tripod
Well-known
antiquark said:
the luminous lasnscape article says that it is a myth that wider lenses have more DOF, but you have to read the conditions imposed: the significant caveat is stated clearly:
if the subject image size remains the same
In order for the subject image to stay the same size, you have to move closer.
DOF is reduced with a) longer focal lengths, b) wider apertures, and c) closer focusing distance.
Wide angle lenses do have greater DOF (this is NOT a myth) when compared to a longer lens shot taken from the same spot, (but not when you move closer to the subject in order to keep the subject size the same as in the longer lens shot.)
Last edited:
tomasis
Well-known
I want add some things. I already gave up DOF object as I said above.
I think that many incl ned and fred agree that dof doesn't matter in real word photography. It is right! Lets to move to hyperfocal topic.
If some guys are used to crop EVERY frame by using film camera then they feel suddenly like Henri Bresson when they take M8 or Rd1 in their hands and they composed perfectly using the camera in real life without need to crop pictures aftewards. It is very good for them.
If some guys don't find any differences on both Olympus E-3 or Nikon D3 with 50mm lenses, I assume that they perfected Michael Jackson back walking and have two eyes more on the back of head to check any obstacles on the ground to avoid falling oneself. I'm really happy for them.
I use 50mm fov for convenience's sake so I could with a few steps forth and back to get 35mm and 75mm fast with little time amount. But I know that here exist some guys with their original shooting styles. That's very cool and I love the diversity!
I think that many incl ned and fred agree that dof doesn't matter in real word photography. It is right! Lets to move to hyperfocal topic.
If some guys are used to crop EVERY frame by using film camera then they feel suddenly like Henri Bresson when they take M8 or Rd1 in their hands and they composed perfectly using the camera in real life without need to crop pictures aftewards. It is very good for them.
If some guys don't find any differences on both Olympus E-3 or Nikon D3 with 50mm lenses, I assume that they perfected Michael Jackson back walking and have two eyes more on the back of head to check any obstacles on the ground to avoid falling oneself. I'm really happy for them.
I use 50mm fov for convenience's sake so I could with a few steps forth and back to get 35mm and 75mm fast with little time amount. But I know that here exist some guys with their original shooting styles. That's very cool and I love the diversity!
M
Magnus
Guest
Leica would like us all to believe that and their approach is good, although expensive. I will not be making use of the upgrade, or any other for that matter of fact I like my M8 as it is, even with all it's quirks which it does have.
It will remain a camera system for people with money to burn and less issues with the actual specs and out of camera IQ not to speak about reliabilty. It will always remain the gold Rolex, very nice, sturdy, special, will get looks, but will not ever tell you the right time..... but nice to have never the less.
As for pro's, I can't imagine them ever wanting to use, or actually use the M8, and by pro's I don't mean the occasional wedding shooter or free-lance reporter for the billaricky news of the day, it's just not reliable enough.
But me being an absolute amateur I don't minf the occasional lock-ups, focussing problems, purple red and green fringes, white balance values which are totally off, image lines which are... well merely indicative.... It adds to ones hobby of photography
having said this I will not argue with anyone stating that the camera is heavily overpriced but I do still like it...... just like I like my Rolex (steel/gold - blue plate) and my waterman fountain pen..... none of which come close to being worth the money I paid for them.
As for the upgrade plan.... again overpriced undocumented marketing hype, but with money to burn, sure go for it, it will certainly frustrate your fellow dentists/lawyers/high earning professional that they will have to do it to... and this is exactly the point Leica is relying upon; people like me, some like to call us "asses" at best <.-<9
It will remain a camera system for people with money to burn and less issues with the actual specs and out of camera IQ not to speak about reliabilty. It will always remain the gold Rolex, very nice, sturdy, special, will get looks, but will not ever tell you the right time..... but nice to have never the less.
As for pro's, I can't imagine them ever wanting to use, or actually use the M8, and by pro's I don't mean the occasional wedding shooter or free-lance reporter for the billaricky news of the day, it's just not reliable enough.
But me being an absolute amateur I don't minf the occasional lock-ups, focussing problems, purple red and green fringes, white balance values which are totally off, image lines which are... well merely indicative.... It adds to ones hobby of photography
having said this I will not argue with anyone stating that the camera is heavily overpriced but I do still like it...... just like I like my Rolex (steel/gold - blue plate) and my waterman fountain pen..... none of which come close to being worth the money I paid for them.
As for the upgrade plan.... again overpriced undocumented marketing hype, but with money to burn, sure go for it, it will certainly frustrate your fellow dentists/lawyers/high earning professional that they will have to do it to... and this is exactly the point Leica is relying upon; people like me, some like to call us "asses" at best <.-<9