RE: [Leica] Digital Aesthetic

["bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Jim - I think you may be further confusing things...;-)

First off, deciding against a 1Ds because it may get upgraded makes less
than no sense - unless you are a sports or other high-speed shooter who
will need to upgrade to get higher-fps speeds as they come along. For
the rest of us, the quality a 1Ds with its 35 mm full-frame, 11 mg
sensor is all anyone would need for a lonnnnng time to come.

Second issue - I think what you are really talking about in terms of the
second matter is the problem of change in focal length. If one is a
wide-angle shooter, then multiplying the focal length of the lens by a
factor of 1.3-1.6 is a real problem. All of a sudden a 35 becomes a  56,
and a 21 becomes a 33.6, which is hardly a super wide...Further, you're
limited in terms of high speed lenses, unless you go to Canon. The Canon
24 1.4 becomes, about a 38 1.4 - but then the great canon 50 1.4 becomes
about an 80 1.4.

But in terms of the "look?" a 38 1.4 is a 38 1.4 in terms of dof...so
it's going to be close to the 35 1.4...as to the Noctilux, given that I
hate the Noctilux look...;-)...but the 85 1.2 is supposed to be a
magnificent lens, so what you'd have is a 130 1.2 in digital...

BUT - if you go for the 1Ds and the full-frame sensor, none of this is a
problem...and you then have the option of using Canon's 24 1.4, 35 1.4,
50 1.4, 85 1.2 etc. etc...plus wides down to about 14 2.8....

B. D.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Jim Laurel
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 2:54 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] Digital Aesthetic


I think you're right, Tim.  People do seem to be discussing several
different questions in this thread, which confuses the matter.

Here's what inspired me to think about this.  I like to shoot with short
focal lengths, close to the subject at very wide apertures.  There's
nothing I love more than photographing interesting people in marginal
light, up close and personal, with a 35mm lens wide open at f1.4.  Or
the Noctilux at f1.0, for that matter.  I have recently been spending so
much time scanning slides, that I have been considering adding a Canon
digital body.  I'm leery of the 1DS because I know it's going to be
revised in 18 mos or so, if it follows Canon's usual digicam upgrade
cycle, and I am not willing to own an $8000 paperweight in 2004.  So, I
started thinking about the 10D, which is more reasonably priced.  But I
soon realized that with this camera, I would not be able to get the look
that I so prize, using an M camera, with its fast lenses.

Q: How do you duplicate the the FOV and DOF look of a photo taken with
an m6 with 35 summilux or noctilux, wide open, at close range, with a
digi SLR using a 15.1x22.7mm sensor?

A: Not possible.  (without some clever Photoshopping, that is)

- --Jim

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tim Atherton" <tim@KairosPhoto.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 8:39 AM
Subject: RE: [Leica] Digital Aesthetic


> > Sounds like we're going to need an experiment to learn the truth 
> > here.
I
> > did some cursory tests similar to what Clive describes, which bear 
> > out
my
> > opinion on this.  I will try to whip up something tomorrow to post 
> > for review.  A digital camera with a smaller than 24x36 frame does
> > *not* change
> > the lens' focal length.  It merely crops the image projected by that
lens.
> > DOF and perspective are the same as they would be on a full-frame
camera,
> > but the image is cropped.
> >
> > --Jim
> >
>
> It does, however, change the "effective" type of lens that you are 
> using - that is, the actual used field of coverage changes and the 
> exact same lens can go from being a telephoto to a wide angle.
>
> This is all old hat to anyone who uses two different large format 
> cameras.
>
> One problem we are getting here is people using the same term to mean 
> different things (and by this point in the discussion, I'm not quite 
> sure what the question is anymore).
>
> On my 8"x10" camera my 210mm lens is a moderate wide angle lens (= to 
> say around 28mm on 35mm cameras)
>
> Now, if I take that EXACT SAME lens and put it on my 4x5 camera it 
> becomes
a
> moderate long/telephoto lens ( = to around 75mm or so on 35mm 
> cameras).
>
> But you are also right the DOF from use on one format camera to 
> another
has
> not changed, nor has the focal length of the camera - I still need 
> 210mm
of
> bellows from the ground glass to the lens to focus at infinity on 
> either camera. But on 4x5 I am seeing a much wider (and higher) part 
> of the scene than on the 8x10.
>
> Your lens can "effectively" change from being a telephoto to a wide 
> angle lens, but nothing else has changed apart from the actual field 
> of view
that
> it covers 'on that particular format'.
>
> >Sounds like we're going to need an experiment to learn the truth 
> >here.
>
> No-one needs to do any experiments here to learn the truth (unless you
want
> to invent the wheel again...) - just read a couple of basic books are 
> articles in using lenses on different format large format cameras - 
> people did all the experimenting for you about 100 years or so ago  
> :-)
>
> tim
>
> PS - trying to read the threads on this I think there are about three 
> different questions being asked and being answered at the same time...

> so I'm probably answering a question no one is asking
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see 
> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html