It's easy to forget because Canon sensors suck, not 'cause Sony's don't. Thanks for showing us pictures of why. Wonder how much money they took out of the "make the 5D3 any better at all than the 5D2" fund to make these useless tech demos? We're gonna see the curved LCDs Samsung has been pretending are on the horizon for 5 years before we see a 120mp APS-H.
Rumor: Canon to move into Medium Format?
- Thread starter Terry_Lasater
- Start date
It's easy to forget because Canon sensors suck, not 'cause Sony's don't. Thanks for showing us pictures of why. Wonder how much money they took out of the "make the 5D3 any better at all than the 5D2" fund to make these useless tech demos? We're gonna see the curved LCDs Samsung has been pretending are on the horizon for 5 years before we see a 120mp APS-H.
...From my perspective both of these photos have too shallow DOF, where next to nothing is in focus.
Having only one eye of the baby in focus doesn't make a great shot in my book. The lighting and composition is beautiful, but for me it would be a better shot with more DOF. ( i.e. would love to have the baby's face in focus )
I am a fan of the FX Networks TV show "Wilfred" which is shot entirely with a dozen Nikon D800 cameras, but almost every episode features some shots that have very little DOF, to the point where I mistakenly think something is wrong with my eyes of a brief moment.
G
Guest
Guest
Exactly. Especially when it comes to video. Getting shallow DoF is not an issue with motion, even on crop sensors. The main thing with digital MF is being able to use longer lenses with wider perspectives. That really changes your look from the average crop dslr. (that does mean shallower depth of field on wider shots... so in a way it is about dof, but it also has less distortion or more compressed space... so I would say the look is more about longer lenses than shallow DoF by itself) But traditionally, with film, it was the resolution that attracted many photographers, as 35mm could never compare to the subtle gradations of larger film formats. In the digital realm a smaller sensor could have both more resolution, more bit depth, and better color rendition, and even better noise (supposing not everything was equal).
Anyway, I am sure there are some people who choose MF for shallow DoF, I just don't see many professionals choosing it for that reason alone. And low light and MF have never been synonymous that I have ever known, at least it doesn't have the same emphasis that people put on ff35 vs crop.
