But just remember that our mushing friend, diffraction, makes the DOF
seem apparently larger by mushing the central (previously sharp) area as
well. Both get equal mushing to lesser pixel resolution. :-)
Smoothing it all out to mediocrity
Dr. Mush
On 6/26/2012 7:01 PM, usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Yes, yes all the caveats apply--some more than others in some
> situations.
> Still the diffraction/dof effects of effective aperture are good to
> think about in macro. The physical size of aperture doesn't change
> with the inc'd mag from extension but the diffraction effects do more
> mischief over a longer distance. The effects are gradual and as the
> dof with macro can gets razor thin, it is tempting to push the f stop
> till the image turns to mush. On the other hand in non macro
> situations every time I bracketed the aperture for an image requiring a
> largish dof when I was worried about diffraction, the larger dof
> setting almost always trumped the diffraction effects.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|