Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 81 to 98 of 98

Thread: wedding photographer

  1. #81

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by tehzeh View Post
    I suggested that you two should go and properly define what DOF you guys are trying to argue about, before even arguing non-stop. I did not say that that was your argument.



    Source: http://www.expertphotography.com/wp-...parison600.jpg

    How not?

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I think there's something wrong with the first quote that you gave (point 1). I don't know if there was any typo or not.

    What's the deal here? You use the same lens on a full frame and a cropped sensor camera, the DOF remains the same but the DOF you see in your photo is not, if it's the same distance.
    I totally don't know what's you talking about. What "the DOF remains the same but the DOF you see in your photo is not, if it's the same distance". There is only one thing in photo called DOF. it's not 2 different things. yawn

  2. #82

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    My photo page: TDR Photography

  3. #83
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Mr Yahhhoooooooo, below is Rashkae's 2nd post in this thread. The 1st one wasn't quite related so I didn't quote it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    You mean DOF?

    Actually you're wrong in both cases. You get the same DOF, but since you need to shift closer to the subject to maintain the same frame subject size as on APS-C, you change the perspective, thus causing a thinner DOF.

    As for ISO performance, you'll get better ISO performance from an APS-C D7000 than from a full-frame D3X - so it really depends on the sensor.

    You do NOT get "more focal length", you just get a perceived focal length boost from the crop factor. In reality you could shoot with the full frame camera, then just crop out the centre aps-C sized portion and you're done.

    What he's saying is that if you
    1) shoot 1 photo with the APS-C camera
    2) without moving either the subject or the camera, switch the same lens to an FX camera and shoot again
    3) Crop off the image from the FX camera to give same angle of view (or subject-to-image size)

    the DOF does not change.
    So please don't go plugging in the DOF calculator numbers and use 75mm focal length to argue your point.
    Looking briefly at the points you've raised, I don't think you're technically incorrect. Just that you did not understand Rashkae's point, and have repeatedly misquoted him in order to have some online argument.

    Actually I would like to chime in by saying that if lens, aperture, and camera-subject distance don't change, switching from DX to FX increases the DOF, due to the larger CoC of the FX sensor
    Last edited by ZerocoolAstra; 23rd September 2011 at 05:30 PM. Reason: typo: replaced "didn't" with "did"
    Exploring! :)

  4. #84

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by Yahooo View Post
    1) Mr Rashkae said crop and full frame will give the same DOF given the same angle of view by varying distances between 2 formats. While I confirm t
    I never said that. I repeatedly stated the opposite.

    Just as an example, here are 5 of the times I have said that changing the distance will affect the DOF, which is the opposite of what you claim I said (that the DOF stays the same):

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    but since you need to shift closer to the subject to maintain the same frame subject size as on APS-C, you change the perspective, thus causing a thinner DOF.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    You would need to change your DISTANCE to the subject as you now have a FOV that LOOKS like 75mm on APS-C to match the subject frame size of the same 50mm on a full frame camera - that is what changes the DOF.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    However, what I am stating is that given the same lens, same focal length, the DOF is THE SAME whether you are on APS-C or FF. The difference is that on FF you need to get closer (change the distance) to get the same subject-frame ratio as the cropped camera provides, thus changing the DOF.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    And I repeat my point again, from the SAME LINK you provided:
    *if* you change the distance so that FF gives the same angle of view as the APS-C equivalent would, *then* the APS-C gives greater DOF - which your own statement agrees with.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    If the subject distance is adjusted to provide the same field of view at the subject, at the same f-number and final-image size, the smaller format has greater DOF, as with the “same picture” comparison above. - This is where you change the distance to give the equivalent subject-frame ratio. APS-C will have a greater DOF as for the FF you needed to move closer - this is what I said.


    Please, if you still cannot comprehend what you read, stop posting. It will make the world a better place.
    Alpha

  5. #85

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    Just that you didn't not understand Rashkae's point, and have repeatedly misquoted him in order to have some online argument.
    Thank you. Finally someone understands english.
    Alpha

  6. #86

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    Mr Yahhhoooooooo, below is Rashkae's 2nd post in this thread. The 1st one wasn't quite related so I didn't quote it.




    What he's saying is that if you
    1) shoot 1 photo with the APS-C camera
    2) without moving either the subject or the camera, switch the same lens to an FX camera and shoot again
    3) Crop off the image from the FX camera to give same angle of view (or subject-to-image size)

    the DOF does not change.
    So please don't go plugging in the DOF calculator numbers and use 75mm focal length to argue your point.
    Looking briefly at the points you've raised, I don't think you're technically incorrect. Just that you didn't not understand Rashkae's point, and have repeatedly misquoted him in order to have some online argument.

    Actually I would like to chime in by saying that if lens, aperture, and camera-subject distance don't change, switching from DX to FX increases the DOF, due to the larger CoC of the FX sensor
    The keyword is to get the same picture. I used different focal lengths to get the same picture with the same perspective and large format will give thinner DOF. I have made my point in this regard and I'm correct. Whether Mr Rashkae has bent it to another meaning is a different story which I do not wish to pursue further.

  7. #87

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    Thank you. Finally someone understands english.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    I never said that. I repeatedly stated the opposite.

    Just as an example, here are 5 of the times I have said that changing the distance will affect the DOF, which is the opposite of what you claim I said (that the DOF stays the same):

    Please, if you still cannot comprehend what you read, stop posting. It will make the world a better place.
    Seriously when can you stop spitting your personal attacks to support your arguments and make you a better man? It's just showing you are stubborn, defensive and shallow.

    And what you gotta say about this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    LOOOOOL ok, then I dare you, Stand 10m from a subject, shoot at 70mm. Now shoot at 200mm. Then still say that the focal length did not impact the perpective at all. I can't stop laughing at your nonsense!

    FYI, it is a well-known fact that shooting at longer focal lengths will give you a tighter perspective, making the background appear larger in the frame, while shooting at wider angles appears to push the background away.

    Geez, you're not getting anything right today, are you?

    Since you are smart. Can you enlighten me please? when I have already made this point:

    Quote Originally Posted by Yahooo View Post
    I'm pretty much confident that statement is true. You are the one who looking at the sky from a well here. I'm pretty sure after cropping both will have the same perspective.

    "The reality is that focal length has absolutely nothing, in itself, to do with perspective in images"

    cited from http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=672913


    Learnt something new oh yeah? =)

    But your sentence saying:

    "Originally Posted by Rashkae
    but since you need to shift closer to the subject to maintain the same frame subject size as on APS-C, you change the perspective, thus causing a thinner DOF."

    already contradicted with it, didn't it?

    Come on, grow up and accept new things

  8. #88

    Default

    This is interesting. Same lens give the same DOF NO MATTER WHICH BODY IS USED. Oops. Time for more flaming ...

  9. #89

    Default

    Anyway, its all a matter of perspective. Pun intended

  10. #90
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by Yahooo View Post
    The keyword is to get the same picture. I used different focal lengths to get the same picture with the same perspective and large format will give thinner DOF. I have made my point in this regard and I'm correct. Whether Mr Rashkae has bent it to another meaning is a different story which I do not wish to pursue further.
    So you mean that cropping off the FX image to get the DX's equivalent crop will a yield a different picture than straight shooting with the DX camera,

    whereas switching from 50 on DX to 75 on FX and not moving will get you the same picture?
    Exploring! :)

  11. #91

  12. #92

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    So you mean that cropping off the FX image to get the DX's equivalent crop will a yield a different picture than straight shooting with the DX camera,

    whereas switching from 50 on DX to 75 on FX and not moving will get you the same picture?
    I'm not saying you are incorrect. I was just explaining the reason why I used 2 different focal lengths . And your point also suggests that focal lengths do not matter in creating different perspectives, but only magnification. The perspective is affected by distance to subject
    Last edited by Yahooo; 23rd September 2011 at 05:39 PM.

  13. #93
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Thomas More's Vision
    Posts
    627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tehzeh

    I suggested that you two should go and properly define what DOF you guys are trying to argue about, before even arguing non-stop. I did not say that that was your argument.

    Source: http://www.expertphotography.com/wp-...parison600.jpg

    How not?

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yahoo I hope you ain't lose your ability to see this photo I posted. How the flip does focal length not affect perspective? I absolutely love people who answer questions selectively, because they ain't got no answer.

    As for the question you posted to me, I don't have an answer for you because that was my assumption and I have the guts to face it.

    A very talented display of cowarrdice through exhibiting indifference and lack of the ability to understand anything, deliberately, I would say.

  14. #94
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by Yahooo View Post
    I'm not saying you are incorrect. I was just explaining the reason why I used 2 different focal lengths . And your point also suggests that focal lengths do not matter in creating different perspectives, but only magnification. The perspective is affected by distance to subject
    Which is why I said earlier that you are also not incorrect.
    Therefore I find it kind of amusing that this whole 'disagreement' took place at all
    The arguments kind of got twisted in all sorts of weird ways. Best you take a pause and re-read through the posts, or else just walk away
    Exploring! :)

  15. #95
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by tehzeh View Post
    Yahoo I hope you ain't lose your ability to see this photo I posted. How the flip does focal length not affect perspective? I absolutely love people who answer questions selectively, because they ain't got no answer.

    As for the question you posted to me, I don't have an answer for you because that was my assumption and I have the guts to face it.

    A very talented display of cowarrdice through exhibiting indifference and lack of the ability to understand anything, deliberately, I would say.
    Your example is a bit flawed, because looking at the 4 photos, focal length wasn't THE ONLY thing that was changed from shot to shot, am I right to say?
    So therefore it is incorrect to look at the photos and conclude: "focal length affects perspective"
    Exploring! :)

  16. #96

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by tehzeh View Post
    Yahoo I hope you ain't lose your ability to see this photo I posted. How the flip does focal length not affect perspective? I absolutely love people who answer questions selectively, because they ain't got no answer.

    As for the question you posted to me, I don't have an answer for you because that was my assumption and I have the guts to face it.

    A very talented display of cowarrdice through exhibiting indifference and lack of the ability to understand anything, deliberately, I would say.
    Ok, you finally convey your message in a clearer way now. I will ignore the last line of your post that calls me whatever names without going through clarification for now.

    To answer your question, yes I did look at the photos. I see the effort to maintain the same subject sizes in the 4 photos. However, it seems to me that this was done using different focal lengths at different distances. When you change the distance to subject, yes you change perspective.

    If you put camera + 70-200mm on tripod. Shoot a picture @70mm. Shoot another picture @200mm without moving the camera. Take the picture @70mm and crop to match the subject size of 200mm picture, you will get 2 identical images. No "compression effect' difference. Which was done, test and verified in this: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=672913

    It looks like you didn't even bother reading the link I posted

  17. #97
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    Mr Yahhhoooooooo, below is Rashkae's 2nd post in this thread. The 1st one wasn't quite related so I didn't quote it.




    What he's saying is that if you
    1) shoot 1 photo with the APS-C camera
    2) without moving either the subject or the camera, switch the same lens to an FX camera and shoot again
    3) Crop off the image from the FX camera to give same angle of view (or subject-to-image size)

    the DOF does not change.
    So please don't go plugging in the DOF calculator numbers and use 75mm focal length to argue your point.
    Looking briefly at the points you've raised, I don't think you're technically incorrect. Just that you did not understand Rashkae's point, and have repeatedly misquoted him in order to have some online argument.

    Actually I would like to chime in by saying that if lens, aperture, and camera-subject distance don't change, switching from DX to FX increases the DOF, due to the larger CoC of the FX sensor
    Actually bro, there is some difference. The circle of confusion is slightly different, therefore the DOF is slightly different. In fact, you get a slightly deeper DOF if you use the D700 in DX mode, than a D300 or D90.

  18. #98
    Moderator nightwolf75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    really MORE diaper changes
    Posts
    17,839
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: wedding photographer

    first things first (and if i am permitted to say this), you guys are crazy enuf to fall for TS' trick to start a flame war. go to his post history and you will see he has done this before. post 1 post of potentially inflammatory remarks, and see who is dumb enuf to fall for it. works every time in CS, as far as i am concern cos a lot of people here are quick to shoot off their keyboards.

    so rather than infracting everyone who started this bitchfest, which takes up too much of my time, i suggest you all take the chill pill and go watch the F1 practice sessions.
    If Life worked on auto mode then manual mode for photography would have never existed.” ― Deeksha Mittal

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •