Frage von ponda199:
Hi All,
I was planning to me to buy a JVC GY HD700, and not really know what this lens is best for me.
The choices are affordable and Fujinion of KIT-Lenses of Canon.
Fujinon 17x5 Lens
Canon 14x4.4 Lens
What are the names of the different lenses available (and the last number) and what the lens offers a better "film look" (; depth of field).
In the previous post have already heard that the Canon Optics will be better, but she brings such a lovely synonymous Tiefenunschärfe as Fujinion?
http://www.vimeo.com/5477125
Schoneinmal Thanks.
Regards Dennis
Antwort von Bernd E.:
... Fujinon 17x5 Lens ... Canon 14x4.4 Lens ... What do the names of the various lenses (and the last number) ... Already forgotten?
http://forum.slashcam.de/viewtopic.php?p=370469 # 370,469
Antwort von ponda199:
Hey, no, remember :-)
For me it was only once again to the depths of uncertainty Lenses, since
I have seen so far only good shots of Fujinion-lens
I (; in terms of depth of field) and of the Canon-Lens
only "normal" images (with closed Aperture / anything sharp).
LG
Antwort von WoWu:
You must take only one image sensor that is small enough, then the closed aperture synonymous everything blurred, no preference what lens you take! :-)
Diffraction is a physical phenomenon which is by nature, form and quality affect only marginally to the Aperture and depth of field with diffraction has nothing more to do with the lens brand and certainly nothing.
Antwort von deti:
... to fit a couple of formulas: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%A4rfentiefe or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field
Deti
Antwort von WoWu:
Deti ... that's a
cute article:
(because the depths; un) sharpness is semantically on a par with motion blur, for example ,.... etc. Then we put the future of the lens s.Schärfering likely to blur out .... ? And ... read it then synonymous Un-sharp ring?
But that was then ... ot.
Antwort von ponda199:
@ WoWu:
hehe, because I think I have expressed my question wrong :-)
I did not mean (the General sharpness, blur) the image, which
included will be attained, but the "film look" (; person sharp, blurred) background.
Because this is governed by the f-number, and when the aperture is open,
the person is exempt nice (; blurred background)
when the aperture is closed, then everything will appear in the same sharpness.
My problem is simply that I do not know which of the two Lenses
a better "film look" (; as described above) achieved.
(; Film look is abgelutschter name of this term I do not like to use yes, but somehow fits the description is ;-))
I hope I could explain my question a little better.
LG
Antwort von WoWu:
@ 199 ponda
I already understood hab'das ... And believe me, that I know what depth and how it arises, but that's how I've already mentioned, somewhat influenced by the modified Lens and virtually not at all of the brand, whether Fuji, Canon, Zeiss , Angenieux or (; you name it).
Criterion for the depth of field, so what is "sharp" and what not, is the adherence to the maximum permissible blur circle diameter. And this is from a whole range of factors of which have predominantly (nothing or very little) to do with the Objektivmarke too.
How blurred the dahingegen remaining image area is shown on the depth says nothing at all. But that's really what you mean, or what you would like to have. It is therefore not in your expectation of the range of sharpness but its progress.
We must therefore clearly distinguish between exemption and depth!
This uncertainty is both dependent on the use of the focal lens, taking into account the size of objects or the magnification, as synonymous of the effective focal ratio to the target surface to which the host image is projected (; sensor).
As the Focal is by definition the distance between the optical center of the lens and the recording level, in smaller and smaller sensors, but according to this distance decreases, ie is present at smaller and smaller image sensors, a change in focal.
(, 50 mm standard lens with 32 mm cameras corresponds to roughly 5 mm with a camcorder.)
Accordingly, a change in the DoF.
You see, your search for what you consider "depth" should start at the camera sensor and
the latest stop in Objektivmarke.
In between are many parameters that you can decide on the way to the result itself.
1) long focal
2) large aperture
3) high magnification
4) major recording format
Then the works synonymous with what you consider depth of field, no preference whether or Fuji or Canon.
At best, to describe the impression of sharpness in front and behind the sharp resolution level, is still spoken by the "bokeh" of a lens.
However one should such designations, which are that the tangential and sagittal values are identical, enjoy with caution ".
Whether such values in the price range in any case different? .... I doubt it very much.
Antwort von ponda199:
Achso, ok, then I understood your first answer is wrong, sorry.
Wanted to attack you under any circumstances, or otherwise, so I did not
s.deiner competence questioned, but s.meiner question that
as you all well described, incorrectly formulated is / was :-)
What I went, therefore, is (; learned) the "Bokeh" of Lenses meant.
I just want that person the object, which is in focus, is beautifully
separates from the background, like the example below picture.
That one such extreme results especially with 35 mm adapters achieved (; as Letus extreme) is clear to me.
My question was just what the kit lens of the camera
(; Fujinion or Canon the time being) is better suited.
Regards
Antwort von WoWu:
... already clear, but this is what is indeed of the Objektivmarke s.wenigsten dependent.
And the subjective impression of "bokeh" is solely of your taste, but depending on such lenses, which are primarily optimized for the display sharpness, the bokeh is mostly complete by the wayside.
So if you aim for a possible "strong" exemption, take a camera with large sensor as possible to choose a long focal and a large magnification of the object be exempted.
The Aperture, I would always be in the range of "supportive Aperture" and they do not keep it simple "break open" because you then punched all the artifacts, which make you your picture again.
And believe me, when the lenses, of which duob speak, I would not share the dream with the name "Bokeh apart.
Therefore, we can not synonymous answer to your question "Canon" or "Fuji type".
Antwort von K.-D. Schmidt:
Choose a long focal synonymous ... Therefore, we can not answer your question, "Canon" or "Fuji type". Perhaps, if he has only the choice between the two lenses and the camera is already available: 17x5 in Comparison to deliver 14x4, 4 is significantly larger tele. And so the Fujinon rather out of the question.
Greeting
KDS
