FF DOF Significant Difference?

[darren_sukul]

<p>Hi,<br>

I know the crop sensor has 1.6x more depth if the shot was framed the same way.<br>

Does anyone have any examples that shows the difference in DOF between FF and crop?</p>

<p>I've seen some nice images on flickr with 5D + 135L where the background is blurred very smooth and subjects is very sharp and stands out. <br>

http://www.flickr.com/photos/astragony/2557541915/sizes/o/<br>

<p>1. I have 40D + 85 1.8 + 100 2.8 + Siggy 30mm. is it worth upgrading to FF for DOF and ISO performance alone? Or get 135L for 40D.<br>

2. Also 40D + 35L and 40D + 85L seems like its pretty much 5D + 50 1.4 and 5D + 135L. It seems like with FF, you don't need to buy super expensive with bigger aperture lenses. Although, 5D + 85L seems like a killer combo, although, I cannot afford both 5d and 85L.</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Darren</p>

[tdigi]

<p>Hi Darren, I have been using the 5D2 ( I also have a 40D ) for about 2 months now and its very different on full frame. Much better ISO performance and much better looking background blur. I am amazed, I wish I had more time to shoot. I would go with the 5D2 and keep your current lenses ( minus the sigma ) the video is also a great added bonus.<br /> Take a look at what people are doing with it.<br /> http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1200<br /> <br /> As to your second question, many commented here. <br /> http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00TcHT</p>

[kevin_penczak]

<p>http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html<br>

Check the 85 1.8 on 1.6x vs. the 135 2.0 on full frame. or do whatever lens/cameras you want to compare. this should give you a tech. answer.</p>

[darren_sukul]

<p>I understand technically, there is a difference. I'm wondering if you can visually see difference. Any examples will be much appreciated.</p>

[tdigi]

<p>Darren, It seems someone provided samples in a previous post. <br>

http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00TU9Q</p>

<p> </p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>It is a trickier thing than you might imagine. If you begin with the assumption that you will not print as large with the smaller sensor format, then the "greater DOF at a given aperture on crop" idea has legs.</p>

<p>There are, however, some compicating factors. For one, you'll have to magnify your original capture more with the smaller original, and this introduces other issues that affect the extent to which you can successfully enlarge without encountering resolution issues.</p>

<p>In addition, you can get the same DOF from either format by using different apertures. Because the effect of diffraction on your print (expresses relative to image width, for example) comes on later on full frame as you stop down you can get the same larger DOF from FF at the expense of a slightly higher ISO and/or longer exposure time. (At the other end of the scale, while you can get narrower DOF if you need it from FF at the largest apertures, there is no way to compensate and achieve this with cropped sensor bodies.)</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>(Standard disclaimer: I'm not claiming that any format is universally "better" than any other format. I'm simply pointing out differences that may or may not matter to you in your photography.)</p>

[darren_sukul]

<p>Thanks Tommy,<br>

Just curious, what lens combo's do you use with 5D2?</p>

[tdigi]

<p>I have the 24-105, 70-200 2.8. 50 1.4 and 100 2.8. I am looking to ad a wide prime next.</p>

[darren_sukul]

<p>How do you like 24-105 lens? or 24-70 worth it?</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>You need to read <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/digitaldof.html">http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/digitaldof.html</a></p>

<p>While the question as to what the difference is in DOF between crop and full frame is a simple one, the answer is way too complex to give here. Basically for minimum DOF and maximum backgrould blur (which are NOT the same thing), full frame wins.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/bokeh.html">http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/bokeh.html</a> might also be helpful if you are trying to maximize background blur.</p>

 

[tdigi]

<p>Its all a compromise for me I use this lens mostly for travel and I really like it ( especially on a 5d ) but I prefer smaller lenses ( I know the 70-200 2.8 is a tank but thats my 1 exception, its killer ) I am actually going more to primes so I am either adding a 28 1.8 or a 35 1.4 sometime this year but I am looking to focus more on shooting and avoiding gear envy.</p>

 

[kari v]

<p>Buy a decent EOS film body for $50, mount your 85/1.8, load new Ektar and enjoy the view. Cheapest way to find out yourself for sure. ;)</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<blockquote>

<p><em>B</em> <em>uy a decent EOS film body for $50, mount your 85/1.8, load new Ektar and enjoy the view. Cheapest way to find out yourself for sure. ;)</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Unless you shoot more than a few rolls, in which case the cost of film and processing will quickly add up...</p>

 

[sheldonnalos]

<p>For the record, the image example I posted in the prior thread shows the 85L wide open on FF and the 50mm f/1.4 wide open on 1.6 crop. So, the example is showing the difference between FF and 1.6 crop, PLUS the difference between f/1.4 and f/1.2.</p>

<p>Didn't want to mislead anyone... :-)</p>