lct Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1461 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well not really. I've been using all those formats more or less (not large though). What do you mean exactly? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 Hi lct, Take a look here Mini M? [MERGED] AKA X-Vario. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dwbell Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1462 Â Posted June 9, 2013 The larger sensor -> less DoF thing. Where "less" is "more". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1463  Posted June 9, 2013 Not to rain on your (nice) Fuji parade but your f/2-2.8 lens is equivalent to f/5.6-8 DoF-wise in the APS-C world. No. it isn't. Instead, a 1:2-2.8 lens on an APS-C-format camera is approximately equivalent, in terms of depth-of-field, to a 1:2.8-4 lens on a 35-mm-format camera (at equivalent focal lengths). The difference is about one stop (or a small fraction of an f-stop more than one if you're meticulous), not three stops.  EDIT: Wait—the Fuji camera in question is not APS-C but 2/3" ... d'oh. So yes, that's a difference, in terms of depth-of-field, of three stops relative to APS-C (and four stops relative to 35-mm format). Read first, then reply ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1464  Posted June 9, 2013 No. it isn't. Instead, a 1:2-2.8 lens on an APS-C-format camera is approximately equivalent, in terms of depth-of-field, to a 1:2.8-4 lens on a 35-mm-format camera (at equivalent focal lengths). The difference is about one stop (or a small fraction of an f-stop more than one if you're meticulous), not three stops. The Fuji in question is the X10; it has a 2/3" sensor. Its 1:2.0–2.8 lens corresponds to a 1:5.2–7.3 lens on an APS-C camera (or 1:8–11 on a 35 mm camera). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1465 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Â Oh dear. Maike Harberts (if she still manages the X line) needs to do better. I expect the camera will sell well in the luxury P&S segment but I was hoping that, for once, Leica were going to introduce a ground-breaking camera product instead of which they are still pedalling furiously to catch up. Â Hi there Mark If it sells well to the luxury p&s brigade then I would imagine that Maike will be very pleased. Let's face it, Leica's intent is to sell cameras, not to excite the likes of you and me. Â However, if a built in zoom on an APSc sized camera floats your boat, then the leaked camera is the only show in town ( of course, it could all be a tease, and the real camera is FF with an f1.8/f2.8 zoom:)). If its a very high quality lens, then it'll make a lot of people happy (especially those who loved the Digilux 2). Â All the best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1466 Â Posted June 9, 2013 If the specifications mentioned in the french ipad screen shot are correct, it would (at least for me) be hard to justify spending big money on a Mini M compared to a Fuji XE-1 with a superb 18-55. Â Including the built-in EVF and with the interchangeable lens system the Fuji would be the more intelligent solution. I can`t imagine Leica would ignore the existing market and would put their trust in brand name loyalty alone. I still believe the "leak" is photoshopped - but it is well made and hard to rule out. An x2 type camera with fixed non-zoom lens and built-in EVF would have more market acceptance IMO. Â Given that the zoom capabilities are better, I still think my RX1 a better "other" camera seeing how it is 24MP and FF. I use a 35mm 80-85% of the time anyway on my M's so what's the big deal having a FF camera with a fixed 35 lens? I fact this gives me more opportunity to use other than 35 lenses on my M's. Â Once you compress M files they come in at the same size as the RX1 compressed files. Plus the EVF improvement on the RX1 over the m's EVF cannot be taken lightly once used in the field. Actual M and RX1 users KNOW what I mean regarding EVF differences and file similarities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1467 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) The larger sensor -> less DoF thing. Where "less" is "more". The larger the sensor the wider the DoF all things equal. We get less DoF when using an equivalent focal length. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1468 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Yes, that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1469  Posted June 9, 2013 The Fuji in question is the X10; it has a 2/3" sensor. Its 1:2.0–2.8 lens corresponds to a 1:5.2–7.3 lens on an APS-C camera (or 1:8–11 on a 35 mm camera).  X20 actually but you'r re right about the sensor size Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1470 Â Posted June 9, 2013 The larger the sensor the wider the DoF all things equal. Umm ... when the sensor sizes are different then there is no way that all other things can be equal. Some things always will be different, besides sensor size. That's the primary cause for all the confusion in discussions like these ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macjonny1 Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1471 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Umm ... when the sensor sizes are different then there is no way that all other things can be equal. Some things always will be different' date=' besides sensor size. That's the primary cause for all the confusion in discussions like these ...[/quote'] Â All you can talk about is equivent DOF and if you stick to that its not confusing at all. For example micro 4/3 you double the focal length and aperture number to get what the equivalent DOF will be. Â DOF on a 100mm f/4 Olympus micro 4/3 will be similar to a 200mm f/8 FF. Â DOF on a 100mm f/4 APSC will be like a 200mm f/6 FF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1472 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Umm ... when the sensor sizes are different then there is no way that all other things can be equal ... Ah! interesting indeed, sounds like i will learn something today. When focal length, aperture, subject distance and visual acuity values are the same, is there another variable than film or sensor size in DoF calculation? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1473  Posted June 9, 2013 X20 actually but you'r re right about the sensor size Ah, you’ve hidden the model designation under black tape it seems. Which makes it look like an X10. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1474 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Ah! interesting indeed, sounds like I will learn something today. When focal length, aperture, subject distance and visual acuity values are the same, is there another variable than film or sensor size in DoF calculation? Focal length, aperture, subject distance, and visual acuity values cannot be the same (at the same time) when sensor sizes are different. And field-of-view cannot, either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglasf13 Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1475 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Â DOF on a 100mm f/4 APSC will be like a 200mm f/6 FF Â I believe you mean 150mm f/6 on FF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macjonny1 Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1476 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Â I believe you mean 150mm f/6 on FF. Â Yes thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1477 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Focal length, aperture, subject distance, and visual acuity values cannot be the same (at the same time) when sensor sizes are different... Why so? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1478 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Focal length, aperture, subject distance, and visual acuity values cannot be the same [...] when sensor sizes are different.Why so? Because you can keep at most three of those four parameters equal, and then the fourth will vary with sensor size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1479 Â Posted June 9, 2013 Because you can keep at most three of those four parameters equal, and then the fourth will vary with sensor size. Hard to follow you here. Neither focal length, aperture, subject distance nor visual acuity depend on film or sensor size. When the latter increases, DoF does increase as well whilst other parameters remain constant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1480 Â Posted June 9, 2013 While you are debating the perennial question "DOF vs. sensor size"...... I notice that Leica has opened a bit more the box... with a STRANGE look of body top length... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.