The dreaded DOF scale international issue.

When I setup my X100 for this type of shooting I used 35 mm as the FL in my DoF app. It never occurred to me to use 23 mm. :eek:




/
 
Repeat after me: "'Depth of Field' scales always assume the image will be printed and viewed with the print held at some specific distance from the viewer. It's not just about what happens within the camera, but is looking at total system resolution in the final print, which takes into account, not only the lens focal length and taking aperture but, the format size and enlargement factor to that final print."

Make sure you stand fully upright, maintain good posture, and intone the above phrase at full volume ten times, ensuring proper breathing is maintained.

It's either that, or we'll have to throw down the mega DOF thread again. ;)

~Joe

PS: DOF scales ALWAYS assume the image will be enlarged and viewed as a print. ALWAYS. Ergo, enlargement factors and format size do matter. Just in case I wasn't bluntly obvious enough already.
 
RayPA said:
When I setup my X100 for this type of shooting I used 35 mm as the FL in my DoF app. It never occurred to me to use 23 mm. :eek:

/
Click to expand...

Me too until I read the instructions on DOF Master, but at least its wrong in the right direction.:)
 
We hope it's in the right direction ONLY.
There's a discussion elsewhere where on MF the camera fails to focus at infinity.
If the scale is off equally in each direction, then that could explain infinity being off also.

I'm 4 scotches down and humbugged with this stuff...
Time to load the M4's again....
The Lux and Cron scales are right.... Aren't they...?
 
I noticed this for the first time this morning - glad I'm not going crazy. Googling around a bit it's flagged as an issue in the DPreview list of bugs in their review, a lot of which were fixed in the firmware update, but apparently this one wasn't. So either they forgot to do it, they can't do it, or it's intentional. It does seem clear that it's very conservative though, so there's more headroom there than the camera suggests.
 
Thanks Steve,
Your not crazy, your just observant. I'm actually surprised that there isn't an uprising about this. It's perplexing as to what people will settle with.
I love the camera. I just know that I have twice the DOF in front than what the camera tells me I have...
Good luck..... Don
 
M4streetshooter said:
I'm actually surprised that there isn't an uprising about this.
Click to expand...

ricebag.jpg
 
I supect 99% of users never take the camera off AF - I hadn't really until today, I only picked up on it because I was playing around with scale focussing this morning and noticed it showed a lot less DoF at any given aperture and distance than the 28mm on my M8, which clearly can't be right.

Perhaps people should all email Fuji to make sure they pick up on it in the next firmware update - it must be a simple fix (you'd think).



M4streetshooter said:
Thanks Steve,
Your not crazy, your just observant. I'm actually surprised that there isn't an uprising about this. It's perplexing as to what people will settle with.
I love the camera. I just know that I have twice the DOF in front than what the camera tells me I have...
Good luck..... Don
Click to expand...
 
M4streetshooter said:
X100: f/4 25 feet to infinity
DOF program: 11.8 feet to infinity
Click to expand...

Maybe you got it wrong?

When I calculate 11.8 feet to infinity with a DOF program then it shows me that you have to dial in a distance of 25 feet to get this.
Maybe the X100 just shows the necessary distance of 25 feet.
 
Tom, try setting the camera to HD at any fstop.
Compare with a DOF program and you'll see the light.
After many tries, I talked with an guy in the engineering dept.
He admitted the camera was wrong and likely to be corrected at some point.
don
 
Oh for heaven's sake.

Most digital shooters with sharp lenses believe the DOF scales as designed for film are hopelessly out of date. Fuji has just been more conservative to satisfy people with crazy pixel-peeping standards or who want larger prints than A4.

Snap out of it. DOF scales are arbitrary and depend entirely on your chosen CoC.

If Fuji had chosen a more relaxed scale as you suggest then there would have been people castigating them in the other direction because "I've done a print and the DOF scales are wrong. Call that sharp?" etc, ad nauseum.
 
I always thought that the smaller the sensor, the greater the DOF for a given focal length.
Ithink Fuji has this right.
 
Eric T said:
I always thought that the smaller the sensor, the greater the DOF for a given focal length.
Ithink Fuji has this right.
Click to expand...

No, the DoF stays the same for a given focal length no matter what size the sensor is. But the smaller the sensor, the shorter the focal length (with less DoF) you need to use in order to achieve the same FoV.
 
I did manage to talk with an engineer at Fuji.
He admitted there was a mistake made as they used a 35mm to compute the scale.
He was hoping for a fix in a future update.

For me, this is a key feature of the camera.
I get a lot of ribbing over this issue but right is right and wrong is just plum wrong.
I've been doing hyperfocal and zone focus long enough to know when something's not working.

My 16 x 20 prints show that the lens performs better than the scale suggests.
Don
 
I prefer the "wrong" scale that they are using now. Maybe they should have a setting in the menu for the CoC used to calculate the DoF scale.
 
fixed point said:
I prefer the "wrong" scale that they are using now. Maybe they should have a setting in the menu for the CoC used to calculate the DoF scale.
Click to expand...

They would put it on the same menu as the Auto ISO.....
So it would be useless anyway.....

It's my only issue with the X100 as everything else it great. I'll probably use this for the rest of my life...well a long time at any rate...
don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top