Well, the original question or comment in this thread was posted by me. It had nothing to do with DOF, but the thread has morphed into arguments about DOF. OriginallyI suggested that, while the FOV of an 18m on the Pentax and similar DSLR cameras were about the same as a 28mm lens on a film-based 35mm SLR, I noted that somehow they view didn't look the same. Tom Reese suggested the perspectives were different, and then all the technical reasons why that could or couldn't be so surface. He was voted down in his belief, and changed his opinion, and then the DOF arguments started in earnest.
Well, this afternoon another list member and I got together. She's not read this thread and is far removed from the technical aspects of this and other areas of photography. The 18mm was put on her istDs, the 28mm on my Pentax body SLR. She looked through the finders of both and concluded that "objects seemed further away" wih the 18mm/DLR combination, supporting that, at least as viewed through the finder the images are not the same, only equivalent in some dimensions or, perhaps, depending on yourefiniation, superficially. We then made a few shots with the two camera/lens combinations. She's going to send me the JPEGs from the digi and I'll get the film processed after the weekend. The pics will be posted here and you all canargue about the validity of the test and whatever else pleases you. To our eyes today, theyare not equivalent - they are not the same. Well see what they look like when posted here, perhaps Tuesday or Wednesday. Shel > [Original Message] > From: William Robb > We have an old adage: The proof is in the pudding. > Since this is a visual medium we are talking about, visual comparisons > (comparative prints, for example) are the best way of comparing the > different formats. > Doing so eliminates all the confusing technobabble that is both tiresome and > obfuscating. > > At least that's what I think. > Not that what I think matter to anyone other than my dawg. > > William Robb >
