canon G3/G5 depth-of-field compared to Film SLR

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dipu, Nov 4, 2003.

  1. Dipu

    Dipu Guest

    I am thinking of getting into the digital camera domain. Canon G3/G5
    looks like a good choice without getting into the $1000 digital SLRs.
    Currently I have a Elan II film SLR. One inportant feature is the
    shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?

    If the G3 is not going to give me the shallow depth I am looking for,
    is the Digital Rebel going to do the trick? The Digital Rebel kit
    comes with a 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 lens. Does it mean I am going to get a
    wider field of vision at 18 mm then I can get with my film SLR with
    the 28-105 lens at 28 mm?

    Thanks.

    -Dipu
     
    Dipu, Nov 4, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. > One inportant feature is the
    > shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    > G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    > the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?


    Yep.
     
    Robert A. Barr, Nov 5, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dipu

    Christian Guest

    THIS IS COMPLETELY WRONG!

    Robert A. Barr wrote:

    >> One inportant feature is the
    >> shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    >> G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    >> the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?

    >
    > Yep.


    NO NO NO NO NO!!! This is COMPLETELY wrong!!! The much smaller sensor size
    means you have A LOT more DOF for the same aperture. I saw a comparison in
    a magazine recently between an APS-sized sensor DSLR and a consumer
    digicam. The DSLR at f/32 had SLIGHTLY LESS DOF than the digicam at f/2.
    So you are not going to get anywhere near the same shallow DOF with a G3
    that you would get with a DSLR, let alone a 35mm film camera.
     
    Christian, Nov 5, 2003
    #3
  4. Dipu

    Tom Thackrey Guest

    Re: THIS IS COMPLETELY WRONG!

    On 4-Nov-2003, Christian <> wrote:

    > Robert A. Barr wrote:
    >
    > >> One inportant feature is the
    > >> shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    > >> G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    > >> the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?

    > >
    > > Yep.

    >
    > NO NO NO NO NO!!! This is COMPLETELY wrong!!! The much smaller sensor
    > size
    > means you have A LOT more DOF for the same aperture. I saw a comparison
    > in
    > a magazine recently between an APS-sized sensor DSLR and a consumer
    > digicam. The DSLR at f/32 had SLIGHTLY LESS DOF than the digicam at f/2.
    > So you are not going to get anywhere near the same shallow DOF with a G3
    > that you would get with a DSLR, let alone a 35mm film camera.


    Actually, DOF is related to aperture AND focal length. The reason that DCams
    have relatively large DOF is they have relatively short focal length lenses.
    A 50mm lens at f/2 will have the same DOF on a DCam as a 35mm camera. It
    will probably have a much smaller field of view (depending on the size of
    the sensor.)

    If you want shallow DOF with your digital camera, select a large focal
    length (i.e. zoom in) and a small aperture number.


    --
    Tom Thackrey
    www.creative-light.com
    tom (at) creative (dash) light (dot) com
    do NOT send email to (it's reserved for spammers)
     
    Tom Thackrey, Nov 5, 2003
    #4
  5. (Dipu) writes:
    >I am thinking of getting into the digital camera domain. Canon G3/G5
    >looks like a good choice without getting into the $1000 digital SLRs.
    >Currently I have a Elan II film SLR. One inportant feature is the
    >shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    >G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    >the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?


    Nowhere close. The sensor in the G3/G5 is about 1/5 the size of a 35 mm
    film frame, and the lens focal length is scaled down in proportion.
    The image is also enlarged 5 times as much, so the Circle of Confusion
    needs to be reduced in proportion to that. The way all these things
    work together is approximately this: the G3/G5 will have *5 times as
    much* depth of field if the field of view is the same and the f/number
    is the same as a 35 mm camera at the same distance from the subject.

    >If the G3 is not going to give me the shallow depth I am looking for,
    >is the Digital Rebel going to do the trick? The Digital Rebel kit
    >comes with a 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 lens. Does it mean I am going to get a
    >wider field of vision at 18 mm then I can get with my film SLR with
    >the 28-105 lens at 28 mm?


    The "scale factor" is 1.6 with the Digital Rebel, instead of 5. So
    you'll get 1.6 times the DOF at the same aperture - much more
    manageable. However, the maximum aperture of that zoom will limit your
    ability to get shallow DOF - a cheap 50 mm f/1.8 lens would be much
    better. As for field of view, the 18-55 mm of the zoom is
    equivalent to 29-88, about the same at the wide end but not as large a
    zoom range.

    Dave
     
    Dave Martindale, Nov 5, 2003
    #5
  6. Dipu

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > I am thinking of getting into the digital camera domain. Canon G3/G5
    > looks like a good choice without getting into the $1000 digital SLRs.
    > Currently I have a Elan II film SLR. One inportant feature is the
    > shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    > G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    > the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?


    Not even close.

    > If the G3 is not going to give me the shallow depth I am looking for,
    > is the Digital Rebel going to do the trick? The Digital Rebel kit
    > comes with a 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 lens. Does it mean I am going to get a
    > wider field of vision at 18 mm then I can get with my film SLR with
    > the 28-105 lens at 28 mm?


    The Rebel will come much closer. Just think about the size of the
    sensors relative to one another and to film and you can estimate the
    relationships of DOF for each.

    --
    ________________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://www.toddwalker.net
    Canon 10D:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/canon10d
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/dpblog.htm
    _________________________________
     
    Todd Walker, Nov 5, 2003
    #6
  7. Dipu

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <>, Not.for.@harvest says...
    > > One inportant feature is the
    > > shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    > > G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    > > the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?

    >
    > Yep.


    As others have said, you are completely wrong. Please try to refrain
    from answering questions when you have no idea what you are talking
    about. This group is about ACCURATE information.

    --
    ________________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://www.toddwalker.net
    Canon 10D:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/canon10d
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/dpblog.htm
    _________________________________
     
    Todd Walker, Nov 5, 2003
    #7
  8. Dipu

    Don Coon Guest

    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > > I am thinking of getting into the digital camera domain. Canon G3/G5
    > > looks like a good choice without getting into the $1000 digital SLRs.
    > > Currently I have a Elan II film SLR. One inportant feature is the
    > > shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    > > G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    > > the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?


    Sorry, no way : (

    The G3 has a 7.2-28.8mm lens regardless of the stated 35mm equivalent.

    At 7.2 f/2.8 10 feet from your subject, your shot will be in focus from
    about 4.3' to infinity.

    Go to this link to see what you can expect:
    http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/guides/dof/hyperfocal2.html

    Select a Coolpix 4500 which has a similar lens (7.85 to 32mm). Use 7.2mm
    for your widest shot, f2.8 and 10 feet and hit calculate. Ouch!

    To see what you can get with a DSLR, a Digital Rebel for example, select a
    CoC of .019, a 28mm lens at f4 and 10'. You've got 7.74' to 14.1' in focus.
    With a 50mm f1.8 you've only got 9.56' to 10.5' !!
     
    Don Coon, Nov 5, 2003
    #8
  9. >
    > As others have said, you are completely wrong. Please try to refrain
    > from answering questions when you have no idea what you are talking
    > about. This group is about ACCURATE information.


    Do you own a G3?
     
    Robert A. Barr, Nov 5, 2003
    #9
  10. Dipu

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <>, Not.for.@harvest
    says...
    > >
    > > As others have said, you are completely wrong. Please try to refrain
    > > from answering questions when you have no idea what you are talking
    > > about. This group is about ACCURATE information.

    >
    > Do you own a G3?


    I own a G1 and have previously owned a G2, which has the same sensor and
    lens as the G3. I also know enough about photography to know that
    consumer point and shoots have much larger DOF than digital SLRs or film
    SLRs because of their short focal lengths and small sensors.

    But I've always been a "picture speaks a thousand words" kinda guy, so
    here's a little test:

    http://www.toddwalker.net/doftest/

    First picture with the G1, second with the 10D and 50mm f/1.8 lens. Both
    cameras at the same distance from the subject and the aperture set at
    f/2.2.

    --
    ________________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://www.toddwalker.net
    Canon 10D:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/canon10d
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/dpblog.htm
    _________________________________
     
    Todd Walker, Nov 5, 2003
    #10
  11. Dipu

    Andy Guest

    "Robert A. Barr" <Not.for.@harvest> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >
    > > As others have said, you are completely wrong. Please try to refrain
    > > from answering questions when you have no idea what you are talking
    > > about. This group is about ACCURATE information.

    >
    > Do you own a G3?
    >


    You are an idiot.
     
    Andy, Nov 5, 2003
    #11
  12. Dipu

    enz Guest

    "Todd Walker" <> wrote
    > I own a G1 and have previously owned a G2, which has the same sensor and
    > lens as the G3. I also know enough about photography to know that
    > consumer point and shoots have much larger DOF than digital SLRs or film
    > SLRs because of their short focal lengths and small sensors.
    >
    > But I've always been a "picture speaks a thousand words" kinda guy, so
    > here's a little test:
    >
    > http://www.toddwalker.net/doftest/


    Are there any tricks to decrease the depth of field in G cameras? For
    example if I want to blur the background, does manual focusing nearer than
    the main foreground object help?

    enz
     
    enz, Nov 5, 2003
    #12
  13. Dipu

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <3fa8ecf3$>, says...
    > "Todd Walker" <> wrote
    > > I own a G1 and have previously owned a G2, which has the same sensor and
    > > lens as the G3. I also know enough about photography to know that
    > > consumer point and shoots have much larger DOF than digital SLRs or film
    > > SLRs because of their short focal lengths and small sensors.
    > >
    > > But I've always been a "picture speaks a thousand words" kinda guy, so
    > > here's a little test:
    > >
    > > http://www.toddwalker.net/doftest/

    >
    > Are there any tricks to decrease the depth of field in G cameras? For
    > example if I want to blur the background, does manual focusing nearer than
    > the main foreground object help?
    >
    > enz


    Nope. You can't rewrite the laws of physics ;-)

    --
    ________________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://www.toddwalker.net
    Canon 10D:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/canon10d
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/dpblog.htm
    _________________________________
     
    Todd Walker, Nov 5, 2003
    #13
  14. Dipu

    John Lodge Guest

    You cannot talk of CoC in millimeters you must scale everything. You must
    state it as a ratio of the image size say the diagonal of 24X36 for 35 mm
    and
    so on for the digital. If you fail to do that you are not doing a correct
    comparison.


    "Don Coon" <coondw_nospam@hotmail_dot_.com> wrote in message
    news:6F_pb.79426$275.228067@attbi_s53...
    > > In article <>,
    > > says...
    > > > I am thinking of getting into the digital camera domain. Canon G3/G5
    > > > looks like a good choice without getting into the $1000 digital SLRs.
    > > > Currently I have a Elan II film SLR. One inportant feature is the
    > > > shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    > > > G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    > > > the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?

    >
    > Sorry, no way : (
    >
    > The G3 has a 7.2-28.8mm lens regardless of the stated 35mm equivalent.
    >
    > At 7.2 f/2.8 10 feet from your subject, your shot will be in focus from
    > about 4.3' to infinity.
    >
    > Go to this link to see what you can expect:
    > http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/guides/dof/hyperfocal2.html
    >
    > Select a Coolpix 4500 which has a similar lens (7.85 to 32mm). Use 7.2mm
    > for your widest shot, f2.8 and 10 feet and hit calculate. Ouch!
    >
    > To see what you can get with a DSLR, a Digital Rebel for example, select a
    > CoC of .019, a 28mm lens at f4 and 10'. You've got 7.74' to 14.1' in

    focus.
    > With a 50mm f1.8 you've only got 9.56' to 10.5' !!
    >
    >
     
    John Lodge, Nov 5, 2003
    #14
  15. Dipu

    Don Coon Guest

    "enz" <> wrote in message
    news:3fa8ecf3$...
    > "Todd Walker" <> wrote
    > > I own a G1 and have previously owned a G2, which has the same sensor and
    > > lens as the G3. I also know enough about photography to know that
    > > consumer point and shoots have much larger DOF than digital SLRs or film
    > > SLRs because of their short focal lengths and small sensors.
    > >
    > > But I've always been a "picture speaks a thousand words" kinda guy, so
    > > here's a little test:
    > >
    > > http://www.toddwalker.net/doftest/

    >
    > Are there any tricks to decrease the depth of field in G cameras? For
    > example if I want to blur the background, does manual focusing nearer than
    > the main foreground object help?


    The best way I've found is to select all the background and apply a severe
    gaussian blur. It's a lot of work to get it right.
     
    Don Coon, Nov 5, 2003
    #15
  16. Dipu

    Don Coon Guest

    "John Lodge" <> wrote in message
    news:T%7qb.4030$...
    > You cannot talk of CoC in millimeters you must scale everything. You must
    > state it as a ratio of the image size say the diagonal of 24X36 for 35 mm
    > and
    > so on for the digital. If you fail to do that you are not doing a correct
    > comparison.


    So....... what are you saying? The program I linked to is incorrect? The
    CoC I stated for the 300D/10D is incorrect? I find the program does a pretty
    good job of predicting DOF which is subjective to some extent anyway.



    > "Don Coon" <coondw_nospam@hotmail_dot_.com> wrote in message
    > news:6F_pb.79426$275.228067@attbi_s53...
    > > > In article <>,
    > > > says...
    > > > > I am thinking of getting into the digital camera domain. Canon G3/G5
    > > > > looks like a good choice without getting into the $1000 digital

    SLRs.
    > > > > Currently I have a Elan II film SLR. One inportant feature is the
    > > > > shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    > > > > G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    > > > > the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?

    > >
    > > Sorry, no way : (
    > >
    > > The G3 has a 7.2-28.8mm lens regardless of the stated 35mm equivalent.
    > >
    > > At 7.2 f/2.8 10 feet from your subject, your shot will be in focus from
    > > about 4.3' to infinity.
    > >
    > > Go to this link to see what you can expect:
    > > http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/guides/dof/hyperfocal2.html
    > >
    > > Select a Coolpix 4500 which has a similar lens (7.85 to 32mm). Use

    7.2mm
    > > for your widest shot, f2.8 and 10 feet and hit calculate. Ouch!
    > >
    > > To see what you can get with a DSLR, a Digital Rebel for example, select

    a
    > > CoC of .019, a 28mm lens at f4 and 10'. You've got 7.74' to 14.1' in

    > focus.
    > > With a 50mm f1.8 you've only got 9.56' to 10.5' !!
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Don Coon, Nov 5, 2003
    #16
  17. No disgagreement to any of this thread (thanks for the 10D/G2 DOF comparison
    BTW, that was useful to see), but just a side note that you can still get
    reasonable DOF blurring effects with the Canon G's without needing PS
    tweaking. For example:

    http://www.boulderwall.com/gallery/be1.jpg
    http://www.boulderwall.com/gallery/beeatwork.jpg

    David.

    "Todd Walker" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <3fa8ecf3$>, says...
    > > "Todd Walker" <> wrote
    > > > I own a G1 and have previously owned a G2, which has the same sensor

    and
    > > > lens as the G3. I also know enough about photography to know that
    > > > consumer point and shoots have much larger DOF than digital SLRs or

    film
    > > > SLRs because of their short focal lengths and small sensors.
    > > >
    > > > But I've always been a "picture speaks a thousand words" kinda guy, so
    > > > here's a little test:
    > > >
    > > > http://www.toddwalker.net/doftest/

    > >
    > > Are there any tricks to decrease the depth of field in G cameras? For
    > > example if I want to blur the background, does manual focusing nearer

    than
    > > the main foreground object help?
    > >
    > > enz

    >
    > Nope. You can't rewrite the laws of physics ;-)
    >
    > --
    > ________________________________
    > Todd Walker
    > http://www.toddwalker.net
    > Canon 10D:
    > http://www.toddwalker.net/canon10d
    > My Digital Photography Weblog:
    > http://www.toddwalker.net/dpblog.htm
    > _________________________________
     
    David Metcalfe, Nov 5, 2003
    #17
  18. Dipu

    Fred Kruse Guest

    > > > One inportant feature is the
    > > > shallow depth of field I can get with large apertures for portraits.
    > > > G3 spec says that it has max aperture of 2.0-3.0. Am I going to get
    > > > the same shallow depth compared to the film SLR at 2.0-3.0 aperture?

    > >
    > > Yep.

    >
    > As others have said, you are completely wrong. Please try to refrain
    > from answering questions when you have no idea what you are talking
    > about.


    THANK YOU!! I wish everyone would follow this rule.

    > This group is about ACCURATE information.


    Now that is NOT true, because everyone does NOT follow your previous
    statement. No newsgroup is about accurate information, they are ALL
    about contradicting statements as everybody feels the need to make
    statements, even when they have no experience or knowledge in what it is
    they are telling others about.
     
    Fred Kruse, Nov 5, 2003
    #18
  19. Dipu

    Fred Kruse Guest

    "Robert A. Barr" wrote:

    > >
    > > As others have said, you are completely wrong. Please try to refrain
    > > from answering questions when you have no idea what you are talking
    > > about. This group is about ACCURATE information.

    >
    > Do you own a G3?


    Yes, I do.
     
    Fred Kruse, Nov 5, 2003
    #19
  20. Dipu

    Fred Kruse Guest

    > Are there any tricks to decrease the depth of field in G cameras? For
    > example if I want to blur the background, does manual focusing nearer than
    > the main foreground object help?


    All you have to do is set the dial on top of the G3 to PORTRAIT MODE and you
    have exactly what you are looking for, it does it all for you without you
    having to know how to set anything.

    Of course, you can still do it manually yourself if you want to.
     
    Fred Kruse, Nov 5, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jennie

    Canon D60 Depth of Field

    Jennie, Jul 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    461
    Katie Piecrust
    Jul 17, 2003
  2. IRISH1EAR

    depth of field , focus points ,group shot canon 10d

    IRISH1EAR, Jan 21, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    932
  3. Nick Good

    Depth of Field and HFD calculator for digital and film

    Nick Good, Aug 27, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    487
    Huygens
    Aug 27, 2004
  4. Winston

    Same depth of field for digital vs. film

    Winston, Nov 17, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    39
    Views:
    822
    Dave Martindale
    Jan 24, 2005
  5. geez

    Small viewfinder compared to film slr

    geez, Jun 8, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    417
Loading...

Share This Page