John Coyle writes:
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
Your comments were a bit patronizing but if everyone agreed with everyone
else this list would be quite boring!
But it is my PREFERENCE to push the little lever-thingy and judge for myself
if I like the effect. And lack of DOF is where I am going here I guess.
How fuzzy is the background
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
: Real DOF the Pentax K1000
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
Erik Nordin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But, as one other member said some time ago, it's useful for evaluating the
amount of fuzziness in out-of-focus areas. The opposite of DOF, in other
words.
Right. I use the depth-of-field preview more as a quality-of-bokeh preview. I
know the background's
This thread demonstrates the principle of FLDSAC.
First Liar Doesn't Stand a Chance. Grin
Len
---
-Original Message-
From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 5:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Real DOF the Pentax K1000
Erik Nordin
6 matches
Mail list logo
