I was probably much too terse ...
Yes a 4x5 camera can give comparable DOF/diffraction limited results
(without tilts) to a 35mm SLR but who would want to do that?
Realistically there won't be very many Canon lenses that are optimized for
the smaller sensor, so choosing between 5Dii and 7D may be more influenced
by features/ergonomics rather than weight or optics. However Moose does like
to use wide range zooms (28-200 Tamron IIRCC) which are quite likely to
exist for smaller sensors and be lighter.
People using larger sensors are generally doing it because they want better
image quality than is attainable with DOF/diffraction limited optics (either
take pictures where DOF is less demanding or want portions of the scene
OOF). Personally I can't imagine wanting a tilt lens for a four thirds
camera, nor could I imagine being happy with a 4x5 that didn't have tilt. I
think I understand and more or less agree with both you and the empirical AG
... and would guess Moose probably isn't confused about his attraction to
the 7D.
When I go after macro I'll take either my Canon (with OM macro lenses) or
Olympus four thirds and leave the LF Canham home so for me small format wins
... and probably prefer four thirds to full 35mm sensor size except for my
greater accumulation of OM Zuikos than 4/3 Zuikos.
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 8:01 PM
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] - Advice wanted about 5D2
From your same source: "..., the diffraction-limited depth of field is
the same for all sensor sizes. In other words, if one were to use the
smallest aperture before diffraction became significant, all sensor
sizes would produce the same depth of field-- even though the
diffraction limited aperture will be different."
I stick by my calculations which used diffraction limited apertures for
each sensor. f/6.3 for the 7D and f/10 for the 5D Mk II. I also stick
by my comment that the lens requirements to reach near to diffraction
limited performance will be easier for the 5D Mk II.
Chuck Norcutt
Jeff Keller wrote:
> See
> http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm
> "Depth of Field Requirements" halfway down.
>
> For macro needing DOF, small format wins.
>
> Jeff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 5:15 PM
> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
> Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] - Advice wanted about 5D2
>
> There might be perfectly fine reasons to get a 7D vs 5D Mk II but depth
> of field for landscape shots will not be one of them. Although shorter
> focal lengths lead to greater depth of field, the larger magnification
> required from the smaller sensor leads to lesser depth of field.
> Diffraction also places limits and tends to be the equalizer.
>
> **snip
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> Moose wrote:
>
>> As I am usually working for the opposite of Dawid's shallow plane of
>> focus, I've be wondering if a 7D might not be a better step for me
>> than 5DII. The 15-85/3.5-5.6 (24-136 eq.) appears to be a very fine
>> lens for it.
>>
>> Multi Mode Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|