Pawel Nabe wrote: > ... So the DEPTH mode with the 1V is pretty useless.
Not really; it's not that difficult to set the focus in DEP mode, and then shift to M to set the exposure. I usually use a tripod, and often use an external spotmeter, so it's usually much easier to be in M anyway. But I completely agree that it shouldn't be necessary to change modes. > Maybe they think that with a pro body we should use pro lenses wide open > only. Or at least they think one would never have a need to deviate from the settings obtained in DEP mode. With all due respect for folks like Art Wolfe and George Lepp, I don't think that "rock and tree" wierdos constitute the bulk of Canon's sales, so that Canon don't really appreciate the importance of a feature that they alone offer. Is DEP an "amateur" feature as many imply? I suggest that anyone who believes this examine the literature for the Sinar e view camera, which used a computer to determine focus, f-number, swing, and tilt in a manner analogous to Canon's DEP mode. In a contest with experienced studio photographers who used the Sinar p with its still-sophisticated manual tilt and DoF calculator, the Sinar e blew the others away. Unfortunately, the Sinar e sank of it's own weight (almost literally), so the literature may be hard to find ... The DEP algorithm isn't quite as sophisticated, but it still gives better result than I can get by eyeballing. Is it as good as using manual lens DoF scales? It seems to be, but exact comparison is difficult because so few of today's lenses incorporate usable DoF scales ... > So how is this feature implemented in the digital bodies? I see no reason for it to be any different from how it is done on the other bodies. It should be as easy to shift in DEP mode as it is in P. Jeff Conrad * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
