[Rockhounds] achieving depth of field w digicam?
J Bryan Kramer
codeburner at gmail.com
Thu Apr 17 06:25:56 PDT 2008
I don't know Axel, when the optical experts start calculating they usually
leave me behind. Especially at that scale.
BK
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Axel Emmermann <axel.emmermann at pandora.be>
wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
>
> Thanks for the input, it's very interesting and, frankly, I learned a
> thing
> or two just gancing at it. ;-)))
>
> However, I did a quick test and got this result
> Aperture 16
> Sensor Width 22.2 mm (Canon 400D)
> Subject Width 4 mm
> Circle Of Confusion 0.0178
> Optical Magnification 5.55 X
> Depth Of Field 0.12085045045045044 mm
>
> Well, I know for a fact that this is wrong... I do macro a lot and 3 and 4
> mm imagewidth is target size for me.
> When I shoot objects at the above settings I get an DOF of just under 1 mm
> as this photo proves:
> http://flickr.com/photos/22753159@N04/2223234472/in/set-72157603704255629/
> This is at least 5 times more (estimated) than predicted by the formula.
> True, I use bellows and reversed lenses... That may affect matters
> perhaps?
>
> Axel
>
>
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: rockhounds-bounces at lists.drizzle.com
> > [mailto:rockhounds-bounces at lists.drizzle.com] Namens J Bryan Kramer
> > Verzonden: donderdag 17 april 2008 1:57
> > Aan: Rockhounds at drizzle.com: A mailing list for rock and gem
> > collectors
> > Onderwerp: Re: [Rockhounds] achieving depth of field w digicam?
> >
> > Whoops URL:
> >
> > <http://www.robertseber.com/calculators/MacroDOFCalculator.html>
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:56 PM, J Bryan Kramer <codeburner at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Here is a macro DOF calculator, use 22.5 as the sensor width for a
> > > Canon crop frame camera like yours. At f/45 on a 30 mm
> > object the most
> > > DOF you could get is 5mm and you would suffer loss of
> > resolution at that f/stop.
> > > You'd need very bright lights too. At a more reasonable
> > f/16 you drop
> > > back to 1.7mm DOF.
> > >
> > > BK
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 7:59 PM, Kreigh Tomaszewski <
> > > Kreigh at tomaszewski.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Tim,
> > > >
> > > > The classic trick might work. More light and a higher f
> > stop to get
> > > > more depth of field.
> > > >
> > > > Kreigh
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Tim Jokela Jr. wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This one goes out to the digital photography gurus out there.
> > > > >
> > > > > I was talking to a buddy last night about macrophotography of
> > > > > small
> > > > fossils,
> > > > > 1-3cm stuff, and how capturing any depth of field
> > continues to be
> > > > > the
> > > > major
> > > > > challenge. He suggested three ways of doing it: buy the $25,000
> > > > > camera system made to do the job, take the picture 3
> > meters away
> > > > > from the
> > > > specimen
> > > > > and blow up the image, or take multiple shots, focusing on
> > > > > different
> > > > areas,
> > > > > and stitch them together with Helicon, Combine-Z, or
> > the expensive
> > > > > new version of PhotoShop.
> > > > >
> > > > > All are basically horrible options.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, is there anything new and interesting in the world
> > of digital
> > > > > photography that's giving depth of field to
> > macrophotography in a
> > > > simple,
> > > > > affordable manner? (My weapon of choice atm is a Canon Digital
> > > > > Rebel
> > > > with a
> > > > > 50mm macro lens.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Many thanks for any info!
> > > > >
> > > > > Tim Jokela Jr., tjokela at execulink.com
> > > > > Business: http://www.element51.com
> > > > > Pleasure: http://www.ontariominerals.com
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Rockhounds at drizzle Mailing List
> > > > > Subscription Services:
> > > > > http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/rockhounds
> > > > > List Home Page, with a link to the List Usage Policy:
> > > > > http://www.eclecticlapidary.com/Rockhounds/index.html
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Rockhounds at drizzle Mailing List
> > > > Subscription Services:
> > > > http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/rockhounds
> > > > List Home Page, with a link to the List Usage Policy:
> > > > http://www.eclecticlapidary.com/Rockhounds/index.html
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > "Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an
> > illusion of
> > > reality with which we create our own private world."
> > > Arnold Newman
> > >
> > >
> > > J Bryan Kramer
> > > North Florida, USA
> > > photos at:
> > > http://pbase.com/photoburner
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an
> > illusion of reality with which we create our own private world."
> > Arnold Newman
> >
> >
> > J Bryan Kramer
> > North Florida, USA
> > photos at:
> > http://pbase.com/photoburner
> >
> >
> > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> > multipart/alternative
> > text/plain (text body -- kept)
> > text/html
> > ---
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rockhounds at drizzle Mailing List
> > Subscription Services:
> > http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/rockhounds
> > List Home Page, with a link to the List Usage Policy:
> > http://www.eclecticlapidary.com/Rockhounds/index.html
> >
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Rockhounds at drizzle Mailing List
> Subscription Services:
> http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/rockhounds
> List Home Page, with a link to the List Usage Policy:
> http://www.eclecticlapidary.com/Rockhounds/index.html
>
--
"Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an illusion of
reality with which we create our own private world."
Arnold Newman
J Bryan Kramer
North Florida, USA
photos at:
http://pbase.com/photoburner
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
More information about the Rockhounds
mailing list