DanPhoto@aol.com
Wed, 16 Jun 1999 12:21:57 -0400 (EDT)
In your email you stated...
> But how would the DOF differ, or not, between the following
>three situations;
>
>1) a 35 mm lens on a 35mm camera
>2) a 65 mm lens on a medium format camera (35mm equivalent field of view)
>3) a 120 mm lens on a 4"x5" camera (35mm equivalent field of view)
Basically, the larger the negative size, the shallower the depth of
field, given lenses of equal angle of view for each format.
When you enlarge each of the above negatives to a 16 x 20 print size, all
the things that are a function of square inches of film (like grain
structure, tonal smoothness etc.) will be amplified, but the depth of
field will still be greatest with the 35mm lens, and least with the 4 x 5.
This is one reason the Kodak Disk camera (dating myself here) from the
late 1970's could achieve such extreme depth of field with an f/2.8 lens:
it's negative was tiny. Of course, the film technology of the day doomed
this small-negative camera to an early demise.
Hope this helps.
Dan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:39:37