From: Rudy Garcia (rudyg_at_email.domain.hidden)
Date: Tue Mar 02 2004 - 22:02:53 EST

• Next message: Douglas W. Hoyt: "Re: What's Most Important When Buying Online?"
• Previous message: Peter A. Stavrakoglou: "Re: minolta dslr or sigma sd 10?"
• In reply to: Dave Martindale: "Re: Digital Depth of Field"
• Next in thread: Dave Martindale: "Re: Digital Depth of Field"
• Reply: Dave Martindale: "Re: Digital Depth of Field"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

In article <c21f4q$1s3$3_at_mughi.cs.ubc.ca>,
 davem_at_cs.ubc.ca (Dave Martindale) wrote:

> "Joseph Meehan" <sligojoeS_PAM_2_at_hotmail.com> writes:
>
> > Four stops! How small is that sensor on the 5050Z?
>
> It is approximately 1/5 the dimensions of a 35 mm frame. Thus when the
> lens is set to a "35 equivalent" focal length of 50 mm, the true FL is
> about 10 mm. At a given subject distance and f/number, you'll have
> about 5 times as much DOF from the digicam. To get the same DOF from
> the 35 camera, you need to multiply the f-number by about 5.
>
> For example, f/2 on the digicam gives the same DOF as f/10 (round to
> f/11) on the 35 mm camera.
>
> Dave
>

Hmmm,

How small is the CoC used to determine DOF on a digital camera?

How small is the effective pixel size in a sensor?

-- 
Rudy Garcia

• Next message: Douglas W. Hoyt: "Re: What's Most Important When Buying Online?"
• Previous message: Peter A. Stavrakoglou: "Re: minolta dslr or sigma sd 10?"
• In reply to: Dave Martindale: "Re: Digital Depth of Field"
• Next in thread: Dave Martindale: "Re: Digital Depth of Field"
• Reply: Dave Martindale: "Re: Digital Depth of Field"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]