I didn't know that anyone from Oz knew how to be pedantic; just look at
Andrew's US spelling etc ...
:-)
I understand what CH means, but that's not what Dawid wrote. And is it as
clear-cut as that?
Chris
On 6 Jan 2010, at 11:41, Wayne Harridge wrote:
>>
>> No, you're right, it doesn't change. But to all intents and purposes,
>> to the photographer, it's an 80/1.4.
>>
>> I don't understand CH's point though ...
>>
>
> Yeah, just me being pedantic !
>
> CH's point is that a 40/1.4 on a 4/3 sensor will give the equivalent DOF of
> an 80/2.8 on FF 35mm (or a 160/5.6 on 6x7).
>
> So if you want the equivalent DOF on 4/3 as a 50/1.4 on FF 35mm you'll need
> a 25/0.7 !
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|