Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/02/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Need and want are different issues.... the Diaphragm is used to limit or allow access to more light at the film plane. Digital cameras will do this by electronic means... The analogy is sort of a "film" that can change ASA frame by frame over a wide range. The issue of depth of field is totally secondary to the dynamic range of light. Remember that I said ..." has no use for".... and this is true. The camera has no use for the creative process. Now you and I will ask for that creative process, and maybe we will get it in a high end camera ( or one that can use 60-odd year old optics like Leitz )but in general, and especially for the greater consumer market, diaphgagms will be non-existant. As a side note, for the consumer market, limited depth of field means that some pictures will be put of focus. To Mr. Joe Average, out of focus means the camera is no good... so optics for the amateur have had and will continue to have limited maximum F-stop.... like Nikon and Canon with their F3.3-4.5 and F4-5.6 lenses. Whatever happened to the market for F2.0 and 2.8 lenses? I know that whenever possible I get the faster optics....then again I can still focus better than the camera can... at least until the light becomes weak. Thank You Frank Filippone red735i@worldnet.att.net > > >Keep in mind that a digital camera has no use for a shutter or, for that > >matter, a diaphragm. > > Educate me here. I understand why a shutter isn't required. Why would a > digital cam not need a diaphragm? Is this a matter of exposure or does a > digital camera somehow have another method of controlling depth of field/focus?