Frage von luggiii:
Hello Slasher!
I take as an example once my equipment.
I have a Panasonic HDC-SD300 and asked myself whether I with a
Tele Converter (Panasonic VW-T4314H Tele converter) more depth of field
can achieve.
Because someone knows what to?
And anyone knows anything about the loss of light synonymous with the teleconverter?
Thanks in advance
Luggiii
Antwort von K.-D. Schmidt:
The opposite is the case.
Antwort von luggiii:
Thank you, sorry.
I mean less depth of field.
Antwort von WoWu:
These are the points with which you reduce depth of field:
1) Long Focal
2) Large Aperture
3) high magnification
4) major recording format
Antwort von luggiii:
I just wanted to know if such a converter changes the focal, or whether something else.
So I could achieve with such a teleconverter with a little less depth of field? (Example: face focus, background blurred)
Thank you!
Antwort von luggiii:
These are the points with which you reduce depth of field:
1) Long Focal
2) Large Aperture
3) high magnification
4) major recording format Thanks for the tip! I ordered your book now at Amazon:)
Antwort von WoWu:
This was not a good decision, because Amazon is still selling the 2007 edition.
Can you cancel yet?
The download is currently in color, has 300 pages and everything is much cheaper.
The paper version there is the Book at LULU currently synonymous, but it is black / white
Antwort von luggiii:
Thanks for the tip!
I can make of my right of withdrawal.
Writing but the download in your signature clean, instead of the ISBN. Or a link if you have.
Synonymous would be a good tip for others.
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
These are the points with which you reduce depth of field:
1) Long Focal
2) Large Aperture
3) high magnification
4) major recording format Well, almost ...
1. With a 35mm lens in Aperture 8.2 and a distance of 1m from the subject, I have much less depth than with 200mm, with the same aperture and a distance of 10m. I'm sure there's somewhere to a chart in relation to focal distance / aperture / depth of field, but we can test for themselves quite easily and does not need to do on the search.
2. Small Aperture would have been right, large aperture. I am sure you have but meant.
MB
Antwort von PowerMac:
Right. But then it seems more likely with higher Focal 'as observed'.
If you have more smaller Focal background, the background is at a higher focal compressed. The impression of distance is distorted. This can be exploited in such chases or action, as far away things look closer then. In 3D one has, to some extent more difficult.
Antwort von WoWu:
Thanks for the note ... that was meant, but could very well still be clarified. (Next update).
And 1 I have the values not at hand, but between an f = 17mm lens and an f = 135mm lens with an identical object in the image window size is the difference in the depth 1.02 m to 1.11 m.
Jau .. Graphic in Gibts Book.
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
Right. But then it seems more likely with higher Focal 'as observed'.
If you have more smaller Focal background, the background is at a higher focal compressed. The impression of distance is distorted. This can be exploited in such chases or action, as far away things look closer then. In 3D one has, to some extent more difficult. Then take hold 50mm, the focal length is normal and there is not bent and not compressed. I s.Set so ever won a crate of beer against the DP. It is far too soon to Ner long lens if you want to blur, often including a short does it with much simpler.
MB
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
Thanks for the note ... that was meant, but could very well still be clarified. (Next update).
And 1 I have the values not at hand, but between an f = 17mm lens and an f = 135mm lens with an identical object in the image window size is the difference in the depth 1.02 m to 1.11 m.
Jau .. Graphic in Gibts Book. Um, at the same Aperture? Maybe, but 17mm is of course extremely wide angle, look after 35 or 50, as the world looks different, and as I said, with short intervals up to 1m in Lens.
MB
Antwort von WoWu:
No, Marc, not really ...
However, the "look" of the circles of confusion is different.
This is often thought of as more or less blur. The subjective impression that is changing, but not the depth.
