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 | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3              5       6       end
  

Archive 2018 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?

  
 
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


highdesertmesa wrote:
"A bit" of difference between FF and 44x33 becomes more untrue the closer you get to MFD. To get bokeh even close to these examples on FF with a 50mm lens you need f1.4. You need f1.4 to mimic not only the DOF of f2.8 on 44x33, but you need it to compensate for the compression a 63mm lens has on the image.

Even though f1.8 on FF is the technical equivalent to f2.8 on 44x33, you have to go to f1.4 to achieve a similar look. Even then, it will not be the same because you cannot simulate a longer
...Show more

Nice images, but what you write is not correct. If we simplify the crop factor to 1.4 (to favor medium format as much as possible), this is how it is:

45 mm f/2.0 on 32x24 mm gives exactly the same FOV, DOF and background compression as 63 mm f/2.8 on 44x33 mm. The look may depend on the bokeh on the individual lenses, but that is not a quantitative difference. Neither does this relation change the closer you get to MFD.

And with certain 35mm format brands you can even get 45 mm f/2 in a Zoom

These are all facts BTW.



Oct 22, 2018 at 02:02 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


alundeb wrote:
Nice images, but what you write is not correct. If we simplify the crop factor to 1.4 (to favor medium format as much as possible), this is how it is:

45 mm f/2.0 on 32x24 mm gives exactly the same FOV, DOF and background compression as 63 mm f/2.8 on 44x33 mm. The look may depend on the bokeh on the individual lenses, but that is not a quantitative difference. Neither does this relation change the closer you get to MFD.

And with certain 35mm format brands you can even get 45 mm f/2 in a Zoom

These are all facts
...Show more

44x33 to FF is .79 crop, so equiv is a 50mm lens.




© highdesertmesa 2018




Oct 22, 2018 at 02:26 PM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


highdesertmesa wrote:
44x33 to FF is .79 crop, so equiv is a 50mm lens.


Actually 44 X 33 to FF35 cropped to 32 X 24 so it has the same aspect ratio, as alundeb specifies, is a .73 crop or about a 45mm equivalent.



Oct 22, 2018 at 02:28 PM
sirimiri
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


Though not exactly relevant, the Canon 35L II, 50L and 85L II do quite well wide open on the GFX. Only a minor crop is needed for the hard vignette that occurs when stopped down.

The 35L II in particular is very good I think.



Oct 22, 2018 at 02:32 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


highdesertmesa wrote:
44x33 to FF is .79 crop, so equiv is a 50mm lens.


Yes, but if you use a crop factor 0.79, you only need a 50mm f/2.2 to get the same DOF and background blur (0.79 crop factor is 0.68 stops or approx 2/3 stops)



Oct 22, 2018 at 02:33 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


Steve Spencer wrote:
Actually 44 X 33 to FF35 cropped to 32 X 24 so it has the same aspect ratio, as alundeb specifies, is a .73 crop or about a 45mm equivalent.


I shoot 4:3



Oct 22, 2018 at 02:34 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


alundeb wrote:
Nice images, but what you write is not correct. If we simplify the crop factor to 1.4 (to favor medium format as much as possible), this is how it is:

45 mm f/2.0 on 32x24 mm gives exactly the same FOV, DOF and background compression as 63 mm f/2.8 on 44x33 mm. The look may depend on the bokeh on the individual lenses, but that is not a quantitative difference. Neither does this relation change the closer you get to MFD.

And with certain 35mm format brands you can even get 45 mm f/2 in a Zoom

These are all facts
...Show more

I think you also made one of my points which is designing a 45/50mm lens creates a different animal than designing a 63mm lens. Take this to the extreme and compare what kind of lens design it would take on M43 to equal the same FOV lens design on 6x7 film. You'd end up comparing a very wide angle lens design (with all its inherent compromises) to a mild telephoto design, and there's no way these can have the same character in the final images. Maybe I'm just bad at how I'm putting it into words.



Oct 22, 2018 at 02:42 PM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


sirimiri wrote:
Though not exactly relevant, the Canon 35L II, 50L and 85L II do quite well wide open on the GFX. Only a minor crop is needed for the hard vignette that occurs when stopped down.

The 35L II in particular is very good I think.


I haven't tried any of the Canon EF lenses, because the adapter is pretty pricey just to try them out and I don't have any EF lenses any more, but if the 35L II is that good it is one of the few lenses with a 35mm focal length that works that well. I have seen the results from the 50L and I would put it like most 50s as having about a 50mm image circle, but that is just looking at other people's samples and not having raw files to work with. The 85L II (or I for that matter they are the same optically just different AF motors) should be close to a 55mm image circle as most 85s have about that much coverage. This is just guesswork on my part though. If someone has used these lenses on the GFX it would be nice to know what you have actually found and I would love to see your results added to the adapted lenses on the GFX thread.



Oct 22, 2018 at 03:08 PM
DannyBurkPhoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


I'd be very curious about the Milvus 25/1.4 and 35/1.4 too, although I suspect that neither will work well, especially the 25.


Oct 22, 2018 at 03:29 PM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
I'd be very curious about the Milvus 25/1.4 and 35/1.4 too, although I suspect that neither will work well, especially the 25.


I have both of these on order (traded in my Otus 28 and Classic 35 f/1.4 for these two lenses), so when I get them I will let you know how they do.



Oct 22, 2018 at 03:30 PM
Rand47
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


For Pete's sake... how narrow would one want to go? As it is, shooting head and shoulders portraits with the 110 f/2 on the GFX, wide open, is way too narrow DOF to produce a pleasing image. E.g. eyes in focus, tip of nose badly out of focus. Get the nose sharp, eyes are way out. Get close enough in and you can have one freckle in focus and the next out of focus.

It's fun to play with math, it's another thing altogether in the real world of making images. One of the challenges of using my medium format GFX as compared to my X-H1 is getting "enough" DOF even w/ the f/4 lenses wide open!

Rand



Oct 22, 2018 at 03:56 PM
DannyBurkPhoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


Steve Spencer wrote:
I have both of these on order (traded in my Otus 28 and Classic 35 f/1.4 for these two lenses), so when I get them I will let you know how they do.


That's great, thanks. You'll love them on the Sony, at the least; both are terrific. I've just posted a Classic-Milvus comparison of the 35 on another thread a few seconds ago.



Oct 22, 2018 at 03:58 PM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


Rand47 wrote:
For Pete's sake... how narrow would one want to go? As it is, shooting head and shoulders portraits with the 110 f/2 on the GFX, wide open, is way too narrow DOF to produce a pleasing image. E.g. eyes in focus, tip of nose badly out of focus. Get the nose sharp, eyes are way out. Get close enough in and you can have one freckle in focus and the next out of focus.

It's fun to play with math, it's another thing altogether in the real world of making images. One of the challenges of using my medium format GFX
...Show more

Hi Rand,

Different people want different things. Some like really shallow DOF for head and shoulder portraits. Some like using smaller f/2 lenses and yet have DOF performance close to f/1.4 lenses on FF35. Some like shooting at ten to fifteen feet and still getting a quite blurred background (something that a really wide aperture is useful for). Personally, I have little use for the first of these options, but lots of use for the latter two options. So a lot depends how what you shoot and how you shooting but for me considering FF35 lenses for my GFX was an important part of my decision to get the camera.



Oct 22, 2018 at 04:05 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


For achieve special look, adapting 35mm lens on MF system is the way to go.

Remember DOF is also a function of distance. It is not like it always give sharp eye, fuzzy nose at f0.95. The combination will create some special look images that 35mm fail to deliver. Like it or not seems not the topic of this thread.



Oct 22, 2018 at 04:39 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


Rand47 wrote:
For Pete's sake... how narrow would one want to go? As it is, shooting head and shoulders portraits with the 110 f/2 on the GFX, wide open, is way too narrow DOF to produce a pleasing image. E.g. eyes in focus, tip of nose badly out of focus. Get the nose sharp, eyes are way out. Get close enough in and you can have one freckle in focus and the next out of focus.


;-)

Preferences vary, for sure, but that's sort of how I feel about super narrow DOF. Honestly, in most portrait situations you are better off using a slightly smaller aperture in many cases and then using factors including focal length, camera-to-subject distance, subject-to-background distance, the nature of that background, and lighting to produce the desired separation.

Notice that I did not write "always."

Not saying that there is no place for super narrow DOF — just that it is possible to have too little DOF in many cases. And, to loop back to my original post above...

... this just means that each photographer needs to weigh all of these variables against their typical subjects and approach to shooting in order to decide whether or not this approach is the ideal for them

YMMV,

Dan



Oct 22, 2018 at 04:58 PM
DannyBurkPhoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


I'll add that not everyone wants fast lenses / shallow DOF for portraits. I don't do portraits at all, yet I do flowers a lot, which I nearly always shoot wide open. Often this is for reasons of interesting background bokeh; if I'm doing one or a small group of flowers, I almost never stop down.


Oct 22, 2018 at 05:49 PM
hauxon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


Does anyone remember Ryan Brenizer and his famous Brenizer method? In some ways you can think of using a 35mm lens on miniDanMF sensor as a single shot Brenizer. That's actually what the MF look has been to me, at least on the web since resolution doesn't show, more background blur on wider shots and further away from the subject.


Oct 22, 2018 at 07:09 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


hauxon wrote:
Does anyone remember Ryan Brenizer and his famous Brenizer method? In some ways you can think of using a 35mm lens on miniDanMF sensor as a single shot Brenizer. That's actually what the MF look has been to me, at least on the web since resolution doesn't show, more background blur on wider shots and further away from the subject.


And the single-shot f1.2 or f1.4 on 44x33 has more character. There's something about the uniformity of the large, out of focus backgrounds done with the Brenizer method that look unnatural or (rather ironically) like computational bokeh.



Oct 22, 2018 at 09:13 PM
Sauseschritt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


highdesertmesa wrote:
Even though f1.8 on FF is the technical equivalent to f2.8 on 44x33

I'm sorry, but thats not correct. 44x33 is merely a ~0.8 crop. A f2.8 on 44x33 is around f2.2 equiv for full frame in respect to depth of field.



Oct 23, 2018 at 03:40 AM
molson
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Can you get shallower Depth of Field on FF 35mm than 44 X 33 sensors?


Sauseschritt wrote:
I'm sorry, but thats not correct. 44x33 is merely a ~0.8 crop. A f2.8 on 44x33 is around f2.2 equiv for full frame in respect to depth of field.


F/2.8 on the GFX is actually equivalent to f/2 on the miniature-format cameras if you use the same aspect ratio.



Oct 23, 2018 at 07:50 AM
1      
2
       3              5       6       end




FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3              5       6       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.