Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
  

Archive 2016 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?

  
 
henry albert
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


Holger wrote:
I like to think in mathematical terms. But I find COC very useful. Usually we look at images of the same size, e.g. from a print or on the monitor. An Iphone sensor with 7 times smaller sensor side requires the light rays to intersect the sensor plane such that the radius of the interaction circle is a lot smaller compared to that in a similar situation on a FF sensor. If it were the same size, it would occupy a much larger area relatively to the sensor size, which would make the image blurry. This inherently influences DOF, as
...Show more

I downsized the 750 frame to match the 500, then cropped each frame to the same size.



Nov 17, 2016 at 05:46 PM
Holger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


henry albert wrote:
I downsized the 750 frame to match the 500, then cropped each frame to the same size.


That's why DOF is similar.
With cropping you changed things as COC changes.



Nov 17, 2016 at 05:50 PM
henry albert
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


Holger wrote:
That's why DOF is similar.
With cropping you changed things as COC changes.


Well, no. Depth of field cannot be changed by cropping or resizing. The die is cast when the shutter clicks. Every action after that is irrelevant in terms of DoF.



Nov 17, 2016 at 07:15 PM
la puffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


What if you took a FX frame of 5568px and cropped the center of the frame to 3712px, then resized to 800px (in length). Wouldn't that show the same FoV as a 5568px DX image resized to 800px?


Nov 17, 2016 at 07:24 PM
Holger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


henry albert wrote:
Well, no. Depth of field cannot be changed by cropping or resizing. The die is cast when the shutter clicks. Every action after that is irrelevant in terms of DoF.


Please acquaint yourself with the concept of COC. What you say is not true and can easily be understood by looking at how DOF is determined using the concept of COC. DOF is NOT a fixed thickness of a plane where everything is sharp and which is not changing by cropping, changing distance aperture etc., but is the depth that APPEARS to be in focus. The larger you display the image, the more obvious it will become that deviations from the "plane of perfect focus" are out of focus, and the smaller you display the image, the less obvious it will be. So what is appearing to the human eye to be in focus is dependent on viewing size (and therefore cropping and magnification) and distance to the print/image, which is used to define COC, which then determines the DOF.

The link above deriving the DOF formulas shows in its first images the rear and front part of the DOF-zone. This zones is determined by defining a blur circle formed by the light rays penetrating the sensor plane, with a size that is seen by the user still as a point, ie. is smaller than the COC. So cropping and magnifying your image will change these relations, as the point formaly seen as sharp could be seen as blurred now or vice versa and therefore the depth of the region where everything is in focus changes.
Look here, too:
http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/#dof



Nov 18, 2016 at 01:39 AM
mp0363
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


wow. pages of blah blah blah over this DOF argument. seems to happen every time, as if we just like to argue when we sit here in front of our keyboards?

i dunno, just test it yourself and you'll be done with it forever.

500 vs 750 v2 by mp0363, on Flickr



Nov 18, 2016 at 02:01 AM
Holger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


mp0363 wrote:
wow. pages of blah blah blah over this DOF argument. seems to happen every time, as if we just like to argue when we sit here in front of our keyboards?

i dunno, just test it yourself and you'll be done with it forever.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7026/26370674833_8f74e796b6_z.jpg500 vs 750 v2 by mp0363, on Flickr


It is not blah blah, it is based on math and physics. Dpreview has pages over pages already demonstrating this
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/2029056?page=6#forum-post-23910313 .
Your images lack information regarding fstop, distance, crop or no crop, focal length (I don't know whether you gave this information elsewhere, in that case please point me to it). It seems that you cropped the FF image afterwards or that you chose equivalent focal length on the APSC camera.

EDIT: Saw that you gave details on your Flickr account, sorry for implying something different. You chose equivalent focal lengths. So this demonstration shows exactly what it should, larger DOF for APSC, in accordance with the theory. We are talking however about mounting the same lens and viewing the resulting image at the same size. A.Silver however cropped in post and changed the situation.



Nov 18, 2016 at 02:47 AM
Lee Saxon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


Pixel Perfect wrote:
it appears to do better than that in real life against most (not D5) cameras however. The D500 holds up well against they D810 at high ISO. A newer sensor in the D810 successor may see the gap increase again, but the D500 seems to he doing very well against most FF considering it's smaller sensor.


That stands to reason, though, with the D810 having nearly the pixel density of the D500. I think the general statements about APS-C vs FF35 are thinking in terms of a similar number of pixels at very different densities (ie D5 vs D500 both 20mp, which as you point out is a different matter than the D810 comparison).




Nov 18, 2016 at 05:41 AM
henry albert
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


Holger wrote:
It is not blah blah, it is based on math and physics. Dpreview has pages over pages already demonstrating this
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/2029056?page=6#forum-post-23910313 .
Your images lack information regarding fstop, distance, crop or no crop, focal length (I don't know whether you gave this information elsewhere, in that case please point me to it). It seems that you cropped the FF image afterwards or that you chose equivalent focal length on the APSC camera.

EDIT: Saw that you gave details on your Flickr account, sorry for implying something different. You chose equivalent focal lengths. So this demonstration shows exactly what it should, larger DOF for
...Show more

Both photos prove my point. The one showing differing depth of fields used different lenses. Mine used the same focal length. Cropping has no effect on the DoF on the asp-c image. Cropping only has an effect on the practically useless calculation using the CoC of an FX image.

A.Silver however cropped in post and changed the situation.

Aren't you the clever one.



Nov 18, 2016 at 08:36 AM
henry albert
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


mp0363 wrote:
wow. pages of blah blah blah over this DOF argument. seems to happen every time, as if we just like to argue when we sit here in front of our keyboards?

i dunno, just test it yourself and you'll be done with it forever.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7026/26370674833_8f74e796b6_z.jpg500 vs 750 v2 by mp0363, on Flickr


Apples vs. oranges in a cage match, winner to face the Blahs. You used different focal lengths. We're talking about identical focal lengths. When you use the same lens, distance and aperture, depth of field is the same.

i dunno, just test it yourself and you'll be done with it forever.

Great idea. Let's do it again.







Nov 18, 2016 at 08:45 AM
Holger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


henry albert wrote:
Both photos prove my point. The one showing differing depth of fields used different lenses. Mine used the same focal length. Cropping has no effect on the DoF on the asp-c image. Cropping only has an effect on the practically useless calculation using the CoC of an FX image.

Aren't you the clever one.


Cropping changes the relation between COC and image diagonal, so your example is bringing an additional variable into the equation. Let's explain it again:

The two light rays before and after the object penetrate the sensor area causing blur circles. If these are smaller than the COC, we see them as points at a certain distance and image size. This defines DOF. Now lets replace first the sensor by a tiny crop sensor. Now, although the blur circles still occupy the same size, the relative size compared to the sensor diagonal changed. Viewing the FF and crop image side by side (and my boundary condition is: the image is viewed at the same size), the blur circle is magnified and not seen as a point anymore. We need to resort to light rays closer to the subjects defining a SMALLER DOF, to cause blur circles of the same RELATIVE size as before.
Now lets crop the FF image. Again, this has an effect on the relative size. As you do it such, that the cropped FF image shows the same FOV, the relative size of sensor diagonal and blur circle coincides with the one of the crop sensor. This equalizes DOF again and is what you have in mind.

This is exactly reflected in the DOF equations.



Nov 18, 2016 at 11:37 AM
henry albert
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


Holger wrote:
Again, lets see to the effect of cropping.
The two light rays before and after the object penetrate the sensor area causing blur circles. If these are smaller than the COC, we see them as points at a certain distance and image size. This defines DOF. Now lets replace first the sensor by a tiny crop sensor. Now, although the blur circles still occupy the same size, the relative size compared to the sensor diagonal changed. Viewing the FF and crop image side by side (and my boundary condition is: the image is viewed at the same size), the blur
...Show more

I think we've just been talking past each other while in agreement.



Nov 18, 2016 at 11:41 AM
Holger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


henry albert wrote:
I think we've just been talking past each other while in agreement.


Good, happy then that we settled it/ found that in a civilized way, contrary to what happens in other forums.



Nov 18, 2016 at 12:29 PM
mp0363
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · D5 V D500 is it worth the difference?


henry albert wrote:
Apples vs. oranges in a cage match, winner to face the Blahs. You used different focal lengths. We're talking about identical focal lengths. When you use the same lens, distance and aperture, depth of field is the same.

Great idea. Let's do it again.


To be true to composition eFOV is your apples to apples and only consideration for real world usage. But I don't want to win an argument here, so perhaps I misunderstood all the talk. Rather than cut to the chase, perhaps you guys like this nerd stuff so it's brain-fun to have a big discussion? If that is the case then sorry for intruding.



Nov 18, 2016 at 03:27 PM
1       2      
3
       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.