Re: [Leica] DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R

["animal" <s.jessurun95@chello.nl>]

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ted Grant" <tedgrant@shaw.ca>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 11:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R


> Lee offered:
> Subject: Re: [Leica] DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R
>
>
> > One interesting thing occurred to me is the "reversed"
> > thinking of DoF.  Instead of a set of parameters like
> > a given lens, aperture and distance (and then to
> > figure out the DoF), it seems to me that DoF and the
> > "size" of image commands the aperture to use for a
> > given lens. <<<<<
>
> Aw geeesh Lee com'n, photography is bad enough to learn all the bits and
> pieces without adding some techie thing to confuse people.  Hell what's
> wrong with just pointing the camera at the subject at f8 and be there? :-)
I
> mean that's worked for a zillion years, why mess with people's minds at
this
> late date?
>
> > Probably portraits are the most popular
> > and sensitive case for DoF usage.  In this case, for
> > regular adult portraits of head and shoulder shots, we
> > typically want to have a DoF about 4" for facial
> > contour before taking a picture.  Therefore, you may
> > roughly use 50 focal lens at aperture of 2 or 85 at
> > aperture of 4 (to get comparable image size at
> > whatever distance needed).<<<,
>
> Holy jumpin' did you drink too much over the holiday? Heck most portrait
> shooters already know this kind of stuff and amateurs wouldn't have a clue
> what yer talking about without a bunch more diagrams to follow. Even then
> they'd not likely understand what the hell yer talkin' about..
>
> > I don't see a such "DoF" calculator (it should be
> > called "aperture calculator" for given DoF - modern
> > camera can have this built-in (little different from
> > canon's DoF priority)).  To me this is more useful. In
> > most cases, people know ahead what DoF they want and
> > the image size (which determines the distance and is
> > part of composition).  What they don't know is what
> > aperture to use.  btw, the marking on lens is hard to
> > use for such large aperture.
> >
> > [To make it topic-related, in order to use Noct's max
> > aperture with DoF of 4", you may have to be roughly 6'
> > away.]<<<
>
> Holy Cow!!!! Man I never worry about the Noctilux and depth of field
because
> I'm concentrating on the light and subject and certainly I'm way too busy
> shooting pictures. The only time I think of making changes is when I want
to
> kill a distracting background then I pop it wide open and it becomes a
> "clean" background.
>
> Most cases I'm nearly wide open to start off with, a stop or bit down
> because what's the point of paying the big bucks for a Noctilux f1.0 and
> then start stopping down with it? Quite frankly that's rather stupid!
>
> ted
>
I found a nice explanation of the topic in the in and out of focus book by
Merklinger which is available for download as a pdf file.

Also I think it is rather silly to call operating this lens at anything less
then F1.0 stupid since you yourself and others like B.D. often have cited
the importance of flare supression in Leica lenses something which the
Noctilux seems to excell at at any aperture according to people who should
know.
Simon jessurun
p.s.
Sorry for not including a link to the book but my mouse failed and am
relearning keystroke navigation


>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html