Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 23 Oct 2007 (Tuesday) 09:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

On a crop body there is a FF field of view equivalent. Is there also a DOF equivalent

 
TMR ­ Design
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
23,883 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Huntington Station, NY
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:01 |  #1

Im sure this has been asked and answered before but I think it's worthy of its own thread.

The field of view equivalent of a crop body is 1.6x that of a full frame body but I'd like to know if depth of field works the same way.

In other words, if you're using a very shallow depth of field on a full frame body, is there an euqivalent when using the same depth of field on a 1.6x crop body?

Will f/2 appear the same on a full frame as it does a 1.6x crop? If you were to crop the full frame to the same view as the 1.6x crop body would the depth of field look the same or would it have slightly greater depth of field?

If not then is there a method of determining that equivalent?


Robert
RobertMitchellPhotogra​phy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Ronald ­ S. ­ Jr.
Prodigal "Brick" Layer
Avatar
16,481 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Sayre, Pennsylvania
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:05 |  #2

TMR Design wrote in post #4176007 (external link)
Will f/2 appear the same on a full frame as it does a 1.6x crop?

Nope. It'll have much more shallow depth of field.

If you were to crop the full frame to the same view as the 1.6x crop body would the depth of field look the same or would it have slightly greater depth of field?

then it would look the same. The difference of depth of field between FF and a crop is only perceptive. As you know, to get the "same" shot on FF, you have to either use a longer lens, or move in closer. Both will give you less depth of field. Taking the same shot from the same place with the same lens and settings, you can indeed crop the shot to match, and should have relatively equal depth of field.


Mac users swear by their computers. PC users swear at theirs.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
44,288 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3472
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:18 |  #3

Robert, get a DOF calculator program for yourself, free on the web. It will show you some interesting things...
For example 50mm f/2 on APS-C focused at 100' has a field in focus of 89' deep, but same lens and settings on 135 format has field in focus of 193' deep!
Remembering that the field of view is not the same in the previous pairings, moving the APS-C camera back to 160' distance to get same FOV (as 50mm on 135 format at 100') results in field in focus of 310' deep (99'-409')
Or put a 30mm f/2 lens on APS-C focus at 100' and you have an infinite field in focus of (49-Infinity)


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Curtis ­ N
Master Flasher
Avatar
19,129 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Northern Illinois, US
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:27 |  #4

These questions always result in argument, because you can't change camera formats and produce an identical image unless you also change the focal length. So let's lay down the proper parameters here.

1) If you compare the DOF of two camera formats without changing anything else (focal length, distance or aperture), the larger format will create an image with greater DOF. The hyperfocal distance from a 1.6x camera will be 1.6 times greater than the hyperfocal distance from a full frame camera. This is because the larger format camera will require less magnification to produce a print of the same size. But since the two images will have different fields of view, this is a pointless comparison.

2) If you compare the DOF from two different camera formats using lenses that generate equivalent fields of view (i.e. 160mm lens on a FF camera vs. 100mm lens on a 1.6x camera), The DOF from the larger format camera will be shallower than the DOF from the smaller format camera. The HFD of a FF camera will be 1.6 times greater than the HFD from a 1.6x camera. In this scenario, in order to create images with identical DOF, you need to use an aperture proportionally greater in the larger format camera. The following two scenarios will generate identical fields of view and identical depth of field:

36mm x 24mm camera format (full frame)
160mm lens
f/16

22.5mm x 15mm camera format (1.6x crop factor)
100mm lens
f/10


"If you're not having fun, your pictures will reflect that." - Joe McNally
Chicago area POTN events (external link)
Flash Photography 101 | The EOS Flash Bible  (external link)| Techniques for Better On-Camera Flash (external link) | How to Use Flash Outdoors| Excel-based DOF Calculator (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeeJay
Goldmember
Avatar
3,834 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2005
Location: Warwickshire - UK
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:31 |  #5

^^^???


1DsMkIII | 1DMkIIN | 70-200 f/2.8L IS | 24-70 f/2.8L | 24-105 f/4L IS | 17-40 f/4L | 50 f/1.2L | WFT-E1 & E2 Transmitters - Click Here for setup advice | CP-E4 Battery Pack x 2 | ST-E2 | 580EX | 550EX | 430EXII | 420EX | Tripod + monopod | Bowens Esprit Gemini 500W/s heads & Travel-Pak | All this gear - and still no idea :confused:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
8,833 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Sep 2005
Location: CT
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:33 |  #6

Hmm, this is interesting. So with a lens like the 17-55 f/2.8 EF-S as compared to the 24-70 f/2.8 (which has a similar field of view), you will likely get a DOF equivalent more like an f/4 lens with the EF-S as opposed to the EF? Hope that makes sense (and not trying to start any arguments :))


connecticut wedding photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Curtis ­ N
Master Flasher
Avatar
19,129 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Northern Illinois, US
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:44 |  #7

timnosenzo wrote in post #4176146 (external link)
Hmm, this is interesting. So with a lens like the 17-55 f/2.8 EF-S as compared to the 24-70 f/2.8 (which has a similar field of view), you will likely get a DOF equivalent more like an f/4 lens with the EF-S as opposed to the EF? Hope that makes sense (and not trying to start any arguments :))

There is no difference in the DOF from an EF-S lens vs. an EF lens at the same focal length when mounted on the same camera.


"If you're not having fun, your pictures will reflect that." - Joe McNally
Chicago area POTN events (external link)
Flash Photography 101 | The EOS Flash Bible  (external link)| Techniques for Better On-Camera Flash (external link) | How to Use Flash Outdoors| Excel-based DOF Calculator (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
8,833 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Sep 2005
Location: CT
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:49 |  #8

Curtis N wrote in post #4176208 (external link)
There is no difference in the DOF from an EF-S lens vs. an EF lens at the same focal length when mounted on the same camera.

I guess what I'm asking is, will a 17mm lens (on a crop body) @ f/2.8 have the same DOF at a 27mm lens (on a FF body) @ F/2.8?


connecticut wedding photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Curtis ­ N
Master Flasher
Avatar
19,129 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Northern Illinois, US
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:53 |  #9

timnosenzo wrote in post #4176234 (external link)
will a 17mm lens (on a crop body) @ f/2.8 have the same DOF at a 27mm lens (on a FF body) @ F/2.8?

Nope. You'll get more DOF with the crop body and shorter lens. But if you stop down the 27mm lens on the FF body to about f/4.5 the DOF will be the same (2.8 * 1.6 = 4.5).


"If you're not having fun, your pictures will reflect that." - Joe McNally
Chicago area POTN events (external link)
Flash Photography 101 | The EOS Flash Bible  (external link)| Techniques for Better On-Camera Flash (external link) | How to Use Flash Outdoors| Excel-based DOF Calculator (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
djeuch
Senior Member
Avatar
933 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Langhorne, PA USA
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:57 |  #10

timnosenzo wrote in post #4176234 (external link)
I guess what I'm asking is, will a 17mm lens (on a crop body) @ f/2.8 have the same DOF at a 27mm lens (on a FF body) @ F/2.8?

If the post above is accurate, the 1.6x multiplier applies to both... so

17mm f/2.8 crop is
27mm f/4(.5) full frame.

So a 27mm FF at f/2.8 will have shallower DOF than you can achieve with a cropped sensor. (27mm f/2.8 would be a 17mm f/1.75!)

Mathematically speaking, of course.


Canon 40D w/BG-E2N Battery Grip | Canon 5D w/BG-E4 Battery Grip | EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM | EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM | EF 85mm f/1.8 w/ET-65III | EF 50mm f/1.4 w/ES-71II | Canon 1.4x TC | Lowepro SlingShot 200 AW | B+W 77mm MRC (010) filter x2 | Speedlite 580EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
8,833 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Sep 2005
Location: CT
     
Oct 23, 2007 09:58 |  #11

Pretty interesting, thanks guys!


connecticut wedding photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rkkwan
Member
134 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Hong Kong
     
Oct 23, 2007 10:08 as a reply to  @ timnosenzo's post |  #12

Curtis is absolutely right.

Another example is the compact digital P&S. Most have f/2.8, but because the sensors are even smaller than APS-C (crop factor of ~6x), you can never get that shallow DOF shots with them.


rkkwan.zenfolio.com (external link)
5D/BG-E4; 70-200/2.8L IS II, Sigma 8-16, Tamron 28-75 Asph, Tokina 10-17 Fish, 1.4x III; 580EX II; G7 X
Full Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TMR ­ Design
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
23,883 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Huntington Station, NY
     
Oct 23, 2007 10:18 as a reply to  @ timnosenzo's post |  #13

It's very easy to get confused but I think I'm getting it.

This was all prompted by the recent thread with an 85mm f/1.2 L where it was said that the incredibly shallow depth of field created by that lens on a 5D could not be replicated on a 30D/40D.


Robert
RobertMitchellPhotogra​phy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ronald ­ S. ­ Jr.
Prodigal "Brick" Layer
Avatar
16,481 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Sayre, Pennsylvania
     
Oct 23, 2007 10:21 |  #14

and they're correct, no?


Mac users swear by their computers. PC users swear at theirs.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TMR ­ Design
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
23,883 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Huntington Station, NY
     
Oct 23, 2007 10:24 as a reply to  @ Ronald S. Jr.'s post |  #15

Hi Ronald,

Now that I understand the concept and the mathematics... yes, they are correct.
This is something else I never considered in my "I don't need full frame" mind set.

I still don't need full frame but the more I understand the format and how lenses perform I do see some clear advantages to using full frame for certain types of work.


Robert
RobertMitchellPhotogra​phy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,297 views & 0 likes for this thread
On a crop body there is a FF field of view equivalent. Is there also a DOF equivalent
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Dirtstar
848 guests, 222 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.