View Single Post
Old 11-27-2006   #9 (permalink)
jfrancho
Camel Breath
 
jfrancho's Avatar
 
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 11,439
jfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorjfrancho strides over the forum like a knight in shining armor
CamelKarma: 3070
Editing OK?: No
Default Re: MACRO LENSE FOR 10D

Quote:
The camera to subject distance has not changed. The magnification is the same. I think the DOF should be the same.
The math here says otherwise. Remember DOF is somewhat subjective, as range of acceptable sharpness may vary by viewer, lighting, medium, etc. However, the article John linked to makes some sense with regards to lens construction, though the author doesn't give an indication as to how close is "close." While the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro can get in close, it isn't real close, but it is close enough to just get to 1:1. Even with all that theory, I'd be curious if a real world test reveals the true answer. I find it hard to believe that the difference in c (10D = 0.019; 5D = 0.03) doesn't have any effect on DOF when it is measured in mere millimeters when this close. But, it is probably so close, most of us can't tell. Thanks for the link, John.
__________________
¿ <°)))))><
jfrancho is offline   Reply With Quote