Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/25

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] new Puts article
From: feli2 at earthlink.net (feli)
Date: Sat Jun 25 09:17:47 2005
References: <001001c57926$037b5660$6452c33e@symke> <65280FBD-D7D0-4458-AEEC-1931718FBA6D@btinternet.com> <9b678e050625054040fb9bc9@mail.gmail.com> <42BD59D7.7000409@arbos.net> <42BD6293.4000507@adrenaline.com>

On Jun 25, 2005, at 6:56 AM, Scott McLoughlin wrote:

>>
>> I, as an R-D1 user, simply agree to an opinion that digital M  
>> mount cameras should not necessarily be with full size sensors. I  
>> will happily use M lenses designed specifically for the APS size,  
>> if it is chosen as the standard.

The only thing that bothers me about a sub full frame size chip is  
that it will be difficult to
achieve the super shallow DOF you can get right now, when shooting  
wide open and close up.

If i remember correctly a half size sensor, doesn't mean twice the  
DOF at the same stop, because
it isn't a linear progression. I would be curious to know how big the  
difference really is...

feli

________________________________________________________
feli2@earthlink.net                 2 + 2 = 4                
www.elanphotos.com


no archive


Replies: Reply from abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] new Puts article)
Reply from bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] new Puts article)
In reply to: Message from s.jessurun95 at chello.nl (animal) ([Leica] new Puts article)
Message from Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie) ([Leica] new Puts article)
Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] new Puts article)
Message from miki at arbos.net (MIKIRO) ([Leica] new Puts article)
Message from scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin) ([Leica] new Puts article)