I know prosumers cams cannot create the same DOF (Blurred) effect compared to DSLR... cos CCD is small.... juz wanna know whether the newer ones are able to?? sony 828, the minolta A1 or the panasonic Z10...
blurboiboi said:I know prosumers cams cannot create the same DOF (Blurred) effect compared to DSLR... cos CCD is small.... juz wanna know whether the newer ones are able to?? sony 828, the minolta A1 or the panasonic Z10...
I know prosumers cams cannot create the same DOF (Blurred) effect compared to DSLR... cos CCD is small.... juz wanna know whether the newer ones are able to?? sony 828, the minolta A1 or the panasonic Z10...
I switched from my Canon A40 to the Nikon F80 purely for this reason; background blur.
You simply cannot emulate the background blur in a film or digital SLR because of the shorter focal length.
The above picture has a shallower DOF because it was taken at Max zoom and the subject was pretty near. If a film camera uses that amount of zoom, you will not be able to see the background almost.
SLR users use the 85mmf1.4 wide open for portraits just to get that very shallow DOF. For prosumer digicams to achieve similar results you would probably need ard 1000mm(35mm equi.) of zoom just to get an actual 85mm focal length and perhaps even more since there arent any f1.4 digicams around.
Hewland said:Hmmm, first time ever I've heard of that. Most prosumer digicams have a pre-set Portrait mode that ensures shallow Depth of Field (DOF). DOF is dependent on the f/ stop, and has nothing to do with the size of the CCD.
Blurboiboi, maybe you can post a couple of pics to help us understand your confusion?
Marc, yes the A40 has a f/2.8-4.9 lens. (I'm not sure of the focal range.) But if you stuck the long end of the lens in your subject's face and shoot with the lens wide open at f/4.9, I'm sure the DOF will be shallow enough. No?
Wow, going to film from digital eh? :thumbsup:
Hewland
erm Hewland, sorry to correct you but the size of the CCD does come into play for DOF. the aperture value of any camera is relative to the size of the "film" (in this case the CCD). aperture f/stop values measures light falling on the film and not DOF. so naturally the lens of a prosumer cam is able to get away with bigger f-stops (e.g. f/2.8, even f/2.0) naturally cos the amount of light needed to get to the small CCD is lesser. so... DoF of f/2.8 @ 100mm zoom on a prosumer cam is NOT as shallow as f/2.8 on a SLR mounted on a 100mm (equiv.) lens.Hewland said:DOF is dependent on the f/ stop, and has nothing to do with the size of the CCD.
Hewland said:Hmmm, first time ever I've heard of that. Most prosumer digicams have a pre-set Portrait mode that ensures shallow Depth of Field (DOF). DOF is dependent on the f/ stop, and has nothing to do with the size of the CCD.
Azure said:Prosumer class digicams CAN produce pretty darn good background blur if that is what you really want have. You just need to master your camera. Caesium's toy shot is an excellent example. Those who went for AG12 will also recognise this pix, taken at very close range (3cm away).
Even for portraits you can achieve pretty decent results, examplee below.
Won't repeat what's already been posted. With a Coolpix 4500, there you have it.
Zerstorer said:Azure, both your examples are hardly considered good examples of background blur in any case.
There's no way a digicam can achieve good blur except for macros as I've previously mentioned. The key thing would be to be more selective about your backgrounds as there is no way to completely isolate it with a digicam.
The only good bokeh comes when you are taking insect portraits like this(s602):
For anything more than 50cm away, you won't get a decent blur no matter how hard you try. Hence, dogs, humans and anything larger need not apply.
Best is to choose your backgrounds properly.
Zerstorer said:Camera-to-Subject:Subject-to-Background
Distance ratio. Make sure the first number is many many times smaller than the other.
A large subject will require a greater working distance to fit in the frame. This makes the first number more significant and hence greatly reduces the possibility of blur as the 2nd number will have to be greatly increased which is not always possible.