Oh man, I hope I don’t regret this, but then why is it so easy for me to get a razor thin DOF on full frame, while it’s harder to achieve on m4/3, and seemingly impossible on 2/3”?DoF is a function of camera (sensor plane) : subject distance and subject : background distance ratios ... .
John, this is a screenshot from the article that you pointed me towards. It literally says that sensor size affects depth of field. So I feel like what I mentioned earlier holds true.@Mountain_Man_79 Chris, firstly, this isn't DPR (thank god!).
Secondly, the following is a reasonable and simple essay that explains everything, without a single mathematical symbol in sight!
I have managed to obtain very narrow DoF photos using a P&S with a tiny sensor that makes 1:2/3 look gigantic!
And it isn't even hard! Just follow a few simple guidelines, and you are home.
BTW, the first example that guy gives from his D800 ... The clouds aren't anywhere near in sharp focus, but it would have been very easy to do so, following his own 'rules'.
The photos below have got shallow DoF, even though short focal length, f/8 and mFTs .... I simply understand these very simple rules.
f/8 @ 100mm
View attachment 886370
f/11 @ 35mm
View attachment 886371
HTH, mate. It is really as simple as this.
Chris, I agree with both you and him.John, this is a screenshot from the article that you pointed me towards. It literally says that sensor size affects depth of field. So I feel like what I mentioned earlier holds true.
View attachment 886447
All things being equal, a smaller sensor has more DOF than a larger sensor. So I feel a little better that I’m not losing my mind, but I’m getting worried for you my friend!