fuji f30, see my blog for an example.

 

[robertasumendi]

I really enjoyed the Panasonic LC1 (Leica Digilux 2), which is compact enough to fit into any kind of a bag you might carry... basically the size of a rangefinder with a large-ish lens. It's f/2-2.4 -- as shallow a dof as you get w/compact digital. Lens is fantastically sharp. Can do full-auto, or full-manual w/aperture/zoom/focus rings and a shutter speed dial.

The only downsides are it's noisy by today's standards at iso 400. For low-light you want to push an iso 100 raw file to iso 400. Also, manual focus is slow and finicky due to the electronic viewfinder.

You can probably get one for $700-$900 USD. Some sample photos in my flickr (the five most recent).

 

[robertasumendi]

Oh, and another option you might want to consider (I am, as I'm cameraless at the moment) is the Pentax K100D. They're very small DSLR bodies (about the size of the aforementioned LC1) and Pentax makes a line of special digital pancake prime lenses: 21/3.2, 40/2.8, 70/2.8. F/2.8 on a sensor this size is plenty wide to get nice out-of-focus background effects. The lenses aren't cheap, but you get a really compact system with high image quality. Body is something like $400 USD, lenses are $450, $270, $525 respectively. Pentax is currently offering $50-$100 rebates on a lot of this stuff, don't know about Canada.

 

[cp_ste.croix]

Thanks everyone...it is lcoming down right now largely to affordability and downsizing from my giant SLR system, I thought that if I could get everything I wanted out of a digital compact, then I would be ok to let go of the interchangeable lens RF.

I really appreciate the respnoses everyone.



ps. anyone know who I can lobby for a digital GSN or cannonette? 😀

 

[fgianni]

depends on how shallow or narrow you're looking to get. It's much easier to get narrow dof with say a panasonic lumix fz3 which has f2.8 throughout a long zoom range, than the fuji f30, but it's still possible with the fuji f30, see my blog for an example.

The F30-F31 is probabl ythe most amazing digital P&S available, images are very clean up to USO 400, still good at 800, usable for small prints at 1600 and still somehow acceptable (as an emergency setting) at 3200

I got my F31 a week ago and am amazed on how much cleaner the images are compared to my Panny LX1, and the lens is almost as good as the Panny one.

The only BIG problem, no RAW, I am sure I could do much better post-processing on iso 3200 RAW files, maybe a future firmware upgrade?

 

[Finder]

To build an f/0.5 lens, simply take a spherical ball of glass twice the focal length in diameter and cut it in half. Place that on you film or sensor and you have a very simple f/0.5 lens. I love physical impossibilities.

 

[dmr]

no one at all?

I haven't seen a point-n-shoot, either film or digital, which will give you any kind of short depth of field or any "bokeh" so to speak.

I do use an Olympus Stylus Zoom (film P&S) as my carry-everywhere camera, and I know it won't do it. The auto exposure tends to keep the lens stopped down to the point that almost everything is in focus. Almost like they do it so the auto-focus does not have to be that precise. 🙂

 

[bmattock]

Sensor size, people.

An APS-C sensor can do some non-macro DOF tricks. A 1/1.8 sensor cannot.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0210/02100402sensorsizes.asp

Aperture is only one part of the DOF dance. Distance to subject, focal length, and sensor size also figure into it. Which is why you can have creamy out-of-focus backgrounds on portraits taken at f/8 - when the camera is an 8x10 view camera.

So if you want DOF effects with a digicam - get a bigger sensor, get a faster/longer lens, or get closer. Note that all digicams that can focus macro can also do DOF tricks at that distance.

 

[Finder]

Sensor size, people.

Which is why you can have creamy out-of-focus backgrounds on portraits taken at f/8 - when the camera is an 8x10 view camera.

Well, if you are using the same focal length, the 8x10 image will have more depth of field. If you are using the same field of view, the the 8x10 will have less depth of field because it is using a longer focal length.

The comment above about aperture was only refering to the size of entrance pupil, not the effective aperture of the f-number system. The entrance pupil is closely related to depth of field just as the exit pupil (relative aperture) is related to depth of focus. Entrance pupil is not the usual way of thinking about DOF and so the comment can seem confusing.

 

[richard_l]

I haven't seen a point-n-shoot, either film or digital, which will give you any kind of short depth of field or any "bokeh" so to speak.

The Minilux can give a fairly shallow DOF. The OOF area is not the smoothest in the world, however.

Richard

 

[ampguy]

Hi Ian

Hi Ian

I don't miss the raw mode, and the write speeds of the xD cards would make the whole thing sluggish. I also think the 3200 mode can often be quite nice for 8x10's, but the f30 does a bit more in camera noise reduction than the f31 according to the dpreview examples.

The F30-F31 is probabl ythe most amazing digital P&S available, images are very clean up to USO 400, still good at 800, usable for small prints at 1600 and still somehow acceptable (as an emergency setting) at 3200

I got my F31 a week ago and am amazed on how much cleaner the images are compared to my Panny LX1, and the lens is almost as good as the Panny one.

The only BIG problem, no RAW, I am sure I could do much better post-processing on iso 3200 RAW files, maybe a future firmware upgrade?

 

[Nikon Bob]

Short answer, no. There should be though but im sure camera makers are more concerned with selling to the general crowd. If there was a camera out there with a fixed 35 or 50mm equivalent lens and a f1.4 or 1.8 or something like that, for instance a digital GSN then I would buy one the moment they came out. I think the lens on the ricoh grd is a 28mm 2.4 but there is no shallow dof there...

If you don't use the zoom the Olympus C5050 had a lens that was the equivalent of 35mm/1.8 and the older Canon G something started at a 35mm eqiv. F2. Still not a GSN though.

Bob