Lindolfi Posted June 26, 2011 Share #21 Posted June 26, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes, no esthetics, just optics, I agree. You can see it visualized and play with the settings in the calculator I wrote in Java for webbrowsers: click As you can see, the default setting is a 24x36 mm camera, a Leica M, but you can also select other formats to see the effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 26, 2011 Posted June 26, 2011 Hi Lindolfi, Take a look here Depth of field - one third two thirds. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest #12 Posted June 26, 2011 Share #22 Posted June 26, 2011 Undoubtedly. Do you have a reference? Thanks. I have not really tried to track any of this down. I've seen excerpts from a couple of places (1880s, 1890s), treating front and rear d.o.f. In earlier sources you may see a more or less correct diagram but no formula given. Not too long after the century turns, you can find books with hyperfocal distance charts, and the "correct" formulae to get the front and rear d.o.f. from that. I bet it would be very hard to sort out who knew what, when. You can find facsimile copies of many 19th cent. works through Google books. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.