Quote:
Originally Posted by chandrashekharbapat
Dear sir,
I am forwarding a site address for the reference of forum members DOF in which it is made clear that the DoC does not depend upon the size or media. I am reproducing a paragraph from the article for the ready reference "Digital Vs. Film, and What About Medium & Large Format
There was a query in October, 2001 on my Discussion Forum as to whether Depth of Field was calculated any differently for digital Vs. film. The answer is, no. There is no difference whosesoever. DOF doesn't care about the recording media type or size, though a lower COF is used for medium and large format, since the amount of magnification to make a decent sized print is much less than for 35mm".
I think the science behind is clear to members of the forum
Chandrashekhar |
The reference you gave has been disputed by many and I think if you poll the general knowledge out there, you will find that the majority disagree with mister Reichmann. He even seems to contradict himself in places.
Quote:
|
There is no difference whosesoever. DOF doesn't care about the recording media type or size, though a lower COF is used for medium and large format, since the amount of magnification to make a decent sized print is much less than for 35mm.
|
The mistake that he makes is assuming that DoF is concerned with how much detail is being resolved on the sensor/film. In that case, no, the size of the film/sensor doesn't matter. But that isn't consistent with the definition of DoF. DoF is concerned with the apparent sharpness
in the final print, so magnification must be taken into account. It's not about resolution, it's about what appears to be sharp. Small films/sensors are magnified more than large sensors/film so the DoF is different.
I'm sorry, I don't know how to explain it any more than that. I think you'll just have to do a lot more reading on the subject, from multiple sources, and perhaps you'll come to a different conclusion.