It isn't wrong Fernando, it's right. Best I can suggest in terms of
published work is downlaodable here:
http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/index.html#TIAOOF but the author has other
works which are well worth a read, even if you arentl specifcally interested
in view canera foussing, or the Scheimpflug rule.
He does a good job of explaining the practical application of 'rules of
thumb' that we grew up with, illustrating thir shortcomings, and explaining
what heyare.
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Fernando Gonzalez Gentile
Sent: 19 December 2004 18:10
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: New member with question about 100/F2
> From: "Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:23:10 -0000
> To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [OM] Re: New member with question about 100/F2
>
> All 100mm lenses have the
> same DoF. It depends how D0F is defined -
[snip]
> (and it is
> also showing the shortcomings of a principle (DoF) defined in the
> 1920s (if I remember correctly) .
Could you elaborate or point towards more web published material on this
subject, Piers?
I supposed that the wider the aperture, the shallower the DOF; the longer
the FL, the shallower the DOF.
Wrong, isn't it?
Thanks,
Fernando.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|