Chris, I meant exactly the same thing. Instead of re-specifying all
the details,
I just refer to "equivalency" (which usually opens up a whole can of
worms
around high-ISO noise, etc). But my primary interest and reference was
to DOF.
Since I only shoot film, and there are no High-ISO noise issues to
speak of
(grain has a constant size regardless of format) I do see the effects of
DOF equivalency every day as I switch between 35mm, MF and larger
formats.
regards,
Dawid
On 06 Jan 2010, at 1:44 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
> 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
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|