[Gear] Fujifilm X-Pro 1 : A viable alternative to mount RF lenses?

[Anxin]

one of them is FF in NEX5n, the other is M9-p cropped to 1.5X view. CAn you tell which is which?

Can't tell BUT that is because you've cropped the M9-P shot.

 

[Anxin]

Anyway, let me guess, the top one is from NEX5n.

 

[NazgulKing]

The sensor on the NEX 5n is at least 2 generations ahead of the M9 sensor in terms of quality. Comparing them is rather moot.

 

[Vinnievinyl]

The sensor on the NEX 5n is at least 2 generations ahead of the M9 sensor in terms of quality. Comparing them is rather moot.

er.... we are not comparing the two cam's sensor. I'm trying to understand the DOF issue on a FF and APS.....

And also, M9 sensor is still a better one than Nex5n.

 

[Anxin]

You got it right, but it didn't appear to have a wider DOF to me, just that new is more contrast, and the image is cropped from FF.

...

While it is not very obvious, the bottom pix does look to have a slightly thiner DOF. I only had 70% confidence that my guess is right.
Have fun with the x-pro1.

 

[cchsieh]

To clear this confusion , it would be better to compare the actual DOF data publised by lens makers at fixed distance instead of using bokeh pictures.

One should understand that
1) the DOF of the lens will not change regardless of thea sensor size. This is how the lens being designed.
2) any comparision is only meaningful when both lens are compare in a same focus distance.

From the tehnical data of 50mm & 75 mm summicron at 1 meter focusing distance at F4; the fomer has a DOF around 0.85 m (2.631-3.493 meter) , the latter has a a DOF around 0.4 m (2.811-3.217 meter). 50mm cron has larger DOF than 75 cron.

When someone is trying to shoot an object of 75mm cron lens on FF M9 and 50mm cron on a 1.5x crop sensor at same object magnification ratio/ fosucing distance with both setups yields 75mm field of view images.

FF will always have shallower DOF than smaller format. Due to the fact that DoF of the 50mm cron will not change and always larger than the75mm cron at fixed distance and any aperture.

 

[Achim Reh]

In my humble opinion , DOF is totally unrelated to the sensor and is purely affected by the lens itself. The DOF is the difference between the closest and the farest point out of focus, where the resolution of created image ( not to be mistaken by the optical resolution of the lens) is not lesser than 30 lp/mm .So, no matter what type of sensor size you put behind the lens, this optical values will not change ( only in such an extreme, when the sensor gets so small that the optical resolving power of the lens plays a roll. But as modern high quality lenses resolve 300 to 400 lp/mm, this will hardly play any roll if you compare FF to APS-C size sensors) . However, DOF is not a fixed value , it depends on the output product. If you print your picture , larger prints will show a shallower DOF , because DOF, as explained before , depends on resolution ( sharpness) . The larger the output print is , the more unsharpness can be detected by the human eye , hence your DOF gets smaller with larger outputs. The scale printed on the lens is a reference value , related to a fixed enlargement size 5X7 inch, but again, different companies might use different reference values , so the lens scale is more a hint / guideline than a real fixed value, and at the end, the DOF depends on the enlargement of the finished print.

 

[anerjee]

Every once in a while, I have M9 gas build up, and then pics like these release it very effectively :bsmilie:

one of them is FF in NEX5n, the other is M9-p cropped to 1.5X view. CAn you tell which is which?

Both Noct at f2. Too late to do more testing, will test at aperture 0.95 tomorrow if got time.

 

[anerjee]

Thanks, this is the clearest expression I've read, and also ties well to my printing experiments. Slightly mis-focussed shots print well on 4x6 or 5x7, but fail on A4 size prints.

In my humble opinion , DOF is totally unrelated to the sensor and is purely affected by the lens itself. The DOF is the difference between the closest and the farest point out of focus, where the resolution of created image ( not to be mistaken by the optical resolution of the lens) is not lesser than 30 lp/mm .So, no matter what type of sensor size you put behind the lens, this optical values will not change ( only in such an extreme, when the sensor gets so small that the optical resolving power of the lens plays a roll. But as modern high quality lenses resolve 300 to 400 lp/mm, this will not play hardly play any roll if you compare FF to APS-C size sensors) . However, DOF is not a fixed value , it depends on the output product. If you print your picture , larger prints will show a shallower DOF , because DOF, as explained before , depends on resolution ( sharpness) . The larger the output print is , the more unsharpness can be detected by the human eye , hence your DOF gets smaller with larger outputs. The scale printed on the lens is a reference value , related to a fixed enlargement size 5X7 inch, but again, different companies might use different reference values , so the lens scale is more a hint / guideline than a real fixed value, and at the end, the DOF depends on the enlargement of the finished print.

 

[NazgulKing]

Every once in a while, I have M9 gas build up, and then pics like these release it very effectively :bsmilie:

LOL... me too. However, there's no denying that focusing with an RF patch has some charm and speed to it though.

 

[ray_stinger]

Let me suggest something controversial...

1. Keeping everything constant except for the sensor size, the DOF decreases as the sensor size gets smaller.

2. Keeping the effective field of view fixed on both a 1.5x crop and FF body, the FF body will produce a thinner DOF.

These are facts.

 

[kentwong81]

Read this : Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography

As sensor size increases, the depth of field will decrease for a given aperture (when filling the frame with a subject of the same size and distance). This is because larger sensors require one to get closer to their subject, or to use a longer focal length in order to fill the frame with that subject. This means that one has to use progressively smaller aperture sizes in order to maintain the same depth of field on larger sensors.

As an example calculation, if one wanted to reproduce the same perspective and depth of field on a full frame sensor as that attained using a 10 mm lens at f/11 on a camera with a 1.6X crop factor, one would need to use a 16 mm lens and an aperture of roughly f/18. Alternatively, if one used a 50 mm f/1.4 lens on a full frame sensor, this would produce a depth of field so shallow it would require an aperture of 0.9 on a camera with a 1.6X crop factor — not possible with consumer lenses!

A shallower depth of field may be desirable for portraits because it improves background blur, whereas a larger depth of field is desirable for landscape photography. This is why compact cameras struggle to produce significant background blur in portraits, while large format cameras struggle to produce adequate depth of field in landscapes.

Note that the above calculator assumes that you have a lens on the new sensor (#2) which can reproduce the same angle of view as on the original sensor (#1). If you instead use the same lens, then the aperture requirements remain the same (but you will have to get closer to your subject). This option, however, also changes perspective.

 

[singscott]

"1. Same Lens, same aperture, same Focal plan to object distant = Same DOF result on FF or APS or any smaller sensor size." is wrong Same lens, same aperture, same distant to subject but different sensor image size will have different DOF because of COC ( circle of confusion). Small sensor more DOF or bigger sensor lesser DOF

 

[singscott]

I seen the argument here and there a lot misinformation. There four things affect DOF. 1) Aperture 2) Distance from camera to subject 3) Lens and 4) Sensors' image circle or COC in image circle at different size. The testings done here are flaw as it did not show in distance of DOF results.

I know many people will argue until the cow come home. Here a more creditable source then me a photography instructor: Depth of field - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

or this a DOF Calculator Online Depth of Field Calculator Notice it ask for four things before giving you the DOF and one of them is the type of camera or COC.

Please help the newbie by not spreading misinformation.

 

[crispy12]

Many people do not understand what Circle of Confusion is. It is important to consider this in DOF calculations. Without calculating COC, the DOF will be exaggerated for smaller sensor cameras.

Also many people consider DOF based upon the field of view of a certain lens on the camera. So 35mm on APS-C (Fuji) vs 50mm on 135 format. Also the way someone would use a 35mm on a Xpro1 will be different to how one uses a 35mm on a 135 film camera. It's silly to buy an M9 and only crop the middle portion of every photo. The fact is the parts that are cropped out will be even more OOF, and this contributes to the major difference in apparent appearence between sensor/film types.

 

[Vinnievinyl]

Wah!!! Still not end yet ah!

 

[Anxin]

Patient, cow coming liao :bsmilie:

 

[Vinnievinyl]

Patient, cow coming liao :bsmilie:

Ha Ha Ha.... !! Actually you have answered my newbie question on COC already very early on, but how could we blame anyone for not reading all the posts properly. The picture as you have said does shows a slightly thinner DOF on the FF compare to APS and the COC theory answered.

Since I have got my answer, I'll delete all my post on the "Circle of Confusion" question to prevent further confusing some other newbies and Kana blame for hijacking the thread.

Oh! BTW I didn't not bite the bullet to send back the M9, I did some test and found that the sensor did not go out of position, so I took your challenge and did the surgery on it and guess what? The cam now focus sharply from 1M to just a very slight off in infinity! :vhappy::vhappy::vhappy:All my lenses focus exactly the same so means Leica did a good job on he lenses. :thumbsup:

 

[Anxin]

Ha Ha Ha.... !! Actually you have answered my newbie question on COC already very early on, but how could we blame anyone for not reading all the posts properly. The picture as you have said does shows a slightly thinner DOF on the FF compare to APS and the COC theory answered.

Since I have got my answer, I'll delete all my post on the "Circle of Confusion" question to prevent further confusing some other newbies and Kana blame for hijacking the thread.

Oh! BTW I didn't not bite the bullet to send back the M9, I did some test and found that the sensor did not go out of position, so I took your challenge and did the surgery on it and guess what? The cam now focus sharply from 1M to just a very slight off in infinity! :vhappy::vhappy::vhappy:All my lenses focus exactly the same so means Leica did a good job on he lenses. :thumbsup:

CONGRATS!!

I guess you did it with only one adjustment using the allan key. To get the infinity also spot on, you need to adjust another one screw deep in and it would in turn affect your first adjustment (and that is what I meant by iterative process). So, if you could live with the off-infinity (DOF would cover it somewhat), you probably could leave it as is.

More shooting n less theory is the way to go. Enjoy your Leica.

 

[singscott]

Hey some reply have suddenly "disappear" hoh -_-" ok let not dug into that