Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/02/25

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Re:Mr. Love' thoughts
From: "Frank Filippone" <red735i@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 07:02:15 -0800

Need and want are different issues....
the Diaphragm is used to limit or allow access to more light at the film
plane.   Digital cameras will do this by electronic means... The analogy is
sort of a "film" that can change ASA frame by frame over a wide range.
The issue of depth of field is totally secondary to the dynamic range of
light.  Remember that I said ..." has no use for".... and this is true. 
The camera has no use for the creative process.  Now you and I will ask for
that creative process, and maybe we will get it in a high end camera ( or
one that can use 60-odd year old optics like Leitz )but in general, and
especially for the greater consumer market, diaphgagms will be
non-existant.

As a side note, for the consumer market, limited depth of field means that
some pictures will be put of focus.  To Mr. Joe Average, out of focus means
the camera is no good... so optics for the amateur have had and will
continue to have limited maximum F-stop.... like Nikon and Canon with their
F3.3-4.5 and F4-5.6 lenses.  Whatever happened to the market for F2.0 and
2.8 lenses?  I know that whenever possible I get the faster optics....then
again I can still focus better than the camera can... at least until the
light becomes weak.

Thank You
Frank Filippone
red735i@worldnet.att.net
> 
> >Keep in mind that a digital camera has no use for a shutter or, for that
> >matter, a diaphragm.
> 
> Educate me here. I understand why a shutter isn't required. Why would a
> digital cam not need a diaphragm? Is this a matter of exposure or does a
> digital camera somehow have another method of controlling depth of
field/focus?