The smaller format camera is a good idea. A tripod won't stop the subject from moving, though. Regards Jens
Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 11. februar 2006 22:28 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: New High End DSLR Speculation Hmm. Use a tripod and longer exposure times, or a smaller format camera... get all the DOF you want. Godfrey On Feb 11, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Jens Bladt wrote: > Very intersting. > I think shallow DOF is one of those "artistic" things, I rarely need. > When I need it I could make it in the computer using a mask and a > Gausian > blurr or similar. > Most of the time I want D O F ! When people are looking at a > scenery, they > often focus (their eyes) at different distances. Later they will > remember > seeing the WHOLE scenery as "sharp". People want pictures to > enhance or > refresh their memory or inspire their imaginations/expectations. > They want D > O F! They want SHARPNESS. > So do I! It's really that simple. > > Artist may want something different (like shallow DOF for portraits > etc.) > No problem. They can get what they want. > Why can't I? > Regards > Jens > > Jens Bladt > http://www.jensbladt.dk > > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > Fra: Derby Chang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 11. februar 2006 20:10 > Til: [email protected] > Emne: Re: New High End DSLR Speculation > > > And sometimes, a subject that one would think needs deep DOF, actually > doesn't. > > Here are some real aerial photos taken with a tilt shift lens to > simulate shallow DOF. I think they are beautiful > http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=1760 > > D > > Paul Stenquist wrote: >> Sensor size or film size will affect DOF for a given angle of view. >> APS-C will actually provide more DOF at a given angle of view than >> 35mm. >> Of course, Shel is right here, despite his lack of coffee <g>. Some >> photos are best executed with minimal DOF. Others will benefit from >> deep DOF. It's al a matter of executing one's vision. I frequently >> shoot wide open with a 35/2 or even a 50/1.4. And I've had reason to >> shoot at f32 with my 300/4 on the 6x7. There is no right or wrong way >> to produce a good photograph. I would think that is very obvious. >> Paul >> On Feb 11, 2006, at 9:22 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: >> >>> At first read, that seems to be a most inane statement, but maybe >>> there's >>> more to it than my pre morning coffee brain can understand. >>> Perhaps you >>> can elaborate upon it, specifically, why is a certain range of DOF >>> important for "good" photographs, what is a good photograph, and >>> what >>> does >>> sensor or film size have to do with anything? Thank you for your >>> indulgence. >>> >>> Shel >>> >>> >>> >>>> [Original Message] >>>> From: Jens Bladt < >>> >>>> Most good photographs will require at least some DOF (F.4 - F.8) >>>> for >>>> APS-sized sensors. >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc > > >
