On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: > Alex wrote: > > Don't forget that I shot these with a 24mm lens, so the depth of field > > is very large. Even at f4.5 everything from about 15' to infinity > > would be in focus, and nothing in most of these pictures is closer to > > me that 15' away. > > Good point. The 24mm should become a 36mm, while depth-of field must be > conidered one stop less, hence pictures taken with the 24mm f/4.5 are like > those taken at 36mm f/3.5, while 24mm f/11 is like 36mm f/8. > However, I was expecting some more sharpness there (not more unsharp mask!).
Can you explain your logic here? In my experience the DOF is based on the lens focal length, not the 35mm equivelent focal length. The 24mm on the *ist D gives you the field of view of a 36mm lens but the depth of field of a 24mm lens (because that is what it is). A 36mm lens at f3.5 would have much less depth of field. alex
