"John Coyle" wrote:
>Which is exactly why, a couple of years ago, we had a thread on the utility
of
>DOF and I said then I thought it a waste of time on 35mm cameras. If you
think
>you can judge depth of field accurately when you're stopped way down, as
one
>usually is shooting macro, I believe, sir, you kid yourself! (Not you,
Bill)
I agree it isn't as useful, but it is still indisposable. Whether you can
see anything depends on the ambient light levels, the amount of modeling
light you can bring to the subject, and, oddly, how far you are stopped
down.
Even if I can't see the DOF at the full setting of the aperture, I can get
a much better feel for how the final image will look at some intermediate
aperture where I _can_ still see the image. I use it to assess both the DOF
on the subject as well as the DOF on the background -- if the subject isn't
even close to being sharp enough, or the background is already too sharp at
some intermediate aperture setting, then I know not to bother with taking a
picture at the full aperture setting.
Also, in the studio, I've been known to bring a ton of modeling light to
some of my live insect subjects simply so I can assess the DOF at the full
aperture setting, then turn it off an make the exposure using flash. A
strange way to work to be sure, but it is effective.
I've got a dandy 7X shot of an aphid where I used all of the above
mentioned techniques.
later,
patbob ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED])
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
